Cited by 547Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research

Utility of the Apolipoprotein E Genotype in the Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease

Open access
Mayeux, Richard, Saunders, Ann M., Shea, Steven, Mirra, Suzanne, Evans, Denis, Roses, Allen D., Hyman, Bradley T., Crain, Barbara +2 more·1998·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The epsilon4 allele of the gene encoding apolipoprotein E (APOE) is strongly associated with Alzheimer's disease, but its value in the diagnosis remains uncertain. METHODS: We reviewed clinical diagnoses and diagnoses obtained at autopsy in 2188 patients referred to 1 of 26 Alzheimer's disease centers for evaluation of dementia. The sensitivity and specificity of the clinical diagnosis or the presence of an APOE epsilon4 allele were calculated, with pathologically confirmed Alzheimer's disease used as the standard. The added value of the APOE genotype was estimated with pretest and post-test probabilities from multivariate analyses to generate receiver-operating-characteristic curves plotting sensitivity against the false positive rate. RESULTS: Of the 2188 patients, 1833 were given a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, and the diagnosis was confirmed pathologically in 1770 patients at autopsy. Sixty-two percent of patients with clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease, as compared with 65 percent of those with pathologically confirmed Alzheimer's disease, had at least one APOE epsilon4 allele. The sensitivity of the clinical diagnosis was 93 percent, and the specificity was 55 percent, whereas the sensitivity and specificity of the APOE epsilon4 allele were 65 and 68 percent, respectively. The addition of information about the APOE genotype increased the overall specificity to 84 percent in patients who met the clinical criteria for Alzheimer's disease, although the sensitivity decreased. The improvement in specificity remained statistically significant in the multivariate analysis after adjustment for differences in age, clinical diagnosis, sex, and center. CONCLUSIONS: APOE genotyping does not provide sufficient sensitivity or specificity to be used alone as a diagnostic test for Alzheimer's disease, but when used in combination with clinical criteria, it improves the specificity of the diagnosis.

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 · 10.1056/nejm199802193380804

Cites

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?

  • The last diagnostic accuracy studies utilizing a complete ADC dataset were performed in 1998 and 1999.

    “the last diagnostic accuracy studies utilizing a complete ADC dataset were performed in 1998 and 1999 (4, 23)”

    From Accuracy of the Clinical Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease at National Institute on Aging Alzheimer Disease Centers, 2005–2010 (2012) · cites this paper as [4]

    The Subjects section describes a diagnostic study using patients from 26 Alzheimer's disease centers, and the Results report diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. The Results also say complete information was available for only 2,188 of 3,177 patients. This 1998 paper does not establish that its dataset was complete or that the last such studies were performed in 1998 and 1999. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Among 1,770 diagnosed individuals from 26 Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers across the United States, 65% had at least one copy of the APOE-e4 gene.

    “Another study found that among 1,770 diagnosed individuals from 26 Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers across the United States, 65% had at least one copy of the APOE-e4 gene.79”

    From 2023 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures (2023) · cites this paper as [79]

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Among 1,770 diagnosed individuals from 26 Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers across the United States, 65% had at least one copy of the APOE-e4 gene.

    “Another study found that among 1,770 diagnosed individuals from 26 Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers across the United States, 65% had at least one copy of the APOE‐e4 gene.”

    From 2024 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures (2024) · cites this paper as [85]

  • There is relatively close agreement with the last 2 prior assessments using total NIA-ADC dataset: Mayeux et al estimated sensitivity 93% and specificity 55% and Tsuang et al reported sensitivity 84% and specificity 50%.

    “There is also relatively close agreement with the last 2 prior assessments of diagnostic accuracy using the total NIA-ADC dataset: Mayeux et al estimated a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 55% (4) and Tsuang et al reported a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 50% (23).”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 547

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [30]30. Assessing the validity and reliability of diagnostic and screening tests. In: Gordis L. Epidemiology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1996:58-75.
  2. [31]31. Interpretation of the coefficients of the logistic regression model. In: Hosmer DW Jr, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York: John Wiley, 1989:38-81.
  3. [41]41. National Institute on Aging/Alzheimer's Association Working Group. Apolipoprotein E genotyping in Alzheimer's disease. Lancet 1996;347: 1091-5.

Authors
Mayeux, R., Saunders, A. M., Shea, S., Mirra, S., Evans, D., Roses, A. D., Hyman, B. T., Crain, B., Tang, M.-X., & Phelps, C. H.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • National Institute on Aging (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1998-02-19
Volume
338
Issue
8
Pages
506-511
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2331442217
Cited by
547
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 21
FWCI
32.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • Emory University
  • University of Washington
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • University of Rochester
  • Case Western Reserve University
  • York University
  • National Institutes of Health (5r35ag010963-04)
  • University of California, Los Angeles
  • National Institute on Aging (AG05 128, P50AG005128, AG8702, P50AG008702, AG10963)
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 › Neurology › Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, apolipoprotein E, APOE ε4, genetic testing, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, diagnosis, autopsy confirmation, dementia, biomarkers
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Apolipoproteins E, False Positive Reactions, Female, Genotype, Humans, Male, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity

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