Leslie M Shaw1, Magdalena Korecka1, Michal Figurski1, Jon Toledo2, David Irwin3, Ju Hee Kang4, John Q Trojanowski1. 1. Departments of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 2. Department of Neurology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX. 3. Department of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 4. Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thirty-four years ago, amyloid-β 1-42 peptide was identified in amyloid plaques from brain tissue obtained from patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) and Down syndrome. This finding led to development of immunoassays for this marker of amyloid plaque burden in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) approximately 10 years later. Subsequently, research immunoassays were developed for total τ protein and τ phosphorylated at the threonine 181 position. Subsequent studies documented the clinical utility of these biomarkers of amyloid plaque burden or τ tangle pathology in cohorts of living patients. CONTENT: We describe the following: (a) clinical utility of AD biomarkers; (b) measurement challenges, including development of mass spectrometry-based reference methods and automated immunoassays; (c) development of "appropriate use criteria" (AUC) guidelines for safe/appropriate use of CSF testing for diagnosis of AD developed by neurologists, a neuroethicist, and laboratorians; (d) a framework, sponsored by the National Institute of Aging-Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA), that defines AD on the basis of CSF and imaging methods for detecting amyloid plaque burden, τ tangle pathology, and neurodegeneration. This framework's purpose was investigative but has important implications for future clinical practice; (e) recognition of copathologies in AD patients and challenges for developing methods to detect these in living patients. SUMMARY: The field can expect availability of validated research tools for detection of AD pathology that support clinical treatment trials of disease-modifying agents and, ultimately, use in clinical practice. Validated methods are becoming available for CSF testing; emergence of validated methods for AD biomarkers in plasma can be expected in the next few years.
BACKGROUND: Thirty-four years ago, amyloid-β 1-42 peptide was identified in amyloid plaques from brain tissue obtained from patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) and Down syndrome. This finding led to development of immunoassays for this marker of amyloid plaque burden in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) approximately 10 years later. Subsequently, research immunoassays were developed for total τ protein and τ phosphorylated at the threonine 181 position. Subsequent studies documented the clinical utility of these biomarkers of amyloid plaque burden or τ tangle pathology in cohorts of living patients. CONTENT: We describe the following: (a) clinical utility of AD biomarkers; (b) measurement challenges, including development of mass spectrometry-based reference methods and automated immunoassays; (c) development of "appropriate use criteria" (AUC) guidelines for safe/appropriate use of CSF testing for diagnosis of AD developed by neurologists, a neuroethicist, and laboratorians; (d) a framework, sponsored by the National Institute of Aging-Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA), that defines AD on the basis of CSF and imaging methods for detecting amyloid plaque burden, τ tangle pathology, and neurodegeneration. This framework's purpose was investigative but has important implications for future clinical practice; (e) recognition of copathologies in ADpatients and challenges for developing methods to detect these in living patients. SUMMARY: The field can expect availability of validated research tools for detection of AD pathology that support clinical treatment trials of disease-modifying agents and, ultimately, use in clinical practice. Validated methods are becoming available for CSF testing; emergence of validated methods for AD biomarkers in plasma can be expected in the next few years.
