ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Comparison of a multi-analyte algorithmic immunoassay blood test with immunoprecipitation mass spectrometry for the detection of amyloid pathology.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlzheimer's blood-based biomarker (BBM) tests using single biomarkers or ratios are well characterized, but head-to-head comparisons of multi-analyte algorithmic tests on shared cohorts are lacking. We compared a five-biomarker algorithmic immunoassay (LucentAD Complete) with an algorithmic immunoprecipitation mass-spectrometry (IP-MS) benchmark on a shared plasma cohort.
methodsSymptomatic individuals (
resultsThe immunoassay amyloid risk score demonstrated a 0.94 area under the curve (AUC) and 92%-93% accuracy, achieving performance parity with IP-MS metrics on shared samples. The two-cutoff design yielded an intermediate zone of 10.4%-12.8%. DISCUSSION: These results establish diagnostic parity between algorithmic immunoassay and algorithmic IP-MS assay. In addition, providing individual biomarker results alongside a validated risk score offers a more granular foundation for comprehensive management than amyloid status alone, supporting premium reimbursement for multi-analyte algorithmic BBMs in clinical practice.
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.