Ever since the discovery of APOE 4 around 25 years ago researchers have been excited about the potential of a blood test for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Since then researchers have looked for genetic, protein, metabolite and/or gene expression markers of AD and related phenotypes.However, no blood test for AD is yet being used in the clinical setting. We first review the trends and challenges in AD blood biomarker research, before giving our personal recommendations to help researchers overcome these challenges. While some degree of consistency and replication has been seen across independent studies, several high-profile studies have seemingly failed to replicate. Partly due to academic incentives there is a reluctance in the field to report predictive ability, to publish negative findings and to independently replicate the work of others. If this can be addressed then we will know sooner whether a blood test for AD or related phenotypes with clinical utility can be developed.
ProgressThe identification of genetic markers such as APOE 4 arguably represented the first step change in progress towards a blood test for late onset Alzheimer's disease (AD), as genetic markers can be measured from blood samples [1]. Since then 19 other significant markers of AD have been identified by a Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS) [2]. These markers have been combined into a polygenic risk score with ~80,000 more weakly associated genetic markers achieving an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 78% for prediction of AD. This compares with 72% achievable with just age, sex and APOE 4 (the `co-variate only' model) [3]. In a smaller recent study (N ~ 3 1,600) some of the same authors have shown that the same risk score has an AUC of 84% for predicting pathologically confirmed cases [4], which if confirmed in larger studies may have enough clinical utility to justify the use of genome-wide genotyping in the clinic to aid diagnosis.Even an AUC of 78%, if validated further, may have some utility for recruitment of higher risk individuals to prevention trials [5]. Other promising approaches at an earlier stage of development have involved increasing the GWAS sample size using an AD-by-proxy phenotype [6], and developing polygenic hazard scores to predict age of dementia onset [7].AD polygenic risk scores have also been shown to be associated with brain atrophy [8,9] and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) amyloid beta [7,8], but to the best of our knowledge they have not yet been shown to be predictive of these phenotypes. In fact, two independent studies (N = 657 and N = 242) have shown that this genetic risk score does not appear to be predictive of amyloid or tau pathology measured from CSF [10,11]. A preliminary report that the polygenic hazard score is better able to predict elevated brain amyloid does not appear to test whether it improves upon a model using age, gender and APOE alone, so its clinical utility is uncertain [12]. If the negative findings are correct then this would be consistent with the idea that biomarkers must be op...