MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205360722 · doi:10.1002/alz.056186

Plasma p‐tau231 in the Alzheimer’s disease continuum: A multi‐cohort evaluation of diagnostic performance, detection of Aβ pathology and preclinical application

2021· article· en· W4205360722 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas J. Ashton, Thomas K. Karikari, Juan Lantero‐Rodriguez, Andréa Lessa Benedet, Anniina Snellman, Tharick A. Pascoal, Serge Gauthier, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Clifford R. Jack, Ronald C. Petersen, Michelle M. Mielke, Pratishtha Chatterjee, Ralph N. Martins, Madhav Thambisetty, Vijay R. Varma, Susan M. Resnick, Nick C. Fox, Antoinette O’Connor, Agathe Vrillon, Claire Paquet, Sylvia Villeneuve, Judes Poirier, Doug Galasko, Marta Milà‐Alomà, Carolina Minguillón, Karine Fauria, Marc Suárez‐Calvet, Eugeen Vanmechelen, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaCohortInternal medicineBiomarkerOncologyPathologyCohort studyArea under the curveDiseaseGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Blood phosphorylated tau (p‐tau) has proven to be the primary candidate as an accessible and scalable biomarker for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Both p‐tau181 and p‐tau217 are highly accurate to detect AD within dementia cases. Our recent work in cerebrospinal fluid, however, indicates p‐tau231 to be associated to incipient AD pathology. In light of this, we developed a Single molecule array (Simoa) to detect plasma p‐tau231 and assessed its performance in multiple domains, specifically, its ability to detect preclinical AD. Method In all cohorts, plasma p‐tau231 was quantified using an in‐house Simoa method developed at the Clinical Neurochemistry Laboratory, Gothenburg University, Sweden. Data presented in this study are samples acquired from Translational Biomarkers of Aging and Dementia (TRIAD, n=503), King’s College London (n=55), Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (n=145), KARVIAH (n=140), Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (n=430), University College London (n=70), Paris University (n=213), PREVENT‐AD (n=257), University of California (n=309) and ALFA+ (n=385). Result In the TRIAD cohort, plasma p‐tau231 demonstrated high accuracy in determining AD from young individuals (AUC=0.95), Aβ‐ elderly (AUC=0.92), Aβ‐ MCI (AUC=0.88) and other neurodegenerative disorders (AUC=0.92). In an autopsy study, plasma p‐tau231 could detect neuropathologically confirmed AD amongst dementia cases (AUC=0.99). In comparing healthy elderly Aβ‐ and Aβ+ individuals, p‐tau231 predicted preclinical Aβ pathology (AUC=0.83). Furthermore, inflection points of the weighted regression curves demonstrate that increases in plasma p‐tau231 occur before plasma p‐tau181 as a function of Aβ deposition load. Plasma p‐tau231 data from additional cohorts will focus on cross‐sectional and longitudinal preclinical datasets. In addition, further data will show the performance of p‐tau231 in symptomatic and presymptomatic PSEN1/APP mutation carriers, memory clinic cohorts, longitudinal neuropathology confirmed and acute neurological injury. Conclusion Plasma p‐tau231 is a new biomarker specific for AD pathology and at higher concentrations relative to p‐tau181 and p‐tau217. Our initial results indicate that plasma p‐tau231 is equivalent to p‐tau181 in diagnostic utility but has greater potential as a biomarker to monitor emerging Aβ pathology. This presentation will give an overview of novel cross‐sectional and longitudinal plasma p‐tau231 data, in more than 3000 individuals, that encompasses the AD continuum, familial AD and other neurological conditions.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→