Cargando…

Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to carry out systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic utility of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-beta (Aβ(1–42)) as a biomarker for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD) from no...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mo, Jin-A, Lim, Ju-Hee, Sul, Ah-Ram, Lee, Min, Youn, Young Chul, Kim, Hee-Jin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4339391/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25710596
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116802
_version_ 1782358871036133376
author Mo, Jin-A
Lim, Ju-Hee
Sul, Ah-Ram
Lee, Min
Youn, Young Chul
Kim, Hee-Jin
author_facet Mo, Jin-A
Lim, Ju-Hee
Sul, Ah-Ram
Lee, Min
Youn, Young Chul
Kim, Hee-Jin
author_sort Mo, Jin-A
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to carry out systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic utility of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-beta (Aβ(1–42)) as a biomarker for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD) from non-AD dementia. METHODS: Design. Systematic literature review was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Aβ for the diagnosis of AD. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) tool was used to evaluate independently the quality of the studies. Data sources. The literature review covered from January 1, 2004, to October 22, 2013, and searched eight domestic databases including Korea Med and international databases including Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Data Extraction and Synthesis. Primary criteria for inclusion were valid studies on (i) patients with mild cognitive impairment with confirmed or suspected AD and non-AD dementia, and (ii) assessment of Aβ(1–42) levels using appropriate comparative tests. RESULTS: A total of 17 diagnostic evaluation studies were identified in which levels of CSF Aβ(1–42) were assessed. Meta-analysis was performed on 11 robust studies that compared confirmed AD (n = 2211) with healthy individuals (n = 1030), 10 studies that compared AD with non-AD dementias (n = 627), and 5 studies that compared amnestic mild cognitive impairment (n = 1133) with non-amnestic type subjects (n = 1276). Overall, the CSF Aβ(1–42) levels were reduced in AD compared to controls or non-AD dementia. The effectiveness of test was evaluated for diagnostic accuracy (pooled sensitivity, 0.80 (95% CI 0.78–0.82); pooled specificity, 0.76 (95% CI 0.74–0.78). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced CSF Aβ(1–42) levels are of potential utility in the differential diagnosis of AD versus non-AD dementias and controls. Diagnostic accuracy was high in AD versus healthy controls. However, differential diagnosis for MCI or non-AD might be evaluated by other biomarkers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4339391
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43393912015-03-04 Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Mo, Jin-A Lim, Ju-Hee Sul, Ah-Ram Lee, Min Youn, Young Chul Kim, Hee-Jin PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to carry out systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic utility of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-beta (Aβ(1–42)) as a biomarker for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD) from non-AD dementia. METHODS: Design. Systematic literature review was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Aβ for the diagnosis of AD. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) tool was used to evaluate independently the quality of the studies. Data sources. The literature review covered from January 1, 2004, to October 22, 2013, and searched eight domestic databases including Korea Med and international databases including Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Data Extraction and Synthesis. Primary criteria for inclusion were valid studies on (i) patients with mild cognitive impairment with confirmed or suspected AD and non-AD dementia, and (ii) assessment of Aβ(1–42) levels using appropriate comparative tests. RESULTS: A total of 17 diagnostic evaluation studies were identified in which levels of CSF Aβ(1–42) were assessed. Meta-analysis was performed on 11 robust studies that compared confirmed AD (n = 2211) with healthy individuals (n = 1030), 10 studies that compared AD with non-AD dementias (n = 627), and 5 studies that compared amnestic mild cognitive impairment (n = 1133) with non-amnestic type subjects (n = 1276). Overall, the CSF Aβ(1–42) levels were reduced in AD compared to controls or non-AD dementia. The effectiveness of test was evaluated for diagnostic accuracy (pooled sensitivity, 0.80 (95% CI 0.78–0.82); pooled specificity, 0.76 (95% CI 0.74–0.78). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced CSF Aβ(1–42) levels are of potential utility in the differential diagnosis of AD versus non-AD dementias and controls. Diagnostic accuracy was high in AD versus healthy controls. However, differential diagnosis for MCI or non-AD might be evaluated by other biomarkers. Public Library of Science 2015-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4339391/ /pubmed/25710596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116802 Text en © 2015 Mo et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mo, Jin-A
Lim, Ju-Hee
Sul, Ah-Ram
Lee, Min
Youn, Young Chul
Kim, Hee-Jin
Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid(1–42) Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort cerebrospinal fluid β-amyloid(1–42) levels in the differential diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease—systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4339391/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25710596
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116802
work_keys_str_mv AT mojina cerebrospinalfluidbamyloid142levelsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofalzheimersdiseasesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT limjuhee cerebrospinalfluidbamyloid142levelsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofalzheimersdiseasesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sulahram cerebrospinalfluidbamyloid142levelsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofalzheimersdiseasesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT leemin cerebrospinalfluidbamyloid142levelsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofalzheimersdiseasesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT younyoungchul cerebrospinalfluidbamyloid142levelsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofalzheimersdiseasesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kimheejin cerebrospinalfluidbamyloid142levelsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofalzheimersdiseasesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis