Shengri Cong1, Chunchen Xiang1, Hailong Wang2, Shuyan Cong3. 1. Department of Neurology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Heping District, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China. 2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 3. Department of Neurology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Heping District, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China. congshuyan@hotmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiple system atrophy (MSA) is an adult onset, fatal neurodegenerative disease. However, no reliable biomarker is currently available to guide clinical diagnosis and help to determine the prognosis. Thus, a comprehensive meta-analysis is warranted to determine effective biomarkers for MSA and provide useful guidance for clinical diagnosis. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was made of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases for relevant clinical trial articles for 1984-2019. Two review authors examined the full-text records, respectively, and determined which studies met the inclusion criteria. We estimated the mean difference, standard deviation and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies and 11 biomarkers were included in our analysis. Several biomarkers were found to be useful to distinguish MSA patients from healthy controls, including the reduction of phosphorylated tau, α-synuclein (α-syn), 42-amino-acid form of Aβ and total tau (t-tau), the elevation of neurofilament light-chain protein (NFL) in cerebrospinal fluid, the elevation of uric acid and reduction of homocysteine and coenzyme Q10 in plasma. Importantly, α-syn, NFL and t-tau could be used to distinguish MSA from Parkinson's disease (PD), indicating that these three biomarkers could be useful biomarkers in MSA diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The findings of our meta-analysis demonstrated diagnostic biomarkers for MSA. Moreover, three biomarkers could be used in differential diagnosis of MSA and PD. The results could be helpful for the early diagnosis of MSA and the accuracy of MSA diagnosis.
BACKGROUND:Multiple system atrophy (MSA) is an adult onset, fatal neurodegenerative disease. However, no reliable biomarker is currently available to guide clinical diagnosis and help to determine the prognosis. Thus, a comprehensive meta-analysis is warranted to determine effective biomarkers for MSA and provide useful guidance for clinical diagnosis. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was made of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases for relevant clinical trial articles for 1984-2019. Two review authors examined the full-text records, respectively, and determined which studies met the inclusion criteria. We estimated the mean difference, standard deviation and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies and 11 biomarkers were included in our analysis. Several biomarkers were found to be useful to distinguish MSApatients from healthy controls, including the reduction of phosphorylated tau, α-synuclein (α-syn), 42-amino-acid form of Aβ and total tau (t-tau), the elevation of neurofilament light-chain protein (NFL) in cerebrospinal fluid, the elevation of uric acid and reduction of homocysteine and coenzyme Q10 in plasma. Importantly, α-syn, NFL and t-tau could be used to distinguish MSA from Parkinson's disease (PD), indicating that these three biomarkers could be useful biomarkers in MSA diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The findings of our meta-analysis demonstrated diagnostic biomarkers for MSA. Moreover, three biomarkers could be used in differential diagnosis of MSA and PD. The results could be helpful for the early diagnosis of MSA and the accuracy of MSA diagnosis.
Authors: Yu Wang; Min Shi; Kathryn A Chung; Cyrus P Zabetian; James B Leverenz; Daniela Berg; Karin Srulijes; John Q Trojanowski; Virginia M-Y Lee; Andrew D Siderowf; Howard Hurtig; Irene Litvan; Mya C Schiess; Elaine R Peskind; Masami Masuda; Masato Hasegawa; Xiangmin Lin; Catherine Pan; Douglas Galasko; David S Goldstein; Poul Henning Jensen; Hui Yang; Kevin C Cain; Jing Zhang Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Min Shi; Joshua Bradner; Aneeka M Hancock; Kathryn A Chung; Joseph F Quinn; Elaine R Peskind; Douglas Galasko; Joseph Jankovic; Cyrus P Zabetian; Hojoong M Kim; James B Leverenz; Thomas J Montine; Carmen Ginghina; Un Jung Kang; Kevin C Cain; Yu Wang; Jan Aasly; David Goldstein; Jing Zhang Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-03-11 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: S Gilman; G K Wenning; P A Low; D J Brooks; C J Mathias; J Q Trojanowski; N W Wood; C Colosimo; A Dürr; C J Fowler; H Kaufmann; T Klockgether; A Lees; W Poewe; N Quinn; T Revesz; D Robertson; P Sandroni; K Seppi; M Vidailhet Journal: Neurology Date: 2008-08-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: N K Magdalinou; R W Paterson; J M Schott; N C Fox; C Mummery; K Blennow; K Bhatia; H R Morris; P Giunti; T T Warner; R de Silva; A J Lees; H Zetterberg Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Silke Nuber; Molly Rajsombath; Georgia Minakaki; Jürgen Winkler; Christian P Müller; Maria Ericsson; Barbara Caldarone; Ulf Dettmer; Dennis J Selkoe Journal: Neuron Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 17.173
Authors: Attila Lehotzky; Judit Oláh; János Tibor Fekete; Tibor Szénási; Edit Szabó; Balázs Győrffy; György Várady; Judit Ovádi Journal: Front Mol Biosci Date: 2021-05-18
Authors: V A Blanco-Palmero; F J Azcárate-Díaz; M Ruiz-Ortiz; M I Laespada-García; P Rábano-Suárez; A Méndez-Guerrero; M Aramendi-Ramos; J L Eguiburu; A Pérez-Rivilla; A Marchán-López; M Rubio-Fernández; E Carro; J González de la Aleja Journal: J Neurol Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 4.849