Dataset Information

Performance of Fully Automated Plasma Assays as Screening Tests for Alzheimer Disease-Related β-Amyloid Status.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Accurate blood-based biomarkers for Alzheimer disease (AD) might improve the diagnostic accuracy in primary care, referrals to memory clinics, and screenings for AD trials.

Objective

To examine the accuracy of plasma β-amyloid (Aβ) and tau measured using fully automated assays together with other blood-based biomarkers to detect cerebral Aβ.

Design, setting, and participants

Two prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter studies. Study participants were consecutively enrolled between July 6, 2009, and February 11, 2015 (cohort 1), and between January 29, 2000, and October 11, 2006 (cohort 2). Data were analyzed in 2018. The first cohort comprised 842 participants (513 cognitively unimpaired [CU], 265 with mild cognitive impairment [MCI], and 64 with AD dementia) from the Swedish BioFINDER study. The validation cohort comprised 237 participants (34 CU, 109 MCI, and 94 AD dementia) from a German biomarker study.

Main outcome and measures

The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio was used as the reference standard for brain Aβ status. Plasma Aβ42, Aβ40 and tau were measured using Elecsys immunoassays (Roche Diagnostics) and examined as predictors of Aβ status in logistic regression models in cohort 1 and replicated in cohort 2. Plasma neurofilament light chain (NFL) and heavy chain (NFH) and APOE genotype were also examined in cohort 1.

Results

The mean (SD) age of the 842 participants in cohort 1 was 72 (5.6) years, with a range of 59 to 88 years, and 446 (52.5%) were female. For the 237 in cohort 2, mean (SD) age was 66 (10) years with a range of 23 to 85 years, and 120 (50.6%) were female. In cohort 1, plasma Aβ42 and Aβ40 predicted Aβ status with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.77-0.83). When adding APOE, the AUC increased significantly to 0.85 (95% CI, 0.82-0.88). Slight improvements were seen when adding plasma tau (AUC, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) or tau and NFL (AUC, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.89) to Aβ42, Aβ40 and APOE. The results were similar in CU and cognitively impaired participants, and in younger and older participants. Applying the plasma Aβ42 and Aβ40 model from cohort 1 in cohort 2 resulted in slightly higher AUC (0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.91), but plasma tau did not contribute. Using plasma Aβ42, Aβ40, and APOE in an AD trial screening scenario reduced positron emission tomography costs up to 30% to 50% depending on cutoff.

Conclusions and relevance

Plasma Aβ42 and Aβ40 measured using Elecsys immunoassays predict Aβ status in all stages of AD with similar accuracy in a validation cohort. Their accuracy can be further increased by analyzing APOE genotype. Potential future applications of these blood tests include prescreening of Aβ positivity in clinical AD trials to lower the costs and number of positron emission tomography scans or lumbar punctures.

SUBMITTER: Palmqvist S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6593637 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinicians, researchers, and patients alike would greatly benefit from more accessible and inexpensive biomarkers for neural β-amyloid (Aβ). We aimed to assess the performance of fully automated plasma Aβ immunoassays, which correlate significantly with immunoprecipitation mass spectrometry assays, in predicting brain Aβ status as determined by visual read assessment of amyloid positron emission tomography (PET).MethodsThe plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio was measured using a fully automated immunoassay platform (HISCL series) in two clinical studies (discovery and validation studies). The discovery and validation sample sets were retrospectively and randomly selected from participants with early Alzheimer's disease (AD) identified during screening for the elenbecestat Phase 3 program.ResultsWe included 197 participants in the discovery study (mean [SD] age 71.1 [8.5] years; 112 females) and 200 in the validation study (age 70.8 [7.9] years; 99 females). The plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio predicted amyloid PET visual read status with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.941 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.910-0.973) and 0.868 (95% CI 0.816-0.920) in the discovery and validation studies, respectively. In the discovery study, a cutoff value of 0.102 was determined based on maximizing the Youden Index, and the sensitivity and specificity were calculated to be 96.0% (95% CI 90.1-98.9%) and 83.5% (95% CI 74.6-90.3%), respectively. Using the same cutoff value, the sensitivity and specificity in the validation study were calculated to be 88.0% (95% CI 80.0-93.6%) and 72.0% (95% CI 62.1-80.5%), respectively.ConclusionsThe plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio measured using the HISCL series achieved high accuracy in predicting amyloid PET status. Since our blood-based immunoassay system is less invasive and more accessible than amyloid PET and cerebrospinal fluid testing, it may contribute to the diagnosis of AD in routine clinical practice.

