87
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Neurofilaments as biomarkers in neurological disorders.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Neuroaxonal damage is the pathological substrate of permanent disability in various neurological disorders. Reliable quantification and longitudinal follow-up of such damage are important for assessing disease activity, monitoring treatment responses, facilitating treatment development and determining prognosis. The neurofilament proteins have promise in this context because their levels rise upon neuroaxonal damage not only in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) but also in blood, and they indicate neuroaxonal injury independent of causal pathways. First-generation (immunoblot) and second-generation (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) neurofilament assays had limited sensitivity. Third-generation (electrochemiluminescence) and particularly fourth-generation (single-molecule array) assays enable the reliable measurement of neurofilaments throughout the range of concentrations found in blood samples. This technological advancement has paved the way to investigate neurofilaments in a range of neurological disorders. Here, we review what is known about the structure and function of neurofilaments, discuss analytical aspects and knowledge of age-dependent normal ranges of neurofilaments and provide a comprehensive overview of studies on neurofilament light chain as a marker of axonal injury in different neurological disorders, including multiple sclerosis, neurodegenerative dementia, stroke, traumatic brain injury, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Parkinson disease. We also consider work needed to explore the value of this axonal damage marker in managing neurological diseases in daily practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references123

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          CSF and blood biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Alzheimer's disease biomarkers are important for early diagnosis in routine clinical practice and research. Three core CSF biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (Aβ42, T-tau, and P-tau) have been assessed in numerous studies, and several other Alzheimer's disease markers are emerging in the literature. However, there have been no comprehensive meta-analyses of their diagnostic performance. We systematically reviewed the literature for 15 biomarkers in both CSF and blood to assess which of these were most altered in Alzheimer's disease.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Single-Molecule enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay detects serum proteins at subfemtomolar concentrations

            The detection of single protein molecules1,2 in blood could help identify many new diagnostic protein markers. We report an approach for detecting hundreds to thousands of individual protein molecules simultaneously that enables the detection of very low concentrations of proteins. Proteins are captured on microscopic beads and labeled with an enzyme, such that each bead has either one or zero enzyme-labeled proteins. By isolating these beads in arrays of 50-femtoliter reaction chambers, single proteins can be detected by fluorescence imaging. By singulating molecules in these arrays, ~10–20 enzymes can be detected in 100 μL (~10−19 M). Single molecule enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (digital ELISA) based on singulation of enzyme labels enabled the detection of clinically-relevant proteins in serum at concentrations (<10−15 M) much lower than conventional ELISA3-5. Digital ELISA detected prostate specific antigen in all tested sera from patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy, down to 14 fg/mL (0.4 fM).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Serum Neurofilament light: A biomarker of neuronal damage in multiple sclerosis

              Objective Neurofilament light chains (NfL) are unique to neuronal cells, are shed to the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and are detectable at low concentrations in peripheral blood. Various diseases causing neuronal damage have resulted in elevated CSF concentrations. We explored the value of an ultrasensitive single‐molecule array (Simoa) serum NfL (sNfL) assay in multiple sclerosis (MS). Methods sNfL levels were measured in healthy controls (HC, n = 254) and two independent MS cohorts: (1) cross‐sectional with paired serum and CSF samples (n = 142), and (2) longitudinal with repeated serum sampling (n = 246, median follow‐up = 3.1 years, interquartile range [IQR] = 2.0–4.0). We assessed their relation to concurrent clinical, imaging, and treatment parameters and to future clinical outcomes. Results sNfL levels were higher in both MS cohorts than in HC (p < 0.001). We found a strong association between CSF NfL and sNfL (β = 0.589, p < 0.001). Patients with either brain or spinal (43.4pg/ml, IQR = 25.2–65.3) or both brain and spinal gadolinium‐enhancing lesions (62.5pg/ml, IQR = 42.7–71.4) had higher sNfL than those without (29.6pg/ml, IQR = 20.9–41.8; β = 1.461, p = 0.005 and β = 1.902, p = 0.002, respectively). sNfL was independently associated with Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) assessments (β = 1.105, p < 0.001) and presence of relapses (β = 1.430, p < 0.001). sNfL levels were lower under disease‐modifying treatment (β = 0.818, p = 0.003). Patients with sNfL levels above the 80th, 90th, 95th, 97.5th, and 99th HC‐based percentiles had higher risk of relapses (97.5th percentile: incidence rate ratio = 1.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21–3.10, p = 0.006) and EDSS worsening (97.5th percentile: OR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.07–5.42, p = 0.034). Interpretation These results support the value of sNfL as a sensitive and clinically meaningful blood biomarker to monitor tissue damage and the effects of therapies in MS. Ann Neurol 2017;81:857–870
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nat Rev Neurol
                Nature reviews. Neurology
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1759-4766
                1759-4758
                October 2018
                : 14
                : 10
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Neurology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. michael.khalil@medunigraz.at.
                [2 ] Neurochemistry Laboratory and Biobank, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
                [3 ] Department of Neurology, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany.
                [4 ] Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
                [5 ] Department of Health Sciences, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
                [6 ] Ospedale Policlinico San Martino IRCCS, Genoa, Italy.
                [7 ] Department of Neurology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
                [8 ] Neurologic Clinic and Policlinic, Departments of Medicine, Clinical Research, and Biomedicine, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
                [9 ] Unit of Clinical Neuroimmunology, Department of Neurology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
                [10 ] UCL Institute of Neurology, Department of Molecular Neurosciences, Moorfields Eye Hospital and The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.
                [11 ] Departments of Neurology, Ophthalmology and Expertise Center for Neuro-ophthalmology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
                [12 ] Clinical Neurochemistry Laboratory, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Mölndal, Sweden.
                [13 ] Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Mölndal, Sweden.
                [14 ] Department of Molecular Neuroscience, UCL Institute of Neurology, Queen Square, London, UK.
                [15 ] UK Dementia Research Institute at UCL, London, UK.
                [16 ] Neurologic Clinic and Policlinic, Departments of Medicine, Clinical Research, and Biomedicine, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. jens.kuhle@usb.ch.
                Article
                10.1038/s41582-018-0058-z
                10.1038/s41582-018-0058-z
                30171200
                50342e97-74d4-4644-8c1b-da475673c459
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article