Cargando…

Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy: New Data and Quantitative Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers in patients with probable cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) according to the modified Boston criteria in a retrospective multicentric cohort. METHODS: Beta-amyloid 1-40 (Aβ40), beta-amyloid 1-42 (Aβ42), total tau...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Margraf, Nils G., Jensen-Kondering, Ulf, Weiler, Caroline, Leypoldt, Frank, Maetzler, Walter, Philippen, Sarah, Bartsch, Thorsten, Flüh, Charlotte, Röcken, Christoph, Möller, Bettina, Royl, Georg, Neumann, Alexander, Brüggemann, Norbert, Roeben, Benjamin, Schulte, Claudia, Bender, Benjamin, Berg, Daniela, Kuhlenbäumer, Gregor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8884145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35237145
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.783996
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers in patients with probable cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) according to the modified Boston criteria in a retrospective multicentric cohort. METHODS: Beta-amyloid 1-40 (Aβ40), beta-amyloid 1-42 (Aβ42), total tau (t-tau), and phosphorylated tau 181 (p-tau(181)) were measured in 31 patients with probable CAA, 28 patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and 30 controls. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were performed for the measured parameters as well as the Aβ42/40 ratio to estimate diagnostic parameters. A meta-analysis of all amenable published studies was conducted. RESULTS: In our data Aβ42/40 (AUC 0.88) discriminated best between CAA and controls while Aβ40 did not perform well (AUC 0.63). Differentiating between CAA and AD, p-tau(181) (AUC 0.75) discriminated best in this study while Aβ40 (AUC 0.58) and Aβ42 (AUC 0.54) provided no discrimination. In the meta-analysis, Aβ42/40 (AUC 0.90) showed the best discrimination between CAA and controls followed by t-tau (AUC 0.79), Aβ40 (AUC 0.76), and p-tau(181) (AUC 0.71). P-tau(181) (AUC 0.76), Aβ40 (AUC 0.73), and t-tau (AUC 0.71) differentiated comparably between AD and CAA while Aβ42 (AUC 0.54) did not. In agreement with studies examining AD biomarkers, Aβ42/40 discriminated excellently between AD and controls (AUC 0.92–0.96) in this study as well as the meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: The analyzed parameters differentiate between controls and CAA with clinically useful accuracy (AUC > ∼0.85) but not between CAA and AD. Since there is a neuropathological, clinical and diagnostic continuum between CAA and AD, other diagnostic markers, e.g., novel CSF biomarkers or other parameters might be more successful.