BackgroundThe quantification of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (Amyloid beta peptides [Aß1‐40 and Aß1‐42], t‐tau and p‐tau(181)) is progressively implemented in specialized laboratories as an aid for the multidisciplinary diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). There is however a diversity of practices between centers related to pre‐analytical and analytical conditions, the calculation of ratios between analytes, the applied cut‐off, or the use of interpretation scales. Finally, for the same biochemical profile, the interpretation and reporting of results may differ from one center to another, which may raise questions about the commutability of the tests. So far, no consensus has been reached between the different laboratories involved to define the most appropriate conclusions/comments based on the profile of the quantified biomarkers.This work is an essential step towards a consensual harmonization of clinical reporting after CSF analysis in the context of AD diagnosis, as advocated by the "Biofluid Based Biomarkers PIA" working group of the Alzheimer's Association.MethodWe obtained, by means of a questionnaire, a description of the pre‐analytical and analytical protocols and examples of reporting from 40 centers located in 15 countries, i.e. in the majority of countries that have implemented clinical CSF tests for the diagnosis of AD. We then adopted a consensus approach to propose harmonized comments corresponding to different AD CSF biomarker profiles observed in patients.ResultPre‐analytical procedures were very similar, among the centers. Regarding the analytical part, more than 88% of the laboratories use automatized immunoassays and more than 83% measure Aß1‐40 and compute the Aß1‐42/Aß1‐40 ratio, in addition to the three core biomarkers (Aß1‐42, t‐tau and p‐tau(181)). The cut‐off values of biomarkers used by the different laboratories are widely dispersed. Delay before sending back the results is lower than 1 week in more than 34% of the laboratories.ConclusionOur results highlight the state of the art in terms of clinical CSF analysis in the context of AD. Harmonization of clinical reporting between different centers could benefit AD care, prevention and treatment strategies, as a common terminology will allow a better assessment of the prevalence of AD and the contribution of biochemical biomarkers to its diagnosis.
Introduction: Despite increasing evidence of a role of rare genetic variation in the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD), limited attention has been paid to its contribution to ADrelated biomarker traits indicative of AD-relevant pathophysiological processes.
Methods: We performed whole-exome gene-based rare-variant association studies (RVASs) of 17 AD-related traits on whole-exome sequencing (WES) data generated in the European Medical Information Framework for Alzheimer's Disease Multimodal Biomarker Discovery (EMIF-AD MBD) study (n = 450) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data from ADNI (n = 808).Results: Mutation screening revealed a novel probably pathogenic mutation (PSEN1 p.Leu232Phe). Gene-based RVAS revealed the exome-wide significant contribution of rare coding variation in RBKS and OR7A10 to cognitive performance and protection against left hippocampal atrophy, respectively.Discussion: The identification of these novel gene-trait associations offers new perspectives into the role of rare coding variation in the distinct pathophysiological processes culminating in AD, which may lead to identification of novel therapeutic and diagnostic targets.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.