Cited by 586Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Amyloid β concentrations and stable isotope labeling kinetics of human plasma specific to central nervous system amyloidosis

Open access
Ovod, Vitaliy, Ramsey, Kara N., Mawuenyega, Kwasi G., Bollinger, Jim G., Hicks, Terry, Schneider, Theresa, Sullivan, Melissa, Paumier, Katrina +6 more·2017·Alzheimer's & Dementia

Abstract

Introduction: Cerebrospinal fluid analysis and other measurements of amyloidosis, such as amyloid‐binding positron emission tomography studies, are limited by cost and availability. There is a need for a more practical amyloid β (Aβ) biomarker for central nervous system amyloid deposition. Methods: We adapted our previously reported stable isotope labeling kinetics protocol to analyze the turnover kinetics and concentrations of Aβ38, Aβ40, and Aβ42 in human plasma. Results: Aβ isoforms have a half‐life of approximately 3 hours in plasma. Aβ38 demonstrated faster turnover kinetics compared with Aβ40 and Aβ42. Faster fractional turnover of Aβ42 relative to Aβ40 and lower Aβ42 and Aβ42/Aβ40 concentrations in amyloid‐positive participants were observed. Discussion: Blood plasma Aβ42 shows similar amyloid‐associated alterations as we have previously reported in cerebrospinal fluid, suggesting a blood‐brain transportation mechanism of Aβ. The stability and sensitivity of plasma Aβ measurements suggest this may be a useful screening test for central nervous system amyloidosis.

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 · 10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.2266

Cites

18 of 18 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?

  • In an 8-year follow-up study of 599 volunteers, cognitively normal PET amyloid-positive people had an elevated risk of developing Alzheimer's disease compared with amyloid-negative people (17·7% vs 8·1%; OR 2·4, 95% CI 1·5-4·0).

    “an 8-year follow-up study of 599 volunteers (average age 70 years) in Australia found that cognitively normal PET amyloid-positive people had an elevated risk of developing Alzheimer's disease compared with amyloid negative (17·7% vs 8·1%; OR 2·4, 95% CI 1·5–4·0).184”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission (2020) · cites this paper as [184]

    The Methods (Participants; page unavailable) describe 41 participants enrolled in the United States, not 599 volunteers in Australia. The Discussion (page unavailable) says longitudinal follow-up is still needed; the paper does not report an eight-year risk comparison or the quoted percentages and odds ratio. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Plasma Aβ measures now show promise.

    “Plasma Aβ measures now show promise [202,203].”
  • Incorporating biomarkers on a large scale in many settings will require low-cost and minimally invasive biomarkers (e.g., blood or saliva) that are now emerging.

    “While imaging/CSF biomarker data on subsets of individuals from well-designed community-based cohorts would provide additional research value, incorporating biomarkers on a large scale in many settings will require low-cost and minimally invasive biomarkers (e.g., blood or saliva) that are now emerging [202–205].”
  • Over 80% of 266 PET amyloid-positive people did not develop cognitive impairment within 8 years, showing that positive status does not predict impairment for most people in a timeframe that might be a useful prognostic window.

    “Over 80% of the 266 people who were PET amyloid-positive did not go onto develop a cognitive impairment within 8 years, showing positive status does not predict impairment for most people in a timeframe that might be a useful prognostic window.”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission (2020) · cites this paper as [184]

    The Methods (Participants; page unavailable) describe 41 participants, including 18 classified as amyloid-positive, not a cohort of 266 PET-positive people. The Discussion (page unavailable) says longitudinal follow-up would be needed; the copy does not report eight-year cognitive-impairment outcomes or the claimed 80% figure (searched: 266, eight years, longitudinal cognitive impairment). (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • At 5-year follow-up, amyloid-positive participants with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment had the same pattern of increased risk compared with amyloid-negative people (2·6, 1·4-4·9).

    “Follow-up at 5 years of amyloid-positive participants with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment versus amyloid negative people found the same pattern of increased risk (2·6, 1·4–4·9).”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission (2020) · cites this paper as [184]

    The Methods (Participants; page unavailable) describe amyloid-positive and amyloid-negative groups, but the paper does not report their relative risk at five years. The Discussion (page unavailable) says longitudinal follow-up is still needed. Searches for five-year follow-up and the reported risk estimate found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [12]Roberts KF Elbert DL Kasten TP Patterson BW Sigurdson WC Connors RE Ovod V Munsell LY Mawuenyega KG Miller-Thomas MM Moran CJ Cross DT III Derdeyn CP Bateman RJ Amyloid-B efflux from the CNS into the plasma Ann Neurol 2014 76 6 837 844 25205593 PMC4355962

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ovod, V., Ramsey, K. N., Mawuenyega, K. G., Bollinger, J. G., Hicks, T., Schneider, T., Sullivan, M., Paumier, K., Holtzman, D. M., Morris, J. C., Benzinger, T., Fagan, A. M., Patterson, B. W., & Bateman, R. J.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Bateman, Randall J.
Venue
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-07-19
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
841-849
ISSN
  • 1552-5260 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5279
OpenAlex
W2736518852
Cited by
585
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 66 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
37.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alzheimer s & Dementia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • MetLife Foundation
  • AbbVie
  • Amgen
  • AstraZeneca
  • Biogen
  • Eisai
  • Pfizer
  • Sanofi
  • Avid Radiopharmaceuticals
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Amyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
amyloid-beta, plasma amyloid-beta
MeSH terms
Aged, Amyloidosis, Chromatography, Liquid, Humans, Isotope Labeling, Kinetics, Peptide Fragments, Prospective Studies, ROC Curve, Mass Spectrometry, Biomarkers, Single-Blind Method, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Area Under Curve, Immunoprecipitation

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