Cargando…

Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of CSF biomarkers and amyloid PET for diagnosing early-stage Alzheimer disease (AD). METHODS: From the prospective, longitudinal BioFINDER study, we included 122 healthy elderly and 34 patients with mild cognitive impairment who developed AD dementia wit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Palmqvist, Sebastian, Zetterberg, Henrik, Mattsson, Niklas, Johansson, Per, Minthon, Lennart, Blennow, Kaj, Olsson, Mattias, Hansson, Oskar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4607601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26354982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000001991
_version_ 1782395536634019840
author Palmqvist, Sebastian
Zetterberg, Henrik
Mattsson, Niklas
Johansson, Per
Minthon, Lennart
Blennow, Kaj
Olsson, Mattias
Hansson, Oskar
author_facet Palmqvist, Sebastian
Zetterberg, Henrik
Mattsson, Niklas
Johansson, Per
Minthon, Lennart
Blennow, Kaj
Olsson, Mattias
Hansson, Oskar
author_sort Palmqvist, Sebastian
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of CSF biomarkers and amyloid PET for diagnosing early-stage Alzheimer disease (AD). METHODS: From the prospective, longitudinal BioFINDER study, we included 122 healthy elderly and 34 patients with mild cognitive impairment who developed AD dementia within 3 years (MCI-AD). β-Amyloid (Aβ) deposition in 9 brain regions was examined with [(18)F]-flutemetamol PET. CSF was analyzed with INNOTEST and EUROIMMUN ELISAs. The results were replicated in 146 controls and 64 patients with MCI-AD from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative study. RESULTS: The best CSF measures for identifying MCI-AD were Aβ42/total tau (t-tau) and Aβ42/hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) (area under the curve [AUC] 0.93–0.94). The best PET measures performed similarly (AUC 0.92–0.93; anterior cingulate, posterior cingulate/precuneus, and global neocortical uptake). CSF Aβ42/t-tau and Aβ42/p-tau performed better than CSF Aβ42 and Aβ42/40 (AUC difference 0.03–0.12, p < 0.05). Using nonoptimized cutoffs, CSF Aβ42/t-tau had the highest accuracy of all CSF/PET biomarkers (sensitivity 97%, specificity 83%). The combination of CSF and PET was not better than using either biomarker separately. CONCLUSIONS: Amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers can identify early AD with high accuracy. There were no differences between the best CSF and PET measures and no improvement when combining them. Regional PET measures were not better than assessing the global Aβ deposition. The results were replicated in an independent cohort using another CSF assay and PET tracer. The choice between CSF and amyloid PET biomarkers for identifying early AD can be based on availability, costs, and doctor/patient preferences since both have equally high diagnostic accuracy. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers identify early-stage AD equally accurately.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4607601
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46076012015-10-29 Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease Palmqvist, Sebastian Zetterberg, Henrik Mattsson, Niklas Johansson, Per Minthon, Lennart Blennow, Kaj Olsson, Mattias Hansson, Oskar Neurology Article OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of CSF biomarkers and amyloid PET for diagnosing early-stage Alzheimer disease (AD). METHODS: From the prospective, longitudinal BioFINDER study, we included 122 healthy elderly and 34 patients with mild cognitive impairment who developed AD dementia within 3 years (MCI-AD). β-Amyloid (Aβ) deposition in 9 brain regions was examined with [(18)F]-flutemetamol PET. CSF was analyzed with INNOTEST and EUROIMMUN ELISAs. The results were replicated in 146 controls and 64 patients with MCI-AD from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative study. RESULTS: The best CSF measures for identifying MCI-AD were Aβ42/total tau (t-tau) and Aβ42/hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) (area under the curve [AUC] 0.93–0.94). The best PET measures performed similarly (AUC 0.92–0.93; anterior cingulate, posterior cingulate/precuneus, and global neocortical uptake). CSF Aβ42/t-tau and Aβ42/p-tau performed better than CSF Aβ42 and Aβ42/40 (AUC difference 0.03–0.12, p < 0.05). Using nonoptimized cutoffs, CSF Aβ42/t-tau had the highest accuracy of all CSF/PET biomarkers (sensitivity 97%, specificity 83%). The combination of CSF and PET was not better than using either biomarker separately. CONCLUSIONS: Amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers can identify early AD with high accuracy. There were no differences between the best CSF and PET measures and no improvement when combining them. Regional PET measures were not better than assessing the global Aβ deposition. The results were replicated in an independent cohort using another CSF assay and PET tracer. The choice between CSF and amyloid PET biomarkers for identifying early AD can be based on availability, costs, and doctor/patient preferences since both have equally high diagnostic accuracy. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers identify early-stage AD equally accurately. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2015-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4607601/ /pubmed/26354982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000001991 Text en © 2015 American Academy of Neurology This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Article
Palmqvist, Sebastian
Zetterberg, Henrik
Mattsson, Niklas
Johansson, Per
Minthon, Lennart
Blennow, Kaj
Olsson, Mattias
Hansson, Oskar
Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease
title Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease
title_full Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease
title_fullStr Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease
title_full_unstemmed Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease
title_short Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease
title_sort detailed comparison of amyloid pet and csf biomarkers for identifying early alzheimer disease
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4607601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26354982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000001991
work_keys_str_mv AT palmqvistsebastian detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT zetterberghenrik detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT mattssonniklas detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT johanssonper detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT minthonlennart detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT blennowkaj detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT olssonmattias detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT hanssonoskar detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease
AT detailedcomparisonofamyloidpetandcsfbiomarkersforidentifyingearlyalzheimerdisease