A blood-based biomarker workflow for optimal tau-PET referral in memory clinic settings

Wagner S. Brum, Nicholas C. Cullen, Joseph Therriault, Shorena Janelidze, Nesrine Rahmouni, Jenna Stevenson, Stijn Servaes, Andrea L. Benedet, Eduardo R. Zimmer, Erik Stomrud, Sebastian Palmqvist, Henrik Zetterberg, Giovanni B. Frisoni, Nicholas J. Ashton, Kaj Blennow, Niklas Mattsson-Carlgren, Pedro Rosa-Neto and Oskar Hansson ()
Additional contact information
Wagner S. Brum: the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg
Nicholas C. Cullen: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University
Joseph Therriault: McGill University, Verdun
Shorena Janelidze: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University
Nesrine Rahmouni: McGill University, Verdun
Jenna Stevenson: McGill University, Verdun
Stijn Servaes: McGill University, Verdun
Andrea L. Benedet: the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg
Eduardo R. Zimmer: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
Erik Stomrud: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University
Sebastian Palmqvist: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University
Henrik Zetterberg: the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg
Giovanni B. Frisoni: Geneva University and University Hospital
Nicholas J. Ashton: the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg
Kaj Blennow: the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg
Niklas Mattsson-Carlgren: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University
Pedro Rosa-Neto: McGill University, Verdun
Oskar Hansson: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University

Nature Communications, 2024, vol. 15, issue 1, 1-11

Abstract: Abstract Blood-based biomarkers for screening may guide tau positrion emissition tomography (PET) scan referrals to optimize prognostic evaluation in Alzheimer’s disease. Plasma Aβ42/Aβ40, pTau181, pTau217, pTau231, NfL, and GFAP were measured along with tau-PET in memory clinic patients with subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment or dementia, in the Swedish BioFINDER-2 study (n = 548) and in the TRIAD study (n = 179). For each plasma biomarker, cutoffs were determined for 90%, 95%, or 97.5% sensitivity to detect tau-PET-positivity. We calculated the percentage of patients below the cutoffs (who would not undergo tau-PET; “saved scans”) and the tau-PET-positivity rate among participants above the cutoffs (who would undergo tau-PET; “positive predictive value”). Generally, plasma pTau217 performed best. At the 95% sensitivity cutoff in both cohorts, pTau217 resulted in avoiding nearly half tau-PET scans, with a tau-PET-positivity rate among those who would be referred for a scan around 70%. And although tau-PET was strongly associated with subsequent cognitive decline, in BioFINDER-2 it predicted cognitive decline only among individuals above the referral cutoff on plasma pTau217, supporting that this workflow could reduce prognostically uninformative tau-PET scans. In conclusion, plasma pTau217 may guide selection of patients for tau-PET, when accurate prognostic information is of clinical value.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46603-2 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natcom:v:15:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-024-46603-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-46603-2

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie

More articles in Nature Communications from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().