Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid1–42 Levels in the Differential Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Authors:
Open Access
- 24 February 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 10 (2) , e0116802
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to carry out systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic utility of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-beta (Aβ1–42) as a biomarker for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD) from non-AD dementia. Design. Systematic literature review was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Aβ for the diagnosis of AD. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) tool was used to evaluate independently the quality of the studies. Data sources. The literature review covered from January 1, 2004, to October 22, 2013, and searched eight domestic databases including Korea Med and international databases including Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Data Extraction and Synthesis. Primary criteria for inclusion were valid studies on (i) patients with mild cognitive impairment with confirmed or suspected AD and non-AD dementia, and (ii) assessment of Aβ1–42 levels using appropriate comparative tests. A total of 17 diagnostic evaluation studies were identified in which levels of CSF Aβ1–42 were assessed. Meta-analysis was performed on 11 robust studies that compared confirmed AD (n = 2211) with healthy individuals (n = 1030), 10 studies that compared AD with non-AD dementias (n = 627), and 5 studies that compared amnestic mild cognitive impairment (n = 1133) with non-amnestic type subjects (n = 1276). Overall, the CSF Aβ1–42 levels were reduced in AD compared to controls or non-AD dementia. The effectiveness of test was evaluated for diagnostic accuracy (pooled sensitivity, 0.80 (95% CI 0.78–0.82); pooled specificity, 0.76 (95% CI 0.74–0.78). Reduced CSF Aβ1–42 levels are of potential utility in the differential diagnosis of AD versus non-AD dementias and controls. Diagnostic accuracy was high in AD versus healthy controls. However, differential diagnosis for MCI or non-AD might be evaluated by other biomarkers.Keywords
This publication has 48 references indexed in Scilit:
- CSF biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: current utility and potential future useNeurobiology of Aging, 2011
- CSF soluble amyloid precursor proteins in the diagnosis of incipient Alzheimer diseaseNeurology, 2011
- Report of the task force on designing clinical trials in early (predementia) ADNeurology, 2011
- Anti-Aβ Therapeutics in Alzheimer's Disease: The Need for a Paradigm ShiftNeuron, 2011
- A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysisResearch Synthesis Methods, 2010
- Longitudinal Study of CSF Biomarkers in Patients with Alzheimer's DiseasePLOS ONE, 2009
- Diagnostic Accuracy of ELISA and xMAP Technology for Analysis of Amyloid β42 and Tau ProteinsClinical Chemistry, 2007
- Prediction of Alzheimer’s Disease Using the CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 Ratio in Patients with Mild Cognitive ImpairmentDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 2007
- Association between CSF biomarkers and incipient Alzheimer's disease in patients with mild cognitive impairment: a follow-up studyThe Lancet Neurology, 2006
- Cerebrospinal Fluid Amyloid β1–42 Levels in the Mild Cognitive Impairment Stage of Alzheimer's DiseaseExperimental Neurology, 2001