A comparison of commercial assays quantifying mature brain-derived neurotrophic factor (mBDNF) and its precursor (pro-BDNF) in human serum

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and its isoforms (pro- and mBDNF) are promising neurobiomarkers. While total serum BDNF levels have been previously validated, the newer isoforms have not. We aimed to identify the most common serum pro- and mBDNF assays through a literature search (MEDLINE/PubMed, until March 2024), and to compare their methodological performance in 23 human serum samples [total BDNF: R&D Systems, #DBNT00; both isoforms: R&DSystems (#DY3175, #DBD00); Aviscera-Bioscience (#SK00752-09, #SK00752-01); FineTest (#EH4255, #EH0043)]. Western-blot and cross-reactivity assays were used to confirm whether the kits tested for the declared isoforms. The total BDNF (#DBNT00) and pro-BDNF (#DY3175) ELISA kits from R&D Systems, and the pro-BDNF ELISA kits from FineTest (#EH4255) and Aviscera-Bioscience (#SK00752-01) showed high specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, and reproducibility. None of the commercial brands tested for mBDNF quantification showed optimal specificity, although R&D Systems (#DBD00) showed an acceptable result. Additionally, comparison of serum mBDNF levels by direct measurement and estimation (total minus pro-BDNF) using the three R&D Systems kits in the 23 serum samples showed acceptable variation (± 15%). This work indicated that there is a need to continue improving the specificity of some ELISA kits, mainly those measuring mBDNF. Total, pro- and m-BDNF serum levels can be quantified using the R&D Systems kits, whereas pro-BDNF serum levels could, in principle, be measured using any of the three brands evaluated.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-10-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-22278-7
Primary Topic
Nerve injury and regeneration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparison of commercial assays quantifying mature brain-derived neurotrophic factor (mBDNF) and its precursor (pro-BDNF) in human serum

Nicolás Olea, Andrea Rodríguez‐Carrillo, Mariana F. Fernández, Vicente Mustieles et al.
Scientific Reports
Nerve injury and regeneration
article

A comparison of commercial assays quantifying mature brain-derived neurotrophic factor (mBDNF) and its precursor (pro-BDNF) in human serum

Nicolás Olea, Andrea Rodríguez‐Carrillo, Mariana F. Fernández, Vicente Mustieles, Alicia Olivas-Martínez, Esther García‐Esquinas, Francisco M. Peinado, Lydia Espín-Moreno, Ainhoa Pérez-Cantero
article en

Abstract

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and its isoforms (pro- and mBDNF) are promising neurobiomarkers. While total serum BDNF levels have been previously validated, the newer isoforms have not. We aimed to identify the most common serum pro- and mBDNF assays through a literature search (MEDLINE/PubMed, until March 2024), and to compare their methodological performance in 23 human serum samples [total BDNF: R&D Systems, #DBNT00; both isoforms: R&DSystems (#DY3175, #DBD00); Aviscera-Bioscience (#SK00752-09, #SK00752-01); FineTest (#EH4255, #EH0043)]. Western-blot and cross-reactivity assays were used to confirm whether the kits tested for the declared isoforms. The total BDNF (#DBNT00) and pro-BDNF (#DY3175) ELISA kits from R&D Systems, and the pro-BDNF ELISA kits from FineTest (#EH4255) and Aviscera-Bioscience (#SK00752-01) showed high specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, and reproducibility. None of the commercial brands tested for mBDNF quantification showed optimal specificity, although R&D Systems (#DBD00) showed an acceptable result. Additionally, comparison of serum mBDNF levels by direct measurement and estimation (total minus pro-BDNF) using the three R&D Systems kits in the 23 serum samples showed acceptable variation (± 15%). This work indicated that there is a need to continue improving the specificity of some ELISA kits, mainly those measuring mBDNF. Total, pro- and m-BDNF serum levels can be quantified using the R&D Systems kits, whereas pro-BDNF serum levels could, in principle, be measured using any of the three brands evaluated.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Universidad de Granada (ES), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES), Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria de Granada (ES), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (ES)
European Commission, HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Nerve injury and regeneration
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.