Cargando…
Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort
BACKGROUND: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a complex neurodegenerative disorder with β-amyloid pathology as a key underlying process. The relevance of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and brain imaging biomarkers is validated in clinical practice for early diagnosis. Yet, their cost and perceived invasiveness...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9938625/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36800984 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-023-01188-8 |
_version_ | 1784890672181936128 |
---|---|
author | Hirtz, Christophe Busto, Germain U. Bennys, Karim Kindermans, Jana Navucet, Sophie Tiers, Laurent Lista, Simone Vialaret, Jérôme Gutierrez, Laure-Anne Dauvilliers, Yves Berr, Claudine Lehmann, Sylvain Gabelle, Audrey |
author_facet | Hirtz, Christophe Busto, Germain U. Bennys, Karim Kindermans, Jana Navucet, Sophie Tiers, Laurent Lista, Simone Vialaret, Jérôme Gutierrez, Laure-Anne Dauvilliers, Yves Berr, Claudine Lehmann, Sylvain Gabelle, Audrey |
author_sort | Hirtz, Christophe |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a complex neurodegenerative disorder with β-amyloid pathology as a key underlying process. The relevance of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and brain imaging biomarkers is validated in clinical practice for early diagnosis. Yet, their cost and perceived invasiveness are a limitation for large-scale implementation. Based on positive amyloid profiles, blood-based biomarkers should allow to detect people at risk for AD and to monitor patients under therapeutics strategies. Thanks to the recent development of innovative proteomic tools, the sensibility and specificity of blood biomarkers have been considerably improved. However, their diagnosis and prognosis relevance for daily clinical practice is still incomplete. METHODS: The Plasmaboost study included 184 participants from the Montpellier’s hospital NeuroCognition Biobank with AD (n = 73), mild cognitive impairments (MCI) (n = 32), subjective cognitive impairments (SCI) (n = 12), other neurodegenerative diseases (NDD) (n = 31), and other neurological disorders (OND) (n = 36). Dosage of β-amyloid biomarkers was performed on plasma samples using immunoprecipitation-mass spectrometry (IPMS) developed by Shimadzu (IPMS-Shim Aβ(42), Aβ(40), APP(669–711)) and Simoa Human Neurology 3-PLEX A assay (Aβ(42), Aβ(40), t-tau). Links between those biomarkers and demographical and clinical data and CSF AD biomarkers were investigated. Performances of the two technologies to discriminate clinically or biologically based (using the AT(N) framework) diagnosis of AD were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. RESULTS: The amyloid IPMS-Shim composite biomarker (combining APP(669–711)/Aβ(42) and Aβ(40)/Aβ(42) ratios) discriminated AD from SCI (AUC: 0.91), OND (0.89), and NDD (0.81). The IPMS-Shim Aβ(42/40) ratio also discriminated AD from MCI (0.78). IPMS-Shim biomarkers have similar relevance to discriminate between amyloid-positive and amyloid-negative individuals (0.73 and 0.76 respectively) and A−T−N−/A+T+N+ profiles (0.83 and 0.85). Performances of the Simoa 3-PLEX Aβ(42/40) ratio were more modest. Pilot longitudinal analysis on the progression of plasma biomarkers indicates that IPMS-Shim can detect the decrease in plasma Aβ(42) that is specific to AD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the potential usefulness of amyloid plasma biomarkers, especially the IPMS-Shim technology, as a screening tool for early AD patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13195-023-01188-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9938625 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99386252023-02-19 Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort Hirtz, Christophe Busto, Germain U. Bennys, Karim Kindermans, Jana Navucet, Sophie Tiers, Laurent Lista, Simone Vialaret, Jérôme Gutierrez, Laure-Anne Dauvilliers, Yves Berr, Claudine Lehmann, Sylvain Gabelle, Audrey Alzheimers Res Ther Research BACKGROUND: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a complex neurodegenerative disorder with β-amyloid pathology as a key underlying process. The relevance of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and brain imaging biomarkers is validated in clinical practice for early diagnosis. Yet, their cost and perceived invasiveness are a limitation for large-scale implementation. Based on positive amyloid profiles, blood-based biomarkers should allow to detect people at risk for AD and to monitor patients under therapeutics strategies. Thanks to the recent development of innovative proteomic tools, the sensibility and specificity of blood biomarkers have been considerably improved. However, their diagnosis and prognosis relevance for daily clinical practice is still incomplete. METHODS: The Plasmaboost study included 184 participants from the Montpellier’s hospital NeuroCognition Biobank with AD (n = 73), mild cognitive impairments (MCI) (n = 32), subjective cognitive impairments (SCI) (n = 12), other neurodegenerative diseases (NDD) (n = 31), and other neurological disorders (OND) (n = 36). Dosage of β-amyloid biomarkers was performed on plasma samples using immunoprecipitation-mass spectrometry (IPMS) developed by Shimadzu (IPMS-Shim Aβ(42), Aβ(40), APP(669–711)) and Simoa Human Neurology 3-PLEX A assay (Aβ(42), Aβ(40), t-tau). Links between those biomarkers and demographical and clinical data and CSF AD biomarkers were investigated. Performances of the two technologies to discriminate clinically or biologically based (using the AT(N) framework) diagnosis of AD were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. RESULTS: The amyloid IPMS-Shim composite biomarker (combining APP(669–711)/Aβ(42) and Aβ(40)/Aβ(42) ratios) discriminated AD from SCI (AUC: 0.91), OND (0.89), and NDD (0.81). The IPMS-Shim Aβ(42/40) ratio also discriminated AD from MCI (0.78). IPMS-Shim biomarkers have similar relevance to discriminate between amyloid-positive and amyloid-negative individuals (0.73 and 0.76 respectively) and A−T−N−/A+T+N+ profiles (0.83 and 0.85). Performances of the Simoa 3-PLEX Aβ(42/40) ratio were more modest. Pilot longitudinal analysis on the progression of plasma biomarkers indicates that IPMS-Shim can detect the decrease in plasma Aβ(42) that is specific to AD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the potential usefulness of amyloid plasma biomarkers, especially the IPMS-Shim technology, as a screening tool for early AD patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13195-023-01188-8. BioMed Central 2023-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9938625/ /pubmed/36800984 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-023-01188-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Hirtz, Christophe Busto, Germain U. Bennys, Karim Kindermans, Jana Navucet, Sophie Tiers, Laurent Lista, Simone Vialaret, Jérôme Gutierrez, Laure-Anne Dauvilliers, Yves Berr, Claudine Lehmann, Sylvain Gabelle, Audrey Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
title | Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
title_full | Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
title_fullStr | Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
title_short | Comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
title_sort | comparison of ultrasensitive and mass spectrometry quantification of blood-based amyloid biomarkers for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis in a memory clinic cohort |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9938625/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36800984 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-023-01188-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hirtzchristophe comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT bustogermainu comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT bennyskarim comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT kindermansjana comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT navucetsophie comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT tierslaurent comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT listasimone comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT vialaretjerome comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT gutierrezlaureanne comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT dauvilliersyves comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT berrclaudine comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT lehmannsylvain comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort AT gabelleaudrey comparisonofultrasensitiveandmassspectrometryquantificationofbloodbasedamyloidbiomarkersforalzheimersdiseasediagnosisinamemorycliniccohort |