PreprintCited by 10Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications

Large-scale cerebrospinal fluid proteomic analysis in Alzheimer’s disease patients reveals five molecular subtypes with distinct genetic risk profiles

Open access
Tijms, Betty M, Vromen, Ellen M, Mjaavatten, Olav, Holstege, Henne, Reus, Lianne M, van der Lee, Sven, Wesenhagen, Kirsten EJ, Lorenzini, Luigi +13 more·2023·medRxiv

Abstract

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is heterogenous on the molecular level. Understanding this heterogeneity is critical for AD drug development. We aimed to define AD molecular subtypes by mass spectrometry proteomics in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Of the 3863 proteins detected in CSF, 1058 proteins had different levels in individuals with AD (n=419) compared with controls (n=187). Cluster analyses of AD individuals on these 1058 proteins revealed five subtypes: subtype 1 was characterized by neuronal hyperplasticity; subtype 2 by innate immune activation; subtype 3 by RNA dysregulation; subtype 4 by choroid plexus dysfunction; and subtype 5 by blood-brain barrier dysfunction. Distinct genetic profiles were associated with subtypes, e.g., subtype 1 was enriched with TREM2 R47H . Subtypes also differed in brain atrophy and clinical outcomes. For example, survival was shorter in subtype 3 compared to subtype 1 (5.6 versus 8.9 years). These novel insights into AD molecular heterogeneity highlight the need for personalized medicine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2023.05.10.23289793

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tijms, B. M., Vromen, E. M., Mjaavatten, O., Holstege, H., Reus, L. M., van der Lee, S., Wesenhagen, K. E., Lorenzini, L., Vermunt, L., Venkatraghavan, V., Tesi, N., Tomassen, J., den Braber, A., Goossens, J., Vanmechelen, E., Barkhof, F., Pijnenburg, Y. A., van der Flier, W. M., Teunissen, C. E., Berven, F., & Visser, P. J.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Neuroscience (NL)
  • University of Bergen (NO)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • ADx NeuroSciences (BE)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Tijms, Betty M
Venue
medRxiv
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2023-05-11
OpenAlex
W4376129808
Cited by
10
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
ZonMw (733050512, 733051061, 09150171910068, #73305095007, 10510022110012, 733050824, 733051106)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, cerebrospinal fluid proteomics, molecular subtypes, disease heterogeneity, innate immune activation, blood-brain barrier dysfunction, brain atrophy, survival, genetic risk profiles, personalized medicine

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