ReviewThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2009
The validity of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints in Alzheimer's disease by means of the Quantitative Surrogate Validation Level of Evidence Scheme (QSVLES).
Review in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommended approaches to sharing individual research results in Alzheimer's disease research: A multidisciplinary expert Delphi consensus.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- A Clinician's Perspective on Biomarkers.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2018Review
- IAGG workshop: health promotion program on prevention of late onset dementia.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2011Article
- Imaging and biomarkers will be used for detection and monitoring progression of early Alzheimer's disease.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2009Article
- Use of biomarkers in Alzheimer's trials.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2009Article
- Neurofilament light (NfL) chain levels predict clinical decline in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the validity of biomarkers that are currently being proposed as potential surrogate endpoints in AD clinical trials with the aid of the "Quantitative Surrogate Validation Level of Evidence Schema" (QSVLES) proposed by Lassere et.al. (1). PROCEDURE: A Pubmed literature search was conducted to identify AD biomarkers with SEP potential, and the QSVLES was applied to determine the extent of the SEP validity.
resultsMRI, PET and MRS measures attained a total validity score of 4, NAA/Cre a total score of 5, and cerebral blood flow (SPECT), Abeta , Tau and APP a total score of 2. None of these biomarkers could fall into the rank of Levels 1 or 2, reserved for SEPs, according to the QSVLES criteria. This was mainly attributed to the lack of sufficient evidence that was derived from high ranking studies (RCT, prospective observational studies).
conclusionThough residing on SEPs as sole determinants of the benefit/risk ratio of AD medications seems to be pretty far, there could be certain cases where the use of SEPs may be beneficial, making efficient therapies available faster when there is a major public health interest involved. However, the potential risks of relying on invalid SEPs should not be underestimated and therefore the research on SEP validation and the development of specific validation guidance should be encouraged. The QSVLES, though not devoid of criticism, may be proposed as a starting point.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.