A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Neurogranin as Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker for Alzheimer Disease: An Assay Comparison Study. | LitMetric

Background: Neurogranin in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) correlates with cognitive decline and is a potential novel biomarker for Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia. We investigated the analytical and diagnostic performance of 3 commonly used neurogranin assays in the same cohort of patients to improve the interpretability of CSF neurogranin test results.

Methods: The neurogranin Erenna assay from Washington University, St. Louis, MO (WashU); ELISA from ADx Neurosciences; and ELISA from Gothenburg University, Mölndal, Sweden (UGot), were compared using silver staining and Western blot after gel electrophoresis. Clinical performance of the 3 assays was compared in samples from individuals diagnosed with subjective cognitive decline (n = 22), and in patients with AD (n = 22), frontotemporal dementia (n = 22), dementia with Lewy bodies (n = 22), or vascular dementia (n = 20), adjusted for sex and age.

Results: The assays detected different epitopes of neurogranin: the WashU assay detected the N-terminal part of neurogranin (S10-D23) and a C-terminal part (G49-G60), the ADx assay detected C-terminal neurogranin truncated at P75, and the UGot assay detected the C-terminal neurogranin with intact ending (D78). Spearman ρ was 0.95 between ADx and WashU, 0.87 between UGot and WashU, and 0.81 between UGot and ADx. ANCOVA (analysis of covariance) showed group differences for ranked neurogranin concentrations in each assay (all < 0.05), with specific increases in AD.

Conclusions: Although the 3 assays target different epitopes on neurogranin and have different calibrators, the high correlations and the similar group differences suggest that the different forms of neurogranin in CSF carry similar diagnostic information, at least in the context of neurodegenerative diseases.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2017.283028DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

neurogranin
12
assay detected
12
neurogranin cerebrospinal
8
cerebrospinal fluid
8
biomarker alzheimer
8
alzheimer disease
8
cognitive decline
8
epitopes neurogranin
8
detected c-terminal
8
c-terminal neurogranin
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!