ReviewJournal of neurology2025
Diagnostic utility of biomarkers in progressive supranuclear palsy: toward a biotyping framework.
Review in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Eye Movement Features Measured by Quantitative Oculography as Candidate Biomarkers for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- From clinical phenotypes to molecular precision: multimodal biomarkers for progressive supranuclear palsy.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a rare and debilitating four-repeat (4R) tauopathy, characterized by motor dysfunction, cognitive decline, and oculomotor abnormalities, yet it lacks reliable biomarkers for early diagnosis, disease stratification, and prognosis. This review critically examines recent advancements in human biomarker research for PSP across multiple domains, including fluid specimen assays, i.e., blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) assays, molecular profiling, and neuroimaging, with the aim of identifying markers that facilitate differential diagnosis, monitor disease progression, and support subtype classification. By synthesizing the findings of studies published, this article highlights the established biomarkers and emerging biomarkers from novel analytical methods and in vivo technologies and their potential utility for clinical trials. Emerging potential biomarkers considered include exosomal α-synuclein and tau aggregates, circulating molecular biomarkers, and relevant biomarkers from magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), diffusion tensor imaging, neuromelanin MRI (NM-MRI), and functional MRI (fMRI) methods. Furthermore, the heterogeneous clinical presentations clearly reflect variable anatomical and molecular pathology in PSP and indicate that relying solely on clinical classification risks misdiagnosis, delayed treatment, and inappropriate management. A biologically grounded biotyping framework, which includes multimodal data integration and artificial intelligence, can resolve this heterogeneity by aligning observable phenotypes with underlying pathophysiology. To move beyond purely clinical classifications, this review proposes a conceptual biotyping framework to categorize PSP based on underlying biological processes, such as neurodegeneration, tau pathology, and neuroinflammation. This framework aims to guide future biomarker validation efforts, facilitate patient stratification in clinical trials, and accelerate the transition toward precision medicine approaches in PSP.
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.