↓ Skip to main content

Chasing the Effects of Pre-Analytical Confounders – A Multicenter Study on CSF-AD Biomarkers

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Chasing the Effects of Pre-Analytical Confounders – A Multicenter Study on CSF-AD Biomarkers
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2015.00153
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria João Leitão, Inês Baldeiras, Sanna-Kaisa Herukka, Maria Pikkarainen, Ville Leinonen, Anja Hviid Simonsen, Armand Perret-Liaudet, Anthony Fourier, Isabelle Quadrio, Pedro Mota Veiga, Catarina Resende de Oliveira

Abstract

Core cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers - Aβ42, Tau, and phosphorylated Tau (pTau) - have been recently incorporated in the revised criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, their widespread clinical application lacks standardization. Pre-analytical sample handling and storage play an important role in the reliable measurement of these biomarkers across laboratories. In this study, we aim to surpass the efforts from previous studies, by employing a multicenter approach to assess the impact of less studied CSF pre-analytical confounders in AD-biomarkers quantification. Four different centers participated in this study and followed the same established protocol. CSF samples were analyzed for three biomarkers (Aβ42, Tau, and pTau) and tested for different spinning conditions [temperature: room temperature (RT) vs. 4°C; speed: 500 vs. 2000 vs. 3000 g], storage volume variations (25, 50, and 75% of tube total volume), as well as freezing-thaw cycles (up to five cycles). The influence of sample routine parameters, inter-center variability, and relative value of each biomarker (reported as normal/abnormal) was analyzed. Centrifugation conditions did not influence biomarkers levels, except for samples with a high CSF total protein content, where either non-centrifugation or centrifugation at RT, compared to 4°C, led to higher Aβ42 levels. Reducing CSF storage volume from 75 to 50% of total tube capacity decreased Aβ42 concentration (within analytical CV of the assay), whereas no change in Tau or pTau was observed. Moreover, the concentration of Tau and pTau appears to be stable up to five freeze-thaw cycles, whereas Aβ42 levels decrease if CSF is freeze-thawed more than three times. This systematic study reinforces the need for CSF centrifugation at 4°C prior to storage and highlights the influence of storage conditions in Aβ42 levels. This study contributes to the establishment of harmonized standard operating procedures that will help reducing inter-lab variability of CSF-AD biomarkers evaluation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 13%
Neuroscience 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 17 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 July 2015.
All research outputs
#3,120,909
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#2,372
of 11,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,716
of 262,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#20
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.