Evaluation of plasma neurofilament and glial fibrillary acidic protein to predict or detect amyloid related imaging abnormalities

Abstract INTRODUCTION Amyloid‐targeting therapies (ATT) require frequent magnetic resonance imaging monitoring to detect vasogenic edema and hemorrhage, i.e., amyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA). Neurofilament light chain (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are potential blood‐based biomarkers (BBM) of ARIA. METHODS Plasma NfL and GFAP were longitudinally collected in an ATT clinic and natural log transformed. Baseline, pre‐ARIA, and trajectories were compared between patients with ( N = 15) and without ( N = 45) ARIA. RESULTS Baseline NfL and GFAP did not differ between patients with or without ARIA (ln[NfL] ECLIA 1.24 ± 0.38 pg/mL vs 1.25 ± 0.40 pg/mL, p = 0.77; ln[NfL] Simoa 2.87 ± 0.47 pg/mL vs 2.98 ± 0.40 pg/mL, p = 0.30, ln[GFAP] ECLIA 4.95 ± 0.36 pg/mL vs 4.88 ± 0.47 pg/mL, p = 0.69). No significant changes were seen at the timepoint preceding ARIA, and ARIA incidence made no detectable impact on biomarker trajectories. DISCUSSION Biobanking in treatment clinics can evaluate clinical utility of BBMs as monitoring tools. These findings do not support a strong association between NfL or GFAP and ARIA in the ATT clinic.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring
Published
2026-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.70446
Primary Topic
Intracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Evaluation of plasma neurofilament and glial fibrillary acidic protein to predict or detect amyloid related imaging abnormalities

Julio C. Rojas, Adam M. Staffaroni, Renaud La Joie, Yingbing Wang et al.
Alzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring
Intracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
article

Evaluation of plasma neurofilament and glial fibrillary acidic protein to predict or detect amyloid related imaging abnormalities

Julio C. Rojas, Adam M. Staffaroni, Renaud La Joie, Yingbing Wang, Peter Alexander Ljubenkov, Kambiz Nael, Melanie L. Stephens, Jeffrey L. Dage, Gil D. Rabinovici, Gautam Tammewar, David N. Soleimani‐Meigooni, Kaancan Deniz, Connor D. Dietz, Nicholas J. Ashton, Nicholas U. Schwartz, Lawren VandeVrede, Katherine Possin, Adam L Boxer, Howie J. Rosen, Tara Ellingson, Rowan Saloner, Hong Nguyen, Bruce L. Miller, Zoe Lin
article en

Abstract

Abstract INTRODUCTION Amyloid‐targeting therapies (ATT) require frequent magnetic resonance imaging monitoring to detect vasogenic edema and hemorrhage, i.e., amyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA). Neurofilament light chain (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are potential blood‐based biomarkers (BBM) of ARIA. METHODS Plasma NfL and GFAP were longitudinally collected in an ATT clinic and natural log transformed. Baseline, pre‐ARIA, and trajectories were compared between patients with ( N = 15) and without ( N = 45) ARIA. RESULTS Baseline NfL and GFAP did not differ between patients with or without ARIA (ln[NfL] ECLIA 1.24 ± 0.38 pg/mL vs 1.25 ± 0.40 pg/mL, p = 0.77; ln[NfL] Simoa 2.87 ± 0.47 pg/mL vs 2.98 ± 0.40 pg/mL, p = 0.30, ln[GFAP] ECLIA 4.95 ± 0.36 pg/mL vs 4.88 ± 0.47 pg/mL, p = 0.69). No significant changes were seen at the timepoint preceding ARIA, and ARIA incidence made no detectable impact on biomarker trajectories. DISCUSSION Biobanking in treatment clinics can evaluate clinical utility of BBMs as monitoring tools. These findings do not support a strong association between NfL or GFAP and ARIA in the ATT clinic.

Alzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease MonitoringVol. 18(4)
University of California, San Francisco (US), Banner Sun Health Research Institute (US), Indiana University Indianapolis (US), Indiana University School of Medicine
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Intracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
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.