Citations 2
Clinical use and reporting of neurofilament quantification in neurological disorders: A global overview
Delaby, Constance , Martinez‐Yriarte, Jose, Zecca, Chiara , Körtvelyessy, Péter , Tumani, Hayrettin , Quadrio, Isabelle , Hart, Melanie , Olsen, Dorte Aalund , Alcolea, Daniel, Blennow, Kaj , Bouaziz-Amar, Élodie , Baldeiras, Inês , Bigot‐Corbel, Edith , Bjerke, Maria , Perez, Mercedes Carretero, Chabrashvili, Tinatin, Chapman, Miles, Fourier, Anthony , Galimberti, Daniela , Gezen‐Ak, Duygu , Gouju, Julien , Flórez, Silvia de las Heras , Sanchez, Juanjo Hernandez, Herwerth, Marina , Imperiale, Daniele , Kaczorowski, Flora, Keshavan, Ashvini , Leithner, Christoph , Blanc, M, Rodríguez, Jose Enrique Martínez, Musso, Giulia , Nogueira, Léonor, Garay, Raquel Perez, Quillard‐Muraine, Muriel, Borja, Enrique Rodriguez, Schraen, Susanna, Terracciano, Daniela , Bachhuber, Franziska , Tzartos, Socrates J., Tzartos, John , Unterwalder, Nadine, Lehmann, Sylvain , Keshavan, Ashvini , Galimberti, Daniela , Herwerth, Marina , Ladang, Aurélie , Logroscino, Giancarlo , Tumani, Hayrettin , Parchi, Piero , Alcolea, Daniel , Fortea, Juan , Lleó, Alberto , Algeciras‐Schimnich, Alicia , Ayrignac, Xavier , Bedel, Aurélie , Santos, Gustavo Alves Andrade dos , Borelli, Wyllians Vendramini , Perez, Mercedes Carretero, Casoli, Tiziana , Cusato, Jessica , Dursun, Erdinç , Gordon, Brian A. , Sanchez, Juanjo Hernandez, Kasuga, Kensaku , Khalil, Michael , Kühle, Jens , Lewczuk, Piotr , Letournel, Franck , Tsolaki, Magda , Giuffrè, Guido Maria , Mroczko, Barbara , Kulczyńska‐Przybik, Agnieszka , Paquet, Claire , Baiardi, Simone , Gaetani, Lorenzo , Parnetti, Lucilla , Poesen, Koen , Halbgebauer, Steffen , Vermunt, Lisa , Wellington, Cheryl L. , Zetterberg, Henrik , Teunissen, Charlotte E.
Alzheimer's & Dementia | June 23, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 6 | Pages: No page available
Abstract INTRODUCTION Neurofilament light chain (NfL) quantification aids in diagnosing and predicting neurological disorders, but clinical and laboratory practices vary across centers. Differences in result interpretation and reporting further challenge test commutability. This study aimed to review the global analytical and post‐analytical methods used for NfL measurement in routine clinical practice across different contexts. METHODS We established an international working group (WG) and distributed a survey to its members to gather information on context of use (COU), (pre) analytical methods, cutoff usage, as well as the interpretation and reporting of NfL measurements. RESULTS Among the centers, 63% measured NfL in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), 87% in blood, and 53% in both. COU was widespread, with 50% defining pathological cutoffs based on publications and 42% considering age. Reporting was primarily done through numeric results (95%). DISCUSSION Harmonizing cutoffs, reporting, and interpretation across various clinical contexts will facilitate the incorporation of this biomarker into routine clinical practice. Highlights Unique international overview of current analytical and post‐analytical methods for neurofilament light chain (NfL) measurement in routine clinical practice. Tailored sheets for each neurological application. Strategies to harmonize cutoffs, reporting, and interpretation of NfL's measurement.
