Assessment of the Correlation and Diagnostic Accuracy between CSF and Plasma AD Biomarkers: A Comparison of the Lumipulse and Simoa Platforms

Abstract Background Alzheimer’s disease (AD) plasma biomarkers related to amyloid (A), tau (T), and neurodegeneration (N) can potentially be used to identify these pathological features of the disease, as shown in recent studies. Our objective was to compare the clinical and analytical performance of plasma AD biomarkers measured using the single‐molecule array (Simoa) and Lumipulse platforms. Method We quantified ATN and AT plasma biomarkers in 127 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) (n = 81), AD (n = 30), and non‐AD dementia (n = 16) using a Simoa HD‐1/HD‐X analyser (Quanterix) and a Lumipulse G600II automated platform (Fujirebio Europe NV). Result We found a strong correlation between the Simoa and Lumipulse methods, although there were systematic differences between biomarker values measured by each method. Concerning the clinical diagnosis, Simoa Ptau181/Aβ42 (AUC 0.739, 95% CI 0.592–0.887) and Lumipulse Aβ42 and Ptau181/Aβ42 (AUC 0.735, 95% CI 0.589–0.882 and AUC 0.733, 95% CI 0.567‐0.900) had the highest discriminating power. However, their power was significantly lower than that of CSF Aβ42/Aβ40, as measured by Lumipulse (AUC 0.879, 95% CI 0.766–0.992). Similarly, Simoa Ptau181 and Lumipulse Ptau181/Aβ42 were the markers most consistent with the CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 status (AUC 0.801, 95% CI 0.712–0.890 vs. AUC 0.870, 95% CI 0.806–0.934, respectively) at the ≥2.127 and ≥0.084 cut‐offs, respectively. Conclusion The Simoa and Lumipulse plasma AD assays showed comparable clinical and analytical performance. However, the performance of these biomarkers is weaker than that of CSF AD biomarkers. Interestingly, both platforms identify plasma Ptau181/Aβ42 as a promising biomarker for AD. At present, the analysed AD plasma biomarkers may be useful for screening to reduce the number of lumbar punctures in the clinical setting. However, the use of these markers as diagnostic tools requires further investigation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.086616
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of the Correlation and Diagnostic Accuracy between CSF and Plasma AD Biomarkers: A Comparison of the Lumipulse and Simoa Platforms

Carlos Matute, Maria Ruiz Julián, Ricard López‐Ortega, Iolanda Riba‐Llena et al.
1 citations
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
0.40
article

Assessment of the Correlation and Diagnostic Accuracy between CSF and Plasma AD Biomarkers: A Comparison of the Lumipulse and Simoa Platforms

Carlos Matute, Maria Ruiz Julián, Ricard López‐Ortega, Iolanda Riba‐Llena, Farida Dakterzada, Raquel Huerto, Gerard Piñol‐Ripoll, Alfonso Martínez Arias, Estibaliz Capetillo‐Zarate, Nuria Tahan, Raffaela Cipriani
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Alzheimer’s disease (AD) plasma biomarkers related to amyloid (A), tau (T), and neurodegeneration (N) can potentially be used to identify these pathological features of the disease, as shown in recent studies. Our objective was to compare the clinical and analytical performance of plasma AD biomarkers measured using the single‐molecule array (Simoa) and Lumipulse platforms. Method We quantified ATN and AT plasma biomarkers in 127 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) (n = 81), AD (n = 30), and non‐AD dementia (n = 16) using a Simoa HD‐1/HD‐X analyser (Quanterix) and a Lumipulse G600II automated platform (Fujirebio Europe NV). Result We found a strong correlation between the Simoa and Lumipulse methods, although there were systematic differences between biomarker values measured by each method. Concerning the clinical diagnosis, Simoa Ptau181/Aβ42 (AUC 0.739, 95% CI 0.592–0.887) and Lumipulse Aβ42 and Ptau181/Aβ42 (AUC 0.735, 95% CI 0.589–0.882 and AUC 0.733, 95% CI 0.567‐0.900) had the highest discriminating power. However, their power was significantly lower than that of CSF Aβ42/Aβ40, as measured by Lumipulse (AUC 0.879, 95% CI 0.766–0.992). Similarly, Simoa Ptau181 and Lumipulse Ptau181/Aβ42 were the markers most consistent with the CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 status (AUC 0.801, 95% CI 0.712–0.890 vs. AUC 0.870, 95% CI 0.806–0.934, respectively) at the ≥2.127 and ≥0.084 cut‐offs, respectively. Conclusion The Simoa and Lumipulse plasma AD assays showed comparable clinical and analytical performance. However, the performance of these biomarkers is weaker than that of CSF AD biomarkers. Interestingly, both platforms identify plasma Ptau181/Aβ42 as a promising biomarker for AD. At present, the analysed AD plasma biomarkers may be useful for screening to reduce the number of lumbar punctures in the clinical setting. However, the use of these markers as diagnostic tools requires further investigation.

Alzheimer s & DementiaVol. 20(S2)
University of the Basque Country (ES), Hospital Universitari de Santa Maria (ES), Achucarro Basque Center for Neuroscience (ES), Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Lleida (ES)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
0.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.