Cited by 32Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

A blood biomarker test for brain amyloid impacts the clinical evaluation of cognitive impairment

Open access
Monane, Mark, Johnson, Kim G., Snider, B. Joy, Turner, Raymond S., Drake, Jonathan D., Maraganore, Demetrius M., Bicksel, James L., Jacobs, Daniel H. +8 more·2023·Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine clinicians' patient selection and result interpretation of a clinically validated mass spectrometry test measuring amyloid beta and ApoE blood biomarkers combined with patient age (PrecivityAD® blood test) in symptomatic patients evaluated for Alzheimer's disease (AD) or other causes of cognitive decline. Methods: The Quality Improvement and Clinical Utility PrecivityAD Clinician Survey (QUIP I, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05477056) was a prospective, single‐arm cohort study among 366 patients evaluated by neurologists and other cognitive specialists. Participants underwent blood biomarker testing and received an amyloid probability score (APS), indicating the likelihood of a positive result on an amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) scan. The primary study outcomes were appropriateness of patient selection as well as result interpretation associated with PrecivityAD blood testing. Results: A 95% (347/366) concordance rate was noted between clinicians' patient selection and the test's intended use criteria. In the final analysis including these 347 patients (median age 75 years, 56% women), prespecified test result categories incorporated 133 (38%) low APS, 162 (47%) high APS, and 52 (15%) intermediate APS patients. Clinicians' pretest and posttest AD diagnosis probability changed from 58% to 23% in low APS patients and 71% to 89% in high APS patients (p < 0.0001). Anti‐AD drug therapy decreased by 46% in low APS patients (p < 0.0001) and increased by 57% in high APS patients (p < 0.0001). Interpretation: These findings demonstrate the clinical utility of the PrecivityAD blood test in clinical care and may have added relevance as new AD therapies are introduced.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acn3.51863

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • BBMs have not been recommended as standalone diagnostic tests due to a lack of studies demonstrating their equivalence to clinically used CSF and PET methods.

    “Despite BBMs being used in clinical practice in some countries, including the United States, they have not been recommended as standalone diagnostic tests due to a lack of studies demonstrating their equivalence to clinically used CSF and PET methods16,35–37.”

    From Highly accurate blood test for Alzheimer's disease is similar or superior to clinical cerebrospinal fluid tests (2024) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Introduction reports studies comparing a blood biomarker test with amyloid PET, and the Discussion describes its potential to support clinical diagnosis. Neither section states that blood biomarkers are not recommended as standalone diagnostic tests or attributes such a recommendation to a lack of equivalence studies with CSF and PET. Searches for standalone-use recommendations and equivalence found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Monane, M., Johnson, K. G., Snider, B. J., Turner, R. S., Drake, J. D., Maraganore, D. M., Bicksel, J. L., Jacobs, D. H., Ortega, J. L., Henderson, J., Jiang, Y., Huang, S., Coppinger, J., Fogelman, I., West, T., & Braunstein, J. B.
Affiliations
  • C2N Diagnostics (United States) (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Georgetown University (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • Tulane University (US)
  • Capital Neurology Services McLean Virginia USA
  • Neurology Services of Orlando Orlando Florida USA
  • Stat4ward Pittsburgh Pennsylvania USA
Corresponding author
Monane, Mark
Venue
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-08-07
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
1738-1748
ISSN
2328-9503 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4385660931
Cited by
32
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 1
FWCI
6.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Tulane University
  • Georgetown University
  • University of South Florida
  • NorthShore University HealthSystem
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
blood biomarkers, amyloid-beta, apolipoprotein E, Alzheimer's disease, cognitive impairment, amyloid PET, clinical utility, patient selection, interpretation of results, clinician survey
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Amyloid, Brain, Female, Hematologic Tests, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Cohort Studies, Biomarkers, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review