Project description:ObjectiveTo study cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) analyzed by fully automated Elecsys immunoassays in comparison to neuropathologic gold standards, and compare their accuracy to plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau181) measured using a novel Simoa method.MethodsWe studied ante-mortem Elecsys-derived CSF biomarkers in 45 individuals who underwent standardized post-mortem assessments of AD and non-AD neuropathologic changes at autopsy. In a subset of 26 participants, we also analysed ante-mortem levels of plasma p-tau181 and neurofilament light (NfL). Reference biomarker values were obtained from 146 amyloid-PET-negative healthy controls (HC).ResultsAll CSF biomarkers clearly distinguished pathology-confirmed AD dementia (N=27) from HC (AUCs=0.86-1.00). CSF total-tau (t-tau), p-tau181, and their ratios with Aβ1-42, also accurately distinguished pathology-confirmed AD from non-AD dementia (N=8; AUCs=0.94-0.97). In pathology-specific analyses, intermediate-to-high Thal amyloid phases were best detected by CSF Aβ1-42 (AUC[95% CI]=0.91[0.81-1]), while intermediate-to-high CERAD neuritic plaques and Braak tau stages were best detected by CSF p-tau181 (AUC=0.89[0.79-0.99] and 0.88[0.77-0.99], respectively). Optimal Elecsys biomarker cut-offs were derived at 1097/229/19 pg/ml for Aβ1-42, t-tau, and p-tau181. In the plasma subsample, both plasma p-tau181 (AUC=0.91[0.86-0.96]) and NfL (AUC=0.93[0.87-0.99]) accurately distinguished pathology-confirmed AD (N=14) from HC. However, only p-tau181 distinguished AD from non-AD dementia cases (N=4; AUC=0.96[0.88-1.00]), and showed a similar, though weaker, pathologic specificity for neuritic plaques (AUC=0.75[0.52-0.98]) and Braak stage (AUC=0.71[0.44-0.98]) as CSF p-tau181.ConclusionsElecsys-derived CSF biomarkers detect AD neuropathologic changes with very high discriminative accuracy in-vivo. Preliminary findings support the use of plasma p-tau181 as an easily accessible and scalable biomarker of AD pathology.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class II evidence that fully-automated CSF t-tau and p-tau181measurements discriminate between autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer's disease and other dementias.

