MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212128030 · doi:10.1515/cclm-2021-0651

Validation of the LUMIPULSE automated immunoassay for the measurement of core AD biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid

2021· article· en· W3212128030 on OpenAlexafffund
Johan Gobom, Lucilla Parnetti, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Martin Vyhnálek, Serge Gauthier, Samuela Cataldi, Ondřej Lerch, Jan Laczó, Kateřina Čechová, Marcus Clarin, Andrea L. Benet, Tharick A. Pascoal, Neserine Rahmouni, Manu Vandijck, Else Huyck, Nathalie Le Bastard, Jenna Stevenson, Mira Chamoun, Daniel Alcolea, Alberto Lleó, Ulf Andréasson, Marcel M. Verbeek, Giovanni Bellomo, Roberta Rinaldi, Nicholas J. Ashton, Henrik Zetterberg, Kateřina Sheardová, Jakub Hort, Kaj Blennow

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUK Dementia Research InstituteVetenskapsrådetHjärnfondenEU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease ResearchAlzheimer's AssociationConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissementAlzheimer's Drug Discovery FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWeston Brain InstituteEuropean CommissionFondation Brain CanadaStiftelsen för Gamla Tjänarinnor
KeywordsImmunoassayReproducibilityRepeatabilityCerebrospinal fluidMedicineBiomarkerRoche DiagnosticsPathologyChromatographyInternal medicineChemistryImmunologyAntibodyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The core cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers; total tau (tTau), phospho-tau (pTau), amyloid β 1-42 (Aβ 1-42), and the Aβ 1-42/Aβ 1-40 ratio have transformed Alzheimer's disease (AD) research and are today increasingly used in clinical routine laboratories as diagnostic tools. Fully automated immunoassay instruments with ready-to-use assay kits and calibrators has simplified their analysis and improved reproducibility of measurements. We evaluated the analytical performance of the fully automated immunoassay instrument LUMIPULSE G (Fujirebio) for measurement of the four core AD CSF biomarkers and determined cutpoints for AD diagnosis. METHODS: Comparison of the LUMIPULSE G assays was performed with the established INNOTEST ELISAs (Fujirebio) for hTau Ag, pTau 181, β-amyloid 1-42, and with V-PLEX Plus Aβ Peptide Panel 1 (6E10) (Meso Scale Discovery) for Aβ 1-42/Aβ 1-40, as well as with a LC-MS reference method for Aβ 1-42. Intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility was evaluated for all assays. Clinical cutpoints for Aβ 1-42, tTau, and pTau was determined by analysis of three cohorts of clinically diagnosed patients, comprising 651 CSF samples. For the Aβ 1-42/Aβ 1-40 ratio, the cutpoint was determined by mixture model analysis of 2,782 CSF samples. RESULTS: The LUMIPULSE G assays showed strong correlation to all other immunoassays (r>0.93 for all assays). The repeatability (intra-laboratory) CVs ranged between 2.0 and 5.6%, with the highest variation observed for β-amyloid 1-40. The reproducibility (inter-laboratory) CVs ranged between 2.1 and 6.5%, with the highest variation observed for β-amyloid 1-42. The clinical cutpoints for AD were determined to be 409 ng/L for total tau, 50.2 ng/L for pTau 181, 526 ng/L for β-amyloid 1-42, and 0.072 for the Aβ 1-42/Aβ 1-40 ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the LUMIPULSE G assays for the CSF AD biomarkers are fit for purpose in clinical laboratory practice. Further, they corroborate earlier presented reference limits for the biomarkers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations150
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207