ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2020
Use of Biomarkers in Ongoing Research Protocols on Alzheimer's Disease.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2020. 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.
- Association of qEEG TAR and TBR During Eyes-Open and Eyes-Closed with Plasma Oligomeric Amyloid-β Levels in an Aging Population.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Multifunctional Nanocarriers for Alzheimer's Disease: Befriending the Barriers.Molecular neurobiology · 2024Review
- Impaired Affordance Perception as the Basis of Tool Use Deficiency in Alzheimer's Disease.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Fluid Biomarkers in Alzheimer's Disease and Other Neurodegenerative Disorders: Toward Integrative Diagnostic Frameworks and Tailored Treatments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Lights and Shadows of Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers in the Current Alzheimer's Disease Framework.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2022Article
- Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going?Journal of personalized medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to describe and discuss the state of the art of biomarker use in ongoing Alzheimer's disease (AD) research. A review of 222 ongoing phase 1, 2, 3, and 4 protocols registered in the clinicaltrials.gov database was performed. All the trials (i) enrolling subjects with clinical disturbances and/or preclinical diagnoses falling within the AD continuum; and (ii) testing the efficacy and/or safety/tolerability of a therapeutic intervention, were analyzed. The use of biomarkers of amyloid deposition, tau pathology, and neurodegeneration among the eligibility criteria and/or study outcomes was assessed. Overall, 58.2% of ongoing interventional studies on AD adopt candidate biomarkers. They are mostly adopted by studies at the preliminary stages of the drug development process to explore the safety profile of novel therapies, and to provide evidence of target engagement and disease-modifying properties. The biologically supported selection of participants is mostly based on biomarkers of amyloid deposition, whereas the use of biomarkers as study outcomes mostly relies on markers of neurodegeneration. Biomarkers play an important role in the design and conduction of research protocols targeting AD. Nevertheless, their clinical validity, utility, and cost-effectiveness in the "real world" remain to be clarified.
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.