You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Editorial commentary
Blood biomarkers may distinguish among dementia disorders
  1. Lucilla Parnetti,
  2. Federico Paolini Paoletti,
  3. Lorenzo Gaetani
  1. Department of Medicine and Surgery, Section of Neurology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
  1. Correspondence to Professor Lucilla Parnetti, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Section of Neurology, University of Perugia, Perugia 06132, Italy; lucilla.parnetti{at}unipg.it

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2021-328649

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    A panel of five plasma biomarkers has shown a characteristic profile in each of the most common neurodegenerative diseases with evolution to dementia

    After the first discovery of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and its long analytical validation process, a new matrix (blood) for old and novel candidate markers is changing the way we approach biomarkers in neurological diseases.1

    Due to the paradigmatic example of AD, multiple blood-based biomarkers reflecting different pathophysiological processes are under investigation for other neurodegenerative disorders evolving to dementia. Amyloid-β42(Aβ42)/Aβ40 ratio and phosphorylated tau at threonine-181 (p-tau181) in blood have demonstrated to reflect amyloidosis and tauopathy in AD with a reliability similar to what observed in CSF. Also, ongoing neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation can be efficiently quantified by blood neurofilament light chain (NfL) and glial fibrillar acid protein (GFAP), respectively.2

    Aβ42/Aβ40, p-tau181, …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors LP reviewed the linked original article. LP, FPP and LG discussed the main findings of the manuscript, and its contribution to the field. LG drafted the editorial commentary. LP and FPP critically reviewed it. All the authors read and approved the final version of the mansucript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles