Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32911755›Full record

ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2020

Significance of Blood and Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease: Sensitivity, Specificity and Potential for Clinical Use.

Cristina d'Abramo, Luciano D'Adamio, Luca Giliberto

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

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 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Epitranscriptomic alterations induced by environmental toxins: implications for RNA modifications and disease.Genes and environment : the official journal of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Advancements in Immunity and Dementia Research: Highlights from the 2023 AAIC Advancements: Immunity Conference.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cristina d'AbramoThe Litwin-Zucker Center for Alzheimer's Disease & Memory Disorders, Institute of Molecular Medicine, Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Northwell Health System, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA.
Luciano D'AdamioRutgers Alzheimer's Disease & Dementia Research Center (RUADRC), Rutgers Brain Health Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
Luca GilibertoThe Litwin-Zucker Center for Alzheimer's Disease & Memory Disorders, Institute of Molecular Medicine, Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Northwell Health System, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6406-0964
Northwell Health · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

Studies of dementia pathogenesis in genetically faithful rat models of Familal Alzheimer diseaseR01AG063407 · NIA · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI D'ADAMIO, LUCIANO · 2019 to 2023
$3.9M
Are mechanisms leading to FAD, SAD and age-associated cognitive decline similar?RF1AG064821 · NIA · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI D'ADAMIO, LUCIANO · 2019 to 2019
$3.9M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG063407NIA NIH HHS RF1 AG064821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia, affecting more than 5 million Americans, with steadily increasing mortality and incredible socio-economic burden. Not only have therapeutic efforts so far failed to reach significant efficacy, but the real pathogenesis of the disease is still obscure. The current theories are based on pathological findings of amyloid plaques and tau neurofibrillary tangles that accumulate in the brain parenchyma of affected patients. These findings have defined, together with the extensive neurodegeneration, the diagnostic criteria of the disease. The ability to detect changes in the levels of amyloid and tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) first, and more recently in blood, has allowed us to use these biomarkers for the specific in-vivo diagnosis of AD in humans. Furthermore, other pathological elements of AD, such as the loss of neurons, inflammation and metabolic derangement, have translated to the definition of other CSF and blood biomarkers, which are not specific of the disease but, when combined with amyloid and tau, correlate with the progression from mild cognitive impairment to AD dementia, or identify patients who will develop AD pathology. In this review, we discuss the role of current and hypothetical biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease, their specificity, and the caveats of current high-sensitivity platforms for their peripheral detection.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseaseamyloidbiomarkersbloodcerebrospinal fluidMultiplexNfLSiMoAsoluble TREM2tau

Identifiers

PMID32911755
PMCPMC7565390
OpenAlexW3084423159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.