Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37291640›Full record

Observational studyAlzheimer's research & therapy2023

Comparative evaluation of clinical and cerebrospinal fluid biomarker characteristics in rapidly and non-rapidly progressive Alzheimer's disease.

Janne Marieke Herden, Peter Hermann, Isabel Schmidt, Kathrin Dittmar, Sezgi Canaslan, Luise Weglage, Sabine Nuhn, Corinna Volpers, Astrid Schlung, Stefan Goebel and 5 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Janne Marieke Herden *Department of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Peter Hermann *Department of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany. peter.hermann@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Isabel SchmidtDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Kathrin DittmarDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Sezgi CanaslanDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Luise WeglageDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Sabine NuhnDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Corinna VolpersDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Astrid SchlungDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Stefan GoebelDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Fabian KückDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Humboldtallee 32, Göttingen, 37073, Germany.
Anna Villar-PiquéDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Christian SchmidtDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Dirk WedekindDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Von-Siebold-Straße 5, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
Inga ZerrDepartment of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD Surveillance, University Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, Göttingen, 37075, Germany.
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DEUniversity of Göttingen · DEUniversitätsmedizin Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapidly progressive forms of Alzheimer's disease (rpAD) are increasingly recognized and may have a prevalence of up to 30% of patients among all patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, insights about risk factors, underlying pathophysiological processes, and clinical characteristics of rpAD remain controversial. This study aimed to gain a comprehensive picture of rpAD and new insights into the clinical manifestation to enable a better interpretation of disease courses in clinical practice as well as in future clinical studies.

methodsPatients (n = 228) from a prospective observational study on AD were selected and categorized into rpAD (n = 67) and non-rpAD (n = 161) disease groups. Patients were recruited through the German Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease surveillance center and the memory outpatient clinic of the Göttingen University Medical Center, representing diverse phenotypes of the AD population. Biomarkers and clinical presentation were assessed using standardized protocols. A drop of ≥ MMSE 6 points within 12 months defined rapid progressors.

resultsLower CSF Amyloid beta 1-42 concentrations (p = 0.048), lower Amyloid beta 42/40 ratio (p = 0.038), and higher Tau/Amyloid-beta 1-42 ratio, as well as pTau/Amyloid-beta 1-42 ratio (each p = 0.004) were associated with rpAD. Analyzes in a subset of the cohort (rpAD: n = 12; non-rpAD: n = 31) showed higher CSF NfL levels in rpAD (p = 0.024). Clinically, rpAD showed earlier impairment of functional abilities (p < 0.001) and higher scores on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale III (p < 0.001), indicating pronounced extrapyramidal motor symptoms. Furthermore, cognitive profiles (adjusted for overall cognitive performance) indicated marked deficits in semantic (p = 0.008) and phonematic (0.023) verbal fluency tests as well as word list learning (p = 0.007) in rpAD compared to non-rpAD. The distribution of APOE genotypes did not differ significantly between groups.

conclusionsOur results suggest that rpAD is associated with distinct cognitive profiles, earlier occurrence of non-cognitive symptoms, extrapyramidal motoric disturbance, and lower Amyloid-beta 1-42 concentrations in the CSF. The findings may help to characterize a distinct phenotype of rpAD and estimate prognosis based on clinical characteristics and biomarker results. However, an important future goal should be a unified definition for rpAD to enable targeted study designs and better comparability of the results.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersDisease ProgressionHumansPeptide Fragmentstau ProteinsAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersPeptide Fragmentstau ProteinsAlzheimer’s diseaseAPOEBiomarkersPhenotypeRapidly progressive Alzheimer’s disease

Identifiers

PMID37291640
PMCPMC10249304
OpenAlexW4379875783

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.