Authors: Michael W Weiner; Dallas P Veitch; Paul S Aisen; Laurel A Beckett; Nigel J Cairns; Robert C Green; Danielle Harvey; Clifford R Jack; William Jagust; John C Morris; Ronald C Petersen; Andrew J Saykin; Leslie M Shaw; Arthur W Toga; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Osama Sabri; Marwan N Sabbagh; John Seibyl; Henryk Barthel; Hiroyasu Akatsu; Yasuomi Ouchi; Kohei Senda; Shigeo Murayama; Kenji Ishii; Masaki Takao; Thomas G Beach; Christopher C Rowe; James B Leverenz; Bernardino Ghetti; James W Ironside; Ana M Catafau; Andrew W Stephens; Andre Mueller; Norman Koglin; Anja Hoffmann; Katrin Roth; Cornelia Reininger; Walter J Schulz-Schaeffer Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2015-03-28 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Piotr Lewczuk; Georg Beck; Oliver Ganslandt; Hermann Esselmann; Florian Deisenhammer; Axel Regeniter; Hela-Felicitas Petereit; Hayrettin Tumani; Andreas Gerritzen; Patrick Oschmann; Johannes Schröder; Peter Schönknecht; Klaus Zimmermann; Harald Hampel; Katharina Bürger; Markus Otto; Sabine Haustein; Karin Herzog; Rainer Dannenberg; Ulrich Wurster; Mirko Bibl; Juan Manuel Maler; Udo Reubach; Johannes Kornhuber; Jens Wiltfang Journal: Neurosci Lett Date: 2006-10-11 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Anne M Fagan; Leslie M Shaw; Chengjie Xiong; Hugo Vanderstichele; Mark A Mintun; John Q Trojanowski; Els Coart; John C Morris; David M Holtzman Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2011-05-09
Authors: Clifford R Jack; Heather J Wiste; Terry M Therneau; Stephen D Weigand; David S Knopman; Michelle M Mielke; Val J Lowe; Prashanthi Vemuri; Mary M Machulda; Christopher G Schwarz; Jeffrey L Gunter; Matthew L Senjem; Jonathan Graff-Radford; David T Jones; Rosebud O Roberts; Walter A Rocca; Ronald C Petersen Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Tobias Bittner; Henrik Zetterberg; Charlotte E Teunissen; Richard E Ostlund; Michael Militello; Ulf Andreasson; Isabelle Hubeek; David Gibson; David C Chu; Udo Eichenlaub; Peter Heiss; Uwe Kobold; Andreas Leinenbach; Kairat Madin; Ekaterina Manuilova; Christina Rabe; Kaj Blennow Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2015-11-10 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: David J Irwin; Sharon X Xie; David Coughlin; Naomi Nevler; Rizwan S Akhtar; Corey T McMillan; Edward B Lee; David A Wolk; Daniel Weintraub; Alice Chen-Plotkin; John E Duda; Meredith Spindler; Andrew Siderowf; Howard I Hurtig; Leslie M Shaw; Murray Grossman; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 11.800
Authors: Peter T Nelson; Dennis W Dickson; John Q Trojanowski; Clifford R Jack; Patricia A Boyle; Konstantinos Arfanakis; Rosa Rademakers; Irina Alafuzoff; Johannes Attems; Carol Brayne; Ian T S Coyle-Gilchrist; Helena C Chui; David W Fardo; Margaret E Flanagan; Glenda Halliday; Suvi R K Hokkanen; Sally Hunter; Gregory A Jicha; Yuriko Katsumata; Claudia H Kawas; C Dirk Keene; Gabor G Kovacs; Walter A Kukull; Allan I Levey; Nazanin Makkinejad; Thomas J Montine; Shigeo Murayama; Melissa E Murray; Sukriti Nag; Robert A Rissman; William W Seeley; Reisa A Sperling; Charles L White; Lei Yu; Julie A Schneider Journal: Brain Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 15.255
Authors: José Luis Molinuevo; Scott Ayton; Richard Batrla; Martin M Bednar; Tobias Bittner; Jeffrey Cummings; Anne M Fagan; Harald Hampel; Michelle M Mielke; Alvydas Mikulskis; Sid O'Bryant; Philip Scheltens; Jeffrey Sevigny; Leslie M Shaw; Holly D Soares; Gary Tong; John Q Trojanowski; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Harald Hampel; Leslie M Shaw; Paul Aisen; Christopher Chen; Alberto Lleó; Takeshi Iwatsubo; Atsushi Iwata; Masahito Yamada; Takeshi Ikeuchi; Jianping Jia; Huali Wang; Charlotte E Teunissen; Elaine Peskind; Kaj Blennow; Jeffrey Cummings; Andrea Vergallo Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 16.655