Cited by 193Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus

Longitudinal stability of CSF biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease

Blennow, Kaj, Zetterberg, Henrik, Minthon, Lennart, Lannfelt, Lars, Strid, Stig, Annas, Peter, Basun, Hans, Andreasen, Niels·2007·Neuroscience Letters

Abstract

Biomarker levels in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) may serve as surrogate markers for treatment efficacy in clinical trials of disease-modifying drugs against Alzheimer's disease (AD). A prerequisite, however, is that the marker is sufficiently stable over time in individual patients. Here, we tested the stability of the three established CSF biomarkers for AD, total tau (T-tau), tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau(181)) and the 42 amino acid isoform of beta-amyloid (Abeta42), over 6 months in a cohort of AD patients on stable treatment with acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors. Fifty-three patients completed the study, 29 men and 24 women, mean age (+/-S.D.) 76.1+/-7.9 years. Mean levels of CSF biomarkers were very stable between baseline and endpoint, with coefficients of variation (CVs) of 4.4-6.1%. Intra-individual biomarker levels at baseline and endpoint were also highly correlated with Pearson r-values above 0.95 (p<0.0001), for all three markers. We conclude that T-tau, P-tau and Abeta42 concentrations in CSF are remarkably stable over a 6-month period in individual AD patients. This suggest that these biomarkers may have a potential to identify and monitor very minor biochemical changes induced by treatment, and thus support their possible usefulness as surrogate markers in clinical trials with drug candidates with disease-modifying potential, such as secretase inhibitors, Abeta immunotherapy and tau phosphorylation inhibitors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neulet.2007.03.064

Cites

3 of 3 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
Blennow, K., Zetterberg, H., Minthon, L., Lannfelt, L., Strid, S., Annas, P., Basun, H., & Andreasen, N.
Affiliations
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • AstraZeneca (Sweden) (SE)
  • Karolinska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Blennow, Kaj
Venue
Neuroscience Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-05
Volume
419
Issue
1
Pages
18-22
ISSN
0304-3940 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2000566928
Cited by
193
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 12
FWCI
14.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, longitudinal stability, total tau, amyloid-beta 42, acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, surrogate markers, treatment monitoring, disease-modifying drugs, secretase inhibitors
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Analysis of Variance, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Female, Humans, Male, Peptide Fragments, Biomarkers, Amyloid beta-Peptides, tau Proteins

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