The Australian e-Health Research Centre, CSIRO, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
ADx NeuroSciences, Ghent, Belgium.
Alzheimers Res Ther. 2021 Apr 16;13(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s13195-021-00812-9.
CSF biomarkers are well-established for routine clinical use, yet a paucity of comparative assessment exists regarding CSF extraction methods during lumbar puncture. Here, we compare in detail biomarker profiles in CSF extracted using either gravity drip or aspiration.
Biomarkers for β-amyloidopathy (Aβ1-42, Aβ1-40), tauopathy (total tau), or synapse pathology (BACE1, Neurogranin Trunc-p75, α-synuclein) were assessed between gravity or aspiration extraction methods in a sub-population of the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers and Lifestyle (AIBL) study (cognitively normal, N = 36; mild cognitive impairment, N = 8; Alzheimer's disease, N = 6).
High biomarker concordance between extraction methods was seen (concordance correlation > 0.85). Passing Bablock regression defined low beta coefficients indicating high scalability.
Levels of these commonly assessed CSF biomarkers are not influenced by extraction method. Results of this study should be incorporated into new consensus guidelines for CSF collection, storage, and analysis of biomarkers.
CSF 生物标志物已广泛用于常规临床应用，但在腰椎穿刺过程中 CSF 提取方法的比较评估却很少。在这里，我们详细比较了重力滴注和抽吸两种方法提取 CSF 时的生物标志物谱。
在澳大利亚影像学、生物标志物和生活方式（AIBL）研究（认知正常，N=36；轻度认知障碍，N=8；阿尔茨海默病，N=6）的亚群中，我们比较了重力或抽吸提取方法之间的β淀粉样蛋白病（Aβ1-42、Aβ1-40）、tau 病（总 tau）或突触病理学（BACE1、Neurogranin Trunc-p75、α-synuclein）的生物标志物。
两种提取方法之间具有很高的生物标志物一致性（一致性相关系数>0.85）。通过 Passing Bablock 回归确定低β系数，表明具有较高的可扩展性。
这些常见的 CSF 生物标志物的水平不受提取方法的影响。本研究的结果应纳入 CSF 收集、储存和生物标志物分析的新共识指南。
