↓ Skip to main content

An integrated multi-study analysis of intra-subject variability in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β concentrations collected by lumbar puncture and indwelling lumbar catheter

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An integrated multi-study analysis of intra-subject variability in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β concentrations collected by lumbar puncture and indwelling lumbar catheter
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13195-015-0136-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brendan P. Lucey, Celedon Gonzales, Ujjwas Das, Jinhe Li, Eric R. Siemers, J. Randall Slemmon, Randall J. Bateman, Yafei Huang, Gerard B. Fox, Jurgen A.H.R. Claassen, Diane Slats, Marcel M. Verbeek, Gary Tong, Holly Soares, Mary J. Savage, Matthew Kennedy, Mark Forman, Magnus Sjögren, Richard Margolin, Xia Chen, Martin R. Farlow, Robert A. Dean, Jeffrey F. Waring

Abstract

Amyloid-β (Aβ) has been investigated as a diagnostic biomarker and therapeutic drug target. Recent studies found that cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ fluctuates over time, including as a diurnal pattern, and increases in absolute concentration with serial collection. It is currently unknown what effect differences in CSF collection methodology have on Aβ variability. In this study, we sought to determine the effect of different collection methodologies on the stability of CSF Aβ concentrations over time. Grouped analysis of CSF Aβ levels from multiple industry and academic groups collected by either lumbar puncture (n=83) or indwelling lumbar catheter (n=178). Participants were either placebo or untreated subjects from clinical drug trials or observational studies. Participants had CSF collected by lumbar puncture or lumbar catheter for quantitation of Aβ concentration by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay. Data from all sponsors was converted to percent of the mean for Aβ40 and Aβ42 for comparison. Repeated measures analysis of variance was performed to assess for factors affecting the linear rise of Aβ concentrations over time. Analysis of studies collecting CSF via lumbar catheter revealed tremendous inter-subject