Flora H Duits1, Charlotte E Teunissen2, Femke H Bouwman3, Pieter-Jelle Visser4, Niklas Mattsson5, Henrik Zetterberg6, Kaj Blennow7, Oskar Hansson8, Lennart Minthon8, Niels Andreasen9, Jan Marcusson10, Anders Wallin7, Marcel Olde Rikkert11, Magda Tsolaki12, Lucilla Parnetti13, Sanna-Kaisa Herukka14, Harald Hampel15, Mony J De Leon16, Johannes Schröder17, Dag Aarsland18, Marinus A Blankenstein2, Philip Scheltens3, Wiesje M van der Flier19. 1. Alzheimer Center and Department of Neurology, Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: F.Duits@vumc.nl. 2. Department of Clinical Chemistry, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Alzheimer Center and Department of Neurology, Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Alzheimer Center and Department of Neurology, Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Institute of Brain and Behaviour, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Neurochemistry and Psychiatry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Mölndal, Sweden; Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Center for Imaging of Neurodegenerative Diseases, San Francisco, CA, USA. 6. Department of Neurochemistry and Psychiatry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Mölndal, Sweden; UCL Institute of Neurology, Queen Square, London, UK. 7. Department of Neurochemistry and Psychiatry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Mölndal, Sweden. 8. Clinical Memory Research Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 9. KI-Alzheimer Disease Research Centre, Karolinska Institute, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 10. Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Neuroscience and Locomotion, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 11. Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud Alzheimer Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 12. Memory and Dementia Centre, 3rd Department of Neurology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, "G. Papanicolaou" General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 13. Clinica Neurologica, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy. 14. Department of Neurology, University of Eastern Finland and Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland. 15. Département de Neurologie & Institut de la Mémoire et de la Maladie d'Alzheimer Pavillon, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, François Lhermitte Hôpital de la Salpêtrière, Paris, France. 16. Center for Brain Health, New York University, School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 17. Sektion Gerontopsychiatrie, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 18. Centre for Age-Related Medicine, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway. 19. Alzheimer Center and Department of Neurology, Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify the most useful definition of the "cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer profile," based on amyloid-ß1-42 (Aβ42), total tau, and phosphorylated tau (p-tau), for diagnosis and prognosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: We constructed eight Alzheimer profiles with previously published combinations, including regression formulas and simple ratios. We compared their diagnostic accuracy and ability to predict dementia due to AD in 1385 patients from the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort. Results were validated in an independent cohort (n = 1442). RESULTS: Combinations outperformed individual biomarkers. Based on the sensitivity of the best performing regression formulas, cutoffs were chosen at 0.52 for the tau/Aβ42 ratio and 0.08 for the p-tau/Aβ42 ratio. Ratios performed similar to formulas (sensitivity, 91%-93%; specificity, 81%-84%). The same combinations best predicted cognitive decline in mild cognitive impairment patients. Validation confirmed these results, especially regarding the tau/Aβ42 ratio. CONCLUSIONS: A tau/Aβ42 ratio of >0.52 constitutes a robust cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer profile. We recommend using this ratio to combine biomarkers.
BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify the most useful definition of the "cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer profile," based on amyloid-ß1-42 (Aβ42), total tau, and phosphorylated tau (p-tau), for diagnosis and prognosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: We constructed eight Alzheimer profiles with previously published combinations, including regression formulas and simple ratios. We compared their diagnostic accuracy and ability to predict dementia due to AD in 1385 patients from the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort. Results were validated in an independent cohort (n = 1442). RESULTS: Combinations outperformed individual biomarkers. Based on the sensitivity of the best performing regression formulas, cutoffs were chosen at 0.52 for the tau/Aβ42 ratio and 0.08 for the p-tau/Aβ42 ratio. Ratios performed similar to formulas (sensitivity, 91%-93%; specificity, 81%-84%). The same combinations best predicted cognitive decline in mild cognitive impairmentpatients. Validation confirmed these results, especially regarding the tau/Aβ42 ratio. CONCLUSIONS: A tau/Aβ42 ratio of >0.52 constitutes a robust cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer profile. We recommend using this ratio to combine biomarkers.
Authors: Anna C van Loenhoud; Alle Meije Wink; Colin Groot; Sander C J Verfaillie; Jos Twisk; Frederik Barkhof; Bart van Berckel; Philip Scheltens; Wiesje M van der Flier; Rik Ossenkoppele Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Gaël Chételat; Rik Ossenkoppele; Victor L Villemagne; Audrey Perrotin; Brigitte Landeau; Florence Mézenge; William J Jagust; Vincent Dore; Bruce L Miller; Stéphanie Egret; William W Seeley; Wiesje M van der Flier; Renaud La Joie; David Ames; Bart N M van Berckel; Philip Scheltens; Frederik Barkhof; Christopher C Rowe; Colin L Masters; Vincent de La Sayette; Femke Bouwman; Gil D Rabinovici Journal: Brain Date: 2016-06-29 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Nienke M E Scheltens; Betty M Tijms; Teddy Koene; Frederik Barkhof; Charlotte E Teunissen; Steffen Wolfsgruber; Michael Wagner; Johannes Kornhuber; Oliver Peters; Brendan I Cohn-Sheehy; Gil D Rabinovici; Bruce L Miller; Joel H Kramer; Philip Scheltens; Wiesje M van der Flier Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Adrià Dangla-Valls; José Luis Molinuevo; Jordi Altirriba; Raquel Sánchez-Valle; Daniel Alcolea; Juan Fortea; Lorena Rami; Mircea Balasa; Cristina Muñoz-García; Mario Ezquerra; Rubén Fernández-Santiago; Alberto Lleó; Albert Lladó; Anna Antonell Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: Marissa D Zwan; Juha O Rinne; Steen G Hasselbalch; Agneta Nordberg; Alberto Lleó; Sanna-Kaisa Herukka; Hilkka Soininen; Ian Law; Justyna M C Bahl; Stephen F Carter; Juan Fortea; Rafael Blesa; Charlotte E Teunissen; Femke H Bouwman; Bart N M van Berckel; Pieter J Visser Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Anna E. Leeuwis; Nick A. Weaver; J. Matthijs Biesbroek; Lieza G. Exalto; Hugo J. Kuijf; Astrid M. Hooghiemstra; Niels D. Prins; Philip Scheltens; Frederik Barkhof; Wiesje M. van der Flier; Geert Jan Biessels Journal: J Psychiatry Neurosci Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 6.186
Authors: Inger van Steenoven; Dag Aarsland; Daniel Weintraub; Elisabet Londos; Frédéric Blanc; Wiesje M van der Flier; Charlotte E Teunissen; Brit Mollenhauer; Tormod Fladby; Milica G Kramberger; Laura Bonanni; Afina W Lemstra Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 4.472