Cited by 286Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Proteome profiling in cerebrospinal fluid reveals novel biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease

Open access
Bader, Jakob M, Geyer, Philipp E, Müller, Johannes B, Strauss, Maximilian T, Koch, Manja, Leypoldt, Frank, Koertvelyessy, Peter, Bittner, Daniel +8 more·2020·Molecular Systems Biology

Abstract

Neurodegenerative diseases are a growing burden, and there is an urgent need for better biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment efficacy. Structural and functional brain alterations are reflected in the protein composition of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients have higher CSF levels of tau, but we lack knowledge of systems‐wide changes of CSF protein levels that accompany AD. Here, we present a highly reproducible mass spectrometry (MS)‐based proteomics workflow for the in‐depth analysis of CSF from minimal sample amounts. From three independent studies (197 individuals), we characterize differences in proteins by AD status (> 1,000 proteins, CV < 20%). Proteins with previous links to neurodegeneration such as tau, SOD1, and PARK7 differed most strongly by AD status, providing strong positive controls for our approach. CSF proteome changes in Alzheimer's disease prove to be widespread and often correlated with tau concentrations. Our unbiased screen also reveals a consistent glycolytic signature across our cohorts and a recent study. Machine learning suggests clinical utility of this proteomic signature.

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 · 10.15252/msb.20199356

Cites

77 of 77 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?

  • 20% of the upregulated proteins were part of the Hif1a downstream network predicted here and included the HIF1A target proteins ALDOA, SPP1, PLD3, PGK1, FABP3, LDHA and STMN1.

    “Importantly, 20% of the upregulated proteins were part of the Hif1a downstream network predicted here and included the HIF1A target proteins ALDOA, SPP1, PLD3, PGK1, FABP3, LDHA and STMN1”

    From Transcriptional signature in microglia associated with Aβ plaque phagocytosis (2021) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Results section (“Neuronal and glycolytic signature in AD CSF”) identifies ALDOA, PGK1 and LDHA among proteins elevated in AD cerebrospinal fluid; another Results section reports elevated FABP3. The cited paper does not establish the stated 20% overlap or identify these proteins as HIF1A targets, and the passages do not establish elevation of SPP1, PLD3 or STMN1. The network described as “predicted here” appears to be the citing authors’ analysis, not a finding of this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Recent analyses showed a reproducible protein signature in 3 independent patient cohorts (total 197 patients) specifically in AD CSF relative to depression and mild cognitive impairment (MCI).

    “Recent analyses showed a reproducible protein signature in 3 independent patient cohorts (total 197 patients) specifically in AD CSF relative to depression and mild cognitive impairment (MCI)78.”

    From Transcriptional signature in microglia associated with Aβ plaque phagocytosis (2021) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Results (Overview of study populations) report three cohorts totaling 197 individuals, and the Results (Replication of AD-associated proteins across cohorts) describe a consistent 40-protein AD CSF signature. The Berlin comparison included depression and subjective cognitive impairment (SCI) controls, not a group identified as mild cognitive impairment (MCI); the other cohorts had different non-AD controls. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Proteins with associations in APOE region featured known AD biomarkers, including four members of the 14-3-3 protein family and neurofilament light and heavy chains.

    “Proteins with associations in this region featured known AD biomarkers, including four members of the 14-3-3 protein family and neurofilament light and heavy chains37,38.”

    From Proteogenomic analysis of human cerebrospinal fluid identifies neurologically relevant regulation and implicates causal proteins for Alzheimer’s disease (2024) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Results sections on CSF proteome alterations and independent-cohort confirmation identify 14-3-3 proteins as associated with AD CSF. Our copy does not establish that four family members and neurofilament light and heavy chains were among proteins associated with the APOE region; searches for APOE and neurofilament did not find that link. Page numbers were not available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In two separate smaller analyses of AD CSF, many of the same AD-associated synaptic and metabolic biomarkers were identified, further supporting the reproducibility of these systems-based CSF marker panels.

    “In two separate smaller analyses of AD CSF, many of the same AD-associated synaptic and metabolic biomarkers were identified, further supporting the reproducibility these systems-based CSF marker panels [78, 172].”

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

1 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bader, J. M., Geyer, P. E., Müller, J. B., Strauss, M. T., Koch, M., Leypoldt, F., Koertvelyessy, P., Bittner, D., Schipke, C. G., Incesoy, E. I., Peters, O., Deigendesch, N., Simons, M., Jensen, M. K., Zetterberg, H., & Mann, M.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry (DE)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (DE)
  • Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg (DE)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
  • German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DE)
  • University Hospital of Basel (CH)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Mann, Matthias
Venue
Molecular Systems Biology
Published
2020-06-01
Volume
16
Issue
6
Pages
e9356-e9356
ISSN
1744-4292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3030835098
Cited by
286
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 8
FWCI
22.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Systems Biology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • MDC Repository (Max-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Open access LMU (Ludwid Maxmilian's Universitat Munchen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Multimedialen Archiv und Publikationsserver der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • DZNE Pub (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden (NNF15CC0001, NNF15OC0016692)
  • EC|Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (825694)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (412136960)
  • H2020 European Research Council (ERC‐2012‐SyG_318987)
  • Funding from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health Dean's Challenge Program sponsored by the McLennan Family Fund
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, cerebrospinal fluid proteome, biomarkers, tau protein, SOD1, DJ-1, neurodegeneration, mass spectrometry-based proteomics, machine learning, clinical utility
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Alzheimer Disease, Glycolysis, Humans, Nerve Degeneration, Neurons, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Biomarkers, tau Proteins, Proteome, Proteomics

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