Cited by 137Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlExtracellular vesicles in disease

Biobanking of CSF: International standardization to optimize biomarker development

Teunissen, Charlotte E., Tumani, Hayrettin, Engelborghs, Sebastiaan, Mollenhauer, Brit·2014·Clinical Biochemistry

Abstract

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) reflects pathophysiological aspects of neurological diseases, where neuroprotective strategies and biomarkers are urgently needed. Therefore, biobanking is very relevant for biomarker discovery and evaluation of neurological diseases. Important and unique features of CSF biobanking are intensive collaboration in international networks and the tight application of standardized protocols. The current adoption of standardized protocols for CSF and blood collection as presented in this review enables biomarker studies in large cohorts of patients and controls. Another topic of this review is the selection of control groups, which influences the outcome of biomarker investigations. Control groups in CSF biobanks mainly consist of different disease controls. This is in part due to the fact that lumbar punctures are mostly performed for clinical indications and rarely for research purposes only, as it is a relatively invasive procedure. Moreover, there is a lack of homogenous criteria and definition of control groups. We therefore propose uniform consensus definitions for such control groups in biomarker research, i.e. Healthy controls (HC), Spinal anesthesia subjects (SAS), Symptomatic controls (SC), Inflammatory Neurological Disease Controls (CINDC), Peripheral Inflammatory Neurological Disease Controls (PINDC) and Non-inflammatory Neurological Disease Controls (NINDC). Another important aspect of CSF biobanking is quality control. Systematic studies to a…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2013.12.024

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Teunissen, C. E., Tumani, H., Engelborghs, S., & Mollenhauer, B.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Neuroscience (NL)
  • University Hospital Ulm (DE)
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • Universitätsmedizin Göttingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Teunissen, Charlotte E.
Venue
Clinical Biochemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
47
Issue
4-5
Pages
288-292
ISSN
0009-9120 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047101604
Cited by
137
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Biochemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • EU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Extracellular vesicles in disease
Keywords
biomarker development, neurological disorders, lumbar puncture, pre-analytical variability, cerebrospinal fluid protein, neurodegenerative diseases, international standardization
MeSH terms
Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Quality Control, Research Design, Specimen Handling, Biomarkers, Guidelines as Topic, Biological Specimen Banks, Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic, Neurodegenerative Diseases, Consensus, Control Groups

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