When Does Alzheimer′s Disease Really Start? The Role of Biomarkers

Lloret, Ana; Esteve, Daniel; Lloret, Maria-Angeles; Cervera‐Ferri, Ana; López, Begoña; Nepomuceno, Mariana; Monllor, Paloma

doi:10.3390/ijms20225536

Cited by 74 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 117 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) holds great promise as a source for CNS biomarkers, and its analysis is already used widely in clinical decision-making [ 2 ]. For example, measurements of AMYLOID BETA (Aβ)1–42, total TAU (T-TAU), phosphorylated TAU, and NfL have considerable clinical significance for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease [ 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Extracellular Vesicles by Proximity Extension Assay: A Comparative Study of Four Isolation Kits

Sjoqvist

Otake

Hirozane

2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a lack of reliable biomarkers for disorders of the central nervous system (CNS), and diagnostics still heavily rely on symptoms that are both subjective and difficult to quantify. The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a promising source of biomarkers due to its close connection to the CNS. Extracellular vesicles are actively secreted by cells, and proteomic analysis of CSF extracellular vesicles (EVs) and their molecular composition likely reflects changes in the CNS to a higher extent compared with total CSF, especially in the case of neuroinflammation, which could increase blood–brain barrier permeability and cause an influx of plasma proteins into the CSF. We used proximity extension assay for proteomic analysis due to its high sensitivity. We believe that this methodology could be useful for de novo biomarker discovery for several CNS diseases. We compared four commercially available kits for EV isolation: MagCapture and ExoIntact (based on magnetic beads), EVSecond L70 (size-exclusion chromatography), and exoEasy (membrane affinity). The isolated EVs were characterized by nanoparticle tracking analysis, ELISA (CD63, CD81 and albumin), and proximity extension assay (PEA) using two different panels, each consisting of 92 markers. The exoEasy samples did not pass the built-in quality controls and were excluded from downstream analysis. The number of detectable proteins in the ExoIntact samples was considerably higher (~150% for the cardiovascular III panel and ~320% for the cell regulation panel) compared with other groups. ExoIntact also showed the highest intersample correlation with an average Pearson’s correlation coefficient of 0.991 compared with 0.985 and 0.927 for MagCapture and EVSecond, respectively. The median coefficient of variation was 5%, 8%, and 22% for ExoIntact, MagCapture, and EVSecond, respectively. Comparing total CSF and ExoIntact samples revealed 70 differentially expressed proteins in the cardiovascular III panel and 17 in the cell regulation panel. To our knowledge, this is the first time that CSF EVs were analyzed by PEA. In conclusion, analysis of CSF EVs by PEA is feasible, and different isolation kits give distinct results, with ExoIntact showing the highest number of identified proteins with the lowest variability.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Extracellular Vesicles by Proximity Extension Assay: A Comparative Study of Four Isolation Kits

Sjoqvist

Otake

Hirozane

2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Existing biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease include (1) Aβ 42 (the 42 amino acid form of amyloid β) in CSF and (2) total and phosphorylated tau protein in CSF [ 20 ]. The utilization of these biomarkers, with acceptable sensitivity and specificity, contribute to the early detection of Alzheimer’s disease, particularly in individuals with mild cognitive impairment, with higher diagnostic certainty [ 21 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alzheimer’s disease is a progressive, clinically heterogeneous, and particularly complex neurodegenerative disease characterized by a decline in cognition. Over the last two decades, there has been significant growth in the investigation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease. This review presents current evidence from many clinical neurochemical studies, with findings that attest to the efficacy of existing core CSF biomarkers such as total tau, phosphorylated tau, and amyloid-β (Aβ42), which diagnose Alzheimer’s disease in the early and dementia stages of the disorder. The heterogeneity of the pathophysiology of the late-onset disease warrants the growth of the Alzheimer’s disease CSF biomarker toolbox; more biomarkers showing other aspects of the disease mechanism are needed. This review focuses on new biomarkers that track Alzheimer’s disease pathology, such as those that assess neuronal injury (VILIP-1 and neurofilament light), neuroinflammation (sTREM2, YKL-40, osteopontin, GFAP, progranulin, and MCP-1), synaptic dysfunction (SNAP-25 and GAP-43), vascular dysregulation (hFABP), as well as CSF α-synuclein levels and TDP-43 pathology. Some of these biomarkers are promising candidates as they are specific and predict future rates of cognitive decline. Findings from the combinations of subclasses of new Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers that improve their diagnostic efficacy in detecting associated pathological changes are also presented.

show abstract

“…The disease begins with small changes in the brain [4], which occur decades before clinical symptoms were noted. The atrophy increases successively until the loss can no longer be compensated [1] and dementia symptoms including loss of memory and problems in thinking and learning occur.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Data Analysis With Shapley Values For Automatic Subject Selection in Alzheimer's Disease Data Sets Using Interpretable Machine Learning

Bloch

Friedrich

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The prediction of whether Mild Cognitive Impaired (MCI) subjects will prospectively develop Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is important for the recruitment and monitoring of subjects for therapy studies. Machine Learning (ML) is suitable to improve early AD prediction. The etiology of AD is heterogeneous, which leads to noisy data sets. Additional noise is introduced by multicentric study designs and varying acquisition protocols. This article examines whether an automatic and fair data valuation method based on Shapley values can identify subjects with noisy data. Methods: An ML-workow was developed and trained for a subset of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cohort. The validation was executed for an independent ADNI test data set and for the Australian Imaging, Biomarker and Lifestyle Flagship Study of Ageing (AIBL) cohort. The workow included volumetric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) feature extraction, subject sample selection using data Shapley, Random Forest (RF) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) for model training and Kernel SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values for model interpretation. This model interpretation enables clinically relevant explanation of individual predictions. Results: The XGBoost models which excluded 116 of the 467 subjects from the training data set based on their Logistic Regression (LR) data Shapley values outperformed the models which were trained on the entire training data set and which reached a mean classification accuracy of 58.54 % by 14.13 % (8.27 percentage points) on the independent ADNI test data set. The XGBoost models, which were trained on the entire training data set reached a mean accuracy of 60.35 % for the AIBL data set. An improvement of 24.86 % (15.00 percentage points) could be reached for the XGBoost models if those 72 subjects with the smallest RF data Shapley values were excluded from the training data set. Conclusion: The data Shapley method was able to improve the classification accuracies for the test data sets. Noisy data was associated with the number of ApoEϵ4 alleles and volumetric MRI measurements. Kernel SHAP showed that the black-box models learned biologically plausible associations.

show abstract

When Does Alzheimer′s Disease Really Start? The Role of Biomarkers

Cited by 74 publications

References 117 publications

Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Extracellular Vesicles by Proximity Extension Assay: A Comparative Study of Four Isolation Kits

Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Extracellular Vesicles by Proximity Extension Assay: A Comparative Study of Four Isolation Kits

Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

Data Analysis With Shapley Values For Automatic Subject Selection in Alzheimer's Disease Data Sets Using Interpretable Machine Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About