血浆 Aβ 作为预测阿尔茨海默病 Aβ-PET 状态的生物标志物:系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 0.9 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Archaeological Journal Pub Date : 2022-05-01 Epub Date: 2022-03-03 DOI:10.1136/jnnp-2021-327864
Lizhen Cheng, Wei Li, Yixin Chen, Yijia Lin, Beiyun Wang, Qihao Guo, Ya Miao
{"title":"血浆 Aβ 作为预测阿尔茨海默病 Aβ-PET 状态的生物标志物:系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Lizhen Cheng, Wei Li, Yixin Chen, Yijia Lin, Beiyun Wang, Qihao Guo, Ya Miao","doi":"10.1136/jnnp-2021-327864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ-PET) scan has been proposed to detect amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in the brain. However, this approach is costly and not ideal for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Blood-based Aβ measurement offers a scalable alternative to the costly or invasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to statistically validate whether plasma Aβ could predict Aβ-PET status via meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched for eligible studies from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library, which reported plasma Aβ levels of amyloid-β positron emission tomography-positive (PET (+)) and amyloid-β positron emission tomography-negative (PET (-)) subjects. We generated pooled estimates using random effects meta-analyses. For any study that has significant heterogeneity, metaregression and subgroup analysis were further conducted. Publication bias was appraised by funnel plots and Egger's test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>16 studies with 3047 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Among all the enrolled studies, 10 studies reported plasma Aβ40 values, while 9 studies reported plasma Aβ42 values and 13 studies reported Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. The pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.76 (95% CI -0.61 to 2.14, p=0.28) in the plasma Aβ40 values group. Plasma Aβ42 values group has a pooled SMD of -0.60 (95% CI -0.80 to -0.41, p<0.0001). In the plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio group, the pooled SMD was -1.44 (95% CI -2.17 to -0.72, p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Plasma Aβ40 values might not distinguish between PET (+) and PET (-) people. However, plasma Aβ42 values and plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio could be served as independent biomarkers for predicting Aβ-PET status.</p>","PeriodicalId":44491,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological Journal","volume":"141 1","pages":"513-520"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9016262/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Plasma Aβ as a biomarker for predicting Aβ-PET status in Alzheimer's disease:a systematic review with meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Lizhen Cheng, Wei Li, Yixin Chen, Yijia Lin, Beiyun Wang, Qihao Guo, Ya Miao\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jnnp-2021-327864\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ-PET) scan has been proposed to detect amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in the brain. However, this approach is costly and not ideal for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Blood-based Aβ measurement offers a scalable alternative to the costly or invasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to statistically validate whether plasma Aβ could predict Aβ-PET status via meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched for eligible studies from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library, which reported plasma Aβ levels of amyloid-β positron emission tomography-positive (PET (+)) and amyloid-β positron emission tomography-negative (PET (-)) subjects. We generated pooled estimates using random effects meta-analyses. For any study that has significant heterogeneity, metaregression and subgroup analysis were further conducted. Publication bias was appraised by funnel plots and Egger's test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>16 studies with 3047 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Among all the enrolled studies, 10 studies reported plasma Aβ40 values, while 9 studies reported plasma Aβ42 values and 13 studies reported Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. The pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.76 (95% CI -0.61 to 2.14, p=0.28) in the plasma Aβ40 values group. Plasma Aβ42 values group has a pooled SMD of -0.60 (95% CI -0.80 to -0.41, p<0.0001). In the plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio group, the pooled SMD was -1.44 (95% CI -2.17 to -0.72, p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Plasma Aβ40 values might not distinguish between PET (+) and PET (-) people. However, plasma Aβ42 values and plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio could be served as independent biomarkers for predicting Aβ-PET status.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44491,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archaeological Journal\",\"volume\":\"141 1\",\"pages\":\"513-520\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9016262/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archaeological Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2021-327864\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/3/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHAEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2021-327864","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/3/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的淀粉样蛋白-β正电子发射断层扫描(Aβ-PET)被提议用于检测大脑中的淀粉样蛋白-β(Aβ)沉积。然而,这种方法成本高昂,而且对于阿尔茨海默病的早期诊断并不理想。基于血液的 Aβ 测量为昂贵的侵入性生物标记物提供了一种可扩展的替代方法。本研究旨在通过荟萃分析对血浆 Aβ 是否能预测 Aβ-PET 状态进行统计验证:方法:我们从PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆系统检索了符合条件的研究,这些研究报告了淀粉样蛋白-β正电子发射断层扫描阳性(PET (+))和淀粉样蛋白-β正电子发射断层扫描阴性(PET (-))受试者的血浆Aβ水平。我们使用随机效应荟萃分析法得出了汇总估计值。对于存在明显异质性的研究,我们进一步进行了元回归和亚组分析。通过漏斗图和 Egger 检验对发表偏倚进行评估:荟萃分析纳入了 16 项研究,共有 3047 名参与者。在所有纳入的研究中,10 项研究报告了血浆 Aβ40 值,9 项研究报告了血浆 Aβ42 值,13 项研究报告了 Aβ42/Aβ40 比值。血浆Aβ40值组的汇总标准化平均差(SMD)为0.76(95% CI -0.61至2.14,P=0.28)。血浆 Aβ42 值组的集合 SMD 为-0.60(95% CI -0.80 至 -0.41,P=0.28):血浆 Aβ40 值可能无法区分 PET(+)和 PET(-)人群。然而,血浆Aβ42值和血浆Aβ42/Aβ40比值可作为预测Aβ-PET状态的独立生物标志物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Plasma Aβ as a biomarker for predicting Aβ-PET status in Alzheimer's disease:a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Objective: Amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ-PET) scan has been proposed to detect amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in the brain. However, this approach is costly and not ideal for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Blood-based Aβ measurement offers a scalable alternative to the costly or invasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to statistically validate whether plasma Aβ could predict Aβ-PET status via meta-analysis.

Methods: We systematically searched for eligible studies from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library, which reported plasma Aβ levels of amyloid-β positron emission tomography-positive (PET (+)) and amyloid-β positron emission tomography-negative (PET (-)) subjects. We generated pooled estimates using random effects meta-analyses. For any study that has significant heterogeneity, metaregression and subgroup analysis were further conducted. Publication bias was appraised by funnel plots and Egger's test.

Results: 16 studies with 3047 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Among all the enrolled studies, 10 studies reported plasma Aβ40 values, while 9 studies reported plasma Aβ42 values and 13 studies reported Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. The pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.76 (95% CI -0.61 to 2.14, p=0.28) in the plasma Aβ40 values group. Plasma Aβ42 values group has a pooled SMD of -0.60 (95% CI -0.80 to -0.41, p<0.0001). In the plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio group, the pooled SMD was -1.44 (95% CI -2.17 to -0.72, p<0.0001).

Conclusion: Plasma Aβ40 values might not distinguish between PET (+) and PET (-) people. However, plasma Aβ42 values and plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio could be served as independent biomarkers for predicting Aβ-PET status.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Archaeological Journal
Archaeological Journal ARCHAEOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
The significance of doorway positions in English medieval parochial churches and chapels Geology and archaeology of Berkshire, for people who aren’t geologists or archaeologists An Early Saxon wooden platform on the River Lea at Edmonton, London Footmarks: a journey into our restless past The early west front of Lincoln Cathedral: the threshold to the Heavenly Jerusalem?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1