Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35241627›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry2022

Plasma Aβ as a biomarker for predicting Aβ-PET status in Alzheimer's disease:a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Lizhen Cheng, Wei Li, Yixin Chen, Yijia Lin, Beiyun Wang, Qihao Guo, Ya Miao

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The Role of Ion-Transporting Proteins in Human Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lizhen ChengDepartment of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5566-4275
Wei LiDepartment of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Yixin ChenDepartment of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Yijia LinDepartment of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Beiyun WangDepartment of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Qihao Guo *Department of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China nning-my@163.com qhguo@sjtu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-5079-8047
Ya Miao *Department of Geriatrics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China nning-my@163.com qhguo@sjtu.edu.cn.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAmyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ-PET) scan has been proposed to detect amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in the brain. However, this approach is costly and not ideal for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Blood-based Aβ measurement offers a scalable alternative to the costly or invasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to statistically validate whether plasma Aβ could predict Aβ-PET status via meta-analysis.

methodsWe systematically searched for eligible studies from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library, which reported plasma Aβ levels of amyloid-β positron emission tomography-positive (PET (+)) and amyloid-β positron emission tomography-negative (PET (-)) subjects. We generated pooled estimates using random effects meta-analyses. For any study that has significant heterogeneity, metaregression and subgroup analysis were further conducted. Publication bias was appraised by funnel plots and Egger's test.

results16 studies with 3047 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Among all the enrolled studies, 10 studies reported plasma Aβ40 values, while 9 studies reported plasma Aβ42 values and 13 studies reported Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. The pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.76 (95% CI -0.61 to 2.14, p=0.28) in the plasma Aβ40 values group. Plasma Aβ42 values group has a pooled SMD of -0.60 (95% CI -0.80 to -0.41, p<0.0001). In the plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio group, the pooled SMD was -1.44 (95% CI -2.17 to -0.72, p<0.0001).

conclusionPlasma Aβ40 values might not distinguish between PET (+) and PET (-) people. However, plasma Aβ42 values and plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio could be served as independent biomarkers for predicting Aβ-PET status.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersHumansPeptide FragmentsPositron-Emission TomographyAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersPeptide FragmentsAlzheimer's diseaseamyloidpet

Identifiers

PMID35241627
PMCPMC9016262
OpenAlexW4214934088

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.