Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40343697›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy and Downstream Alzheimer Disease Plasma Biomarkers.

Sung Hoon Kang, Eun Hye Lee, Young Ju Kim, Hyemin Jang, Daeun Shin, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow, Fernando Gonzalez-Ortiz, Nicholas J Ashton, Jihwan Yun and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy: a narrative review.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  12. Screening GGC repeat expansion in theAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
    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

14 authors.

Sung Hoon KangDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Eun Hye LeeDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Young Ju KimDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hyemin JangDepartment of Neurology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Daeun ShinDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Henrik ZetterbergDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Kaj BlennowDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Fernando Gonzalez-OrtizDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Nicholas J AshtonDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, the Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jihwan YunDepartment of Neurology, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.
Hee Jin KimDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Duk L NaDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jun Pyo KimDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Sang Won SeoDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: As amyloid-targeted therapies have become commercially available, the monitoring of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), which is an important risk factor for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, has received increasing attention. However, comprehensive evidence on the association between Alzheimer disease (AD) plasma biomarkers and various CAA imaging markers is still lacking. Objective: To examine the association of CAA imaging markers with downstream AD plasma biomarkers in relation to amyloid-β (Aβ) uptake on positron emission tomography (PET) and whether their interplay is associated with cognitive changes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based cohort study in 25 hospitals across South Korea recruited participants aged 45 years or older who were registered between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023. Participants were categorized as having no cognitive impairment, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia of the Alzheimer type. Exposures: Cerebral amyloid angiopathy imaging markers assessed by magnetic resonance imaging, including cerebral microbleeds (CMBs), cortical superficial siderosis, white matter hyperintensities, lacunes, and enlarged perivascular spaces. Main Outcomes and Measures: Plasma phosphorylated tau-217 (p-tau217) was measured using a commercial assay. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and neurofilament light chain (NfL) were measured using a single-molecule assay on a single platform. All participants underwent amyloid PET imaging. Associations of CAA and vascular imaging markers with downstream AD plasma biomarkers were investigated using linear regression. Results: A total of 1708 participants were included (mean [SD] age, 71.2 [8.4] years; 1044 female [61.1%]). The mean (SD) follow-up period was 4.3 (3.1) years. Lobar CMB counts and the presence of CAA were associated with downstream AD plasma biomarkers, including p-tau217 (β = 0.12 [95% CI, 0.05-0.18] and 0.29 [95% CI, 0.12-0.47], respectively), GFAP (β = 0.07 [95% CI, 0.03-0.12] and 0.20 [95% CI, 0.09-0.31], respectively), and NfL (β = 0.07 [95% CI, 0.03-0.11] and 0.16 [95% CI, 0.06-0.25], respectively) with and without the mediation of Aβ uptake on PET (indirect effect: lobar CMBs-p-tau217, 59.8% [β = 0.07 (95% CI, 0.03-0.11)]; lobar CMBs-GFAP, 49.3% [β = 0.04 (95% CI, 0.01-0.06)]; lobar CMBs-NfL, 20.9% [β = 0.01 (95% CI, 0.01-0.03)]; CAA-p-tau217, 50.9% [β = 0.15 (95% CI, 0.06-0.24)]; CAA-GFAP, 39.2% [β = 0.08 (95% CI, 0.03-0.13)]; CAA-NfL, 19.2% [β = 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01-0.05)]). Amyloid-β uptake fully mediated the associations between cortical superficial siderosis and downstream AD plasma markers. In contrast, hypertensive arteriosclerotic vascular imaging markers, including lacunes, deep CMBs, and enlarged perivascular spaces in basal ganglia, were associated with only NfL levels (β = 0.07 [95% CI, 0.01-0.13], 0.20 [95% CI, 0.08-0.32], and 0.14 [95% CI, 0.06-0.23], respectively), regardless of Aβ uptake on PET. Finally, there were interactive associations of lobar CMBs in conjunction with p-tau217 levels (β = -0.56 [95% CI, -0.79 to -0.34]) and GFAP levels (β = -0.44 [95% CI, -0.70 to -0.17]) with annual Mini-Mental State Examination changes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of participants with no cognitive impairment, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia of the Alzheimer type, a novel association was found among CAA imaging markers, downstream AD plasma biomarkers, and cognitive declines in relation to brain Aβ burdens. The findings emphasize the importance of understanding the clinical effects of amyloid-related imaging abnormality-like CAA imaging markers in light of upcoming amyloid-targeted therapies.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCerebral Amyloid AngiopathyAgedAged, 80 and overAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersCognitive DysfunctionCohort StudiesFemaleGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeurofilament ProteinsPositron-Emission TomographyAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersGFAP protein, humanGlial Fibrillary Acidic Proteinneurofilament protein LNeurofilament Proteinstau Proteins

Identifiers

PMID40343697
PMCPMC12065043

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.