Biochemical markers have a central position in the diagnosis and management of patients in clinical medicine, and also in clinical research and drug development, also for brain disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is frequently used for measurement of low-abundance biomarkers. However, the quality of ELISA methods varies, which may introduce both systematic and random errors. This urges the need for more rigorous control of assay performance, regardless of its use in a research setting, in clinical routine, or drug development. The aim of a method validation is to present objective evidence that a method fulfills the requirements for its intended use. Although much has been published on which parameters to investigate in a method validation, less is available on a detailed level on how to perform the corresponding experiments. To remedy this, standard operating procedures (SOPs) with step-by-step instructions for a number of different validation parameters is included in the present work together with a validation report template, which allow for a well-ordered presentation of the results. Even though the SOPs were developed with the intended use for immunochemical methods and to be used for multicenter evaluations, most of them are generic and can be used for other technologies as well.

IMPORTANCE Cerebral amyloid-β aggregation is an early event in Alzheimer disease (AD). Understanding the association between amyloid aggregation and cognitive manifestation in persons without dementia is important for a better understanding of the course of AD and for the design of prevention trials. OBJECTIVE To investigate whether amyloid-β aggregation is associated with cognitive functioning in persons without dementia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study included 2908 participants with normal cognition and 4133 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from 53 studies in the multicenter Amyloid Biomarker Study. Normal cognition was defined as having no cognitive concerns for which medical help was sought and scores within the normal range on cognitive tests. Mild cognitive impairment was diagnosed according to published criteria. Study inclusion began in 2013 and is ongoing. Data analysis was performed in January 2017. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Global cognitive performance as assessed by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and episodic memory performance as assessed by a verbal word learning test. Amyloid aggregation was measured with positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and dichotomized as negative (normal) or positive (abnormal) according to study-specific cutoffs. Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the association between amyloid aggregation and low cognitive scores (MMSE score ≤27 or memory z score≤−1.28) and to assess whether this association was moderated by age, sex, educational level, or apolipoprotein E genotype. RESULTS Among 2908 persons with normal cognition (mean [SD] age, 67.4 [12.8] years), amyloid positivity was associated with low memory scores after age 70 years (mean difference in amyloid positive vs negative, 4% [95% CI, 0%–7%] at 72 years and 21% [95% CI, 10%–33%] at 90 years) but was not associated with low MMSE scores (mean difference, 3% [95% CI, −1% to 6%], P = .16). Among 4133 patients with MCI (mean [SD] age, 70.2 [8.5] years), amyloid positivity was associated with low memory (mean difference, 16% [95% CI, 12%–20%], P < .001) and low MMSE (mean difference, 14% [95% CI, 12%–17%], P < .001) scores, and this association decreased with age. Low cognitive scores had limited utility for screening of amyloid positivity in persons with normal cognition and those with MCI. In persons with normal cognition, the age-related increase in low memory score paralleled the age-related increase in amyloid positivity with an intervening period of 10 to 15 years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Although low memory scores are an early marker of amyloid positivity, their value as a screening measure for early AD among persons without dementia is limited.

Esophageal cancer (EC) is one of the most aggressive malignant tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. There are two distinct histological types of EC: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Etiologic factors and the patterns of incidence of both subtypes are different. Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and their tissue inhibitors (TIMPs) play an important role in esophageal carcinogenesis. Gellatinases MMP-2 and MMP-9 are able to degrade collagen IV from basement membranes and extracellular matrix which is related to tumor progression, including invasion, metastasis, growth and angiogenesis. It has been shown that increased expression of MMPs plays a crucial role in the development of several human malignancies, including esophageal cancer. The activity of MMPs is regulated by their endogenous natural inhibitors (TIMPs). Among these, the roles of TIMP-1 and TIMP-2 in EC development, tumor progression and formation of metastases have been most extensively characterized and best recognized.

This article presents recommendations, based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method, for the clinical application of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) amyloid-β, tau, and phosphorylated tau in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). The recommendations were developed by a multidisciplinary working group and based on the available evidence and consensus from focused group discussions for 1) prediction of clinical progression to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, 2) cost-effectiveness, 3) interpretation of results, and 4) patient counseling. The working group recommended using CSF AD biomarkers in the diagnostic workup of MCI patients, after prebiomarker counseling, as an add-on to clinical evaluation to predict functional decline or conversion to AD dementia and to guide disease management. Because of insufficient evidence, it was uncertain whether CSF AD biomarkers outperform imaging biomarkers. Furthermore, the working group provided recommendations for interpretation of ambiguous CSF biomarker results and for pre- and post-biomarker counseling.