The Alzheimer's Association external quality control program for cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers
Mattsson, Niklas , Andréasson, Ulf , Batish, Sat Dev, Bernardini, Sergio , Bocchio‐Chiavetto, Luisella , Blankenstein, Marinus A. , Carrillo, María C. , Chalbot, Sonia, Coart, Els, Chiasserini, Davide , Cutler, Neal E., Dahlfors, Gunilla, Duller, Stefan, Fagan, Anne M. , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Galimberti, Daniela , Hampel, Harald , Handberg, Aase , Heneka, Michael T. , Herskovits, A. Zara , Herukka, Sanna‐Kaisa , Humpel, Christian , Iqbal, Khalid , Kaeser, Stephan A. , Kaiser, Elmar, Kapaki, Elisabeth, Kidd, Daniel, Klivènyi, Péter , Knudsen, Cindy Soendersoe, Kummer, Markus P. , Lui, James, Lladó, Albert , Li, Qiao‐Xin , Martins, Ralph N. , Masters, Colin L. , McAuliffe, John C., Mercken, Marc, Moghekar, Abhay , Molinuevo, José Luís , Montine, Thomas J. , Nowatzke, William, O’Brien, Richard , Otto, Markus , Parnetti, Lucilla , Petersen, Ronald C. , Prvulovic, David, Reus, Herman P.M. de, Scarpini, Elio , Stefani, Alessandro , Schröder, Johannes , Shaw, Leslie M. , Skinningsrud, Anders, Skrogstad, Brith, Spreer, Annette, Trojanowski, John Q. , Tumani, Hayrettin , Umek, Robert M., Broeck, Bianca Van, Vanderstichele, Hugo, Vécsei, László , Blennow, Kaj , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Persson, Staffan , Arai, Hiroyuki N. , Forlenza, Orestes Vicente , Galasko, Douglas , Holtzman, David M. , Hyman, Bradley T. , Jucker, Mathias , Lewczuk, Piotr , Paraskevas, George P. , Rissman, Robert A. , Soininen, Hilkka S. , Talib, Leda Leme , Teunissen, Charlotte E. , Verbeek, Marcel M. , Windisch, Manfred , Zhang, Jing , Zetterberg, Henrik , Parnetti, Lucilla , Molinuevo, José Luis , Masters, Colin L , Otto, Markus , Galimberti, Daniela
Alzheimer's & Dementia | July 25, 2011 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 386
BackgroundThe cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers amyloid β (Aβ)‐42, total‐tau (T‐tau), and phosphorylated‐tau (P‐tau) demonstrate good diagnostic accuracy for Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, there are large variations in biomarker measurements between studies, and between and within laboratories. The Alzheimer's Association has initiated a global quality control program to estimate and monitor variability of measurements, quantify batch‐to‐batch assay variations, and identify sources of variability. In this article, we present the results from the first two rounds of the program.MethodsThe program is open for laboratories using commercially available kits for Aβ, T‐tau, or P‐tau. CSF samples (aliquots of pooled CSF) are sent for analysis several times a year from the Clinical Neurochemistry Laboratory at the Mölndal campus of the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. Each round consists of three quality control samples.ResultsForty laboratories participated. Twenty‐six used INNOTEST enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay kits, 14 used Luminex xMAP with the INNO‐BIA AlzBio3 kit (both measure Aβ‐(1‐42), P‐tau(181P), and T‐tau), and 5 used Meso Scale Discovery with the Aβ triplex (AβN‐42, AβN‐40, and AβN‐38) or T‐tau kits. The total coefficients of variation between the laboratories were 13% to 36%. Five laboratories analyzed the samples six times on different occasions. Within‐laboratory precisions differed considerably between biomarkers within individual laboratories.ConclusionsMeasurements of CSF AD biomarkers show large between‐laboratory variability, likely caused by factors related to analytical procedures and the analytical kits. Standardization of laboratory procedures and efforts by kit vendors to increase kit performance might lower variability, and will likely increase the usefulness of CSF AD biomarkers.