Project description:ImportanceBlood-based tests for brain amyloid-β (Aβ) pathology are needed for widespread implementation of Alzheimer disease (AD) biomarkers in clinical care and to facilitate patient screening and monitoring of treatment responses in clinical trials.ObjectiveTo compare the performance of plasma Aβ42/40 measured using 8 different Aβ assays when detecting abnormal brain Aβ status in patients with early AD.Design, setting, and participantsThis study included 182 cognitively unimpaired participants and 104 patients with mild cognitive impairment from the BioFINDER cohort who were enrolled at 3 different hospitals in Sweden and underwent Aβ positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma collection from 2010 to 2014. Plasma Aβ42/40 was measured using an immunoprecipitation-coupled mass spectrometry developed at Washington University (IP-MS-WashU), antibody-free liquid chromatography MS developed by Araclon (LC-MS-Arc), and immunoassays from Roche Diagnostics (IA-Elc); Euroimmun (IA-EI); and Amsterdam University Medical Center, ADx Neurosciences, and Quanterix (IA-N4PE). Plasma Aβ42/40 was also measured using an IP-MS-based method from Shimadzu in 200 participants (IP-MS-Shim) and an IP-MS-based method from the University of Gothenburg (IP-MS-UGOT) and another immunoassay from Quanterix (IA-Quan) among 227 participants. For validation, 122 participants (51 cognitively normal, 51 with mild cognitive impairment, and 20 with AD dementia) were included from the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative who underwent Aβ-PET and plasma Aβ assessments using IP-MS-WashU, IP-MS-Shim, IP-MS-UGOT, IA-Elc, IA-N4PE, and IA-Quan assays.Main outcomes and measuresDiscriminative accuracy of plasma Aβ42/40 quantified using 8 different assays for abnormal CSF Aβ42/40 and Aβ-PET status.ResultsA total of 408 participants were included in this study. In the BioFINDER cohort, the mean (SD) age was 71.6 (5.6) years and 49.3% of the cohort were women. When identifying participants with abnormal CSF Aβ42/40 in the whole cohort, plasma IP-MS-WashU Aβ42/40 showed significantly higher accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.90) than LC-MS-Arc Aβ42/40, IA-Elc Aβ42/40, IA-EI Aβ42/40, and IA-N4PE Aβ42/40 (AUC range, 0.69-0.78; P < .05). Plasma IP-MS-WashU Aβ42/40 performed significantly better than IP-MS-UGOT Aβ42/40 and IA-Quan Aβ42/40 (AUC, 0.84 vs 0.68 and 0.64, respectively; P < .001), while there was no difference in the AUCs between IP-MS-WashU Aβ42/40 and IP-MS-Shim Aβ42/40 (0.87 vs 0.83; P = .16) in the 2 subcohorts where these biomarkers were available. The results were similar when using Aβ-PET as outcome. Plasma IPMS-WashU Aβ42/40 and IPMS-Shim Aβ42/40 showed highest coefficients for correlations with CSF Aβ42/40 (r range, 0.56-0.65). The BioFINDER results were replicated in the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [5.4] years; 43.4% women), where the IP-MS-WashU assay performed significantly better than the IP-MS-UGOT, IA-Elc, IA-N4PE, and IA-Quan assays but not the IP-MS-Shim assay.Conclusions and relevanceThe results from 2 independent cohorts indicate that certain MS-based methods performed better than most of the immunoassays for plasma Aβ42/40 when detecting brain Aβ pathology.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the clinical significance of measuring bile acids concentration in plasma or serum has been recognized for long in patients with hepatobiliary disease and/or bile acid malabsorption, the reference separation techniques are expensive and mostly unsuitable for early diagnosis and for measuring large volumes of samples. Therefore, this study was aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of three commercial enzymatic techniques for measuring total bile acids in plasma using a fully-automated clinical chemistry platform.MethodsThree commercial enzymatic assays (from Diazyme, Randox and Sentinel) were adapted for use on a Cobas Roche c501. We performed imprecision and linearity studies, and we compared results with those obtained using a reference liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) technique on an identical set of lithium-heparin plasma samples.ResultsTotal imprecision was optimal, always equal or lower than 3%. All assays had optimal linearity between 3-138 ?mol/L. The comparison studies showed good correlation with LC-MS data (Spearman's correlation coefficients always >0.92), but all plasma samples values were significantly underestimated using the commercial enzymatic assays (-44% for Diazyme, -16% for Randox and -12% for Sentinel). The agreement at the 10 and 40 ?mol/L diagnostic thresholds of total bile acids in plasma ranged between 86-92%. This discrepancy was found to be mainly attributable to a heterogeneous composition in terms of bile acids content of the three assay calibrators.ConclusionsThis study suggests that the analytical performance of the three commercial enzymatic assays is excellent, thus confirming that automation of this important test by means of enzymatic assessment may be feasible, practical, reliable and supposedly cheap. Nevertheless, the underestimation of values compared to the reference LC-MS also suggests that the local definition and validation of reference ranges according to the combination between the specific enzymatic assay and the different clinical chemistry platforms may be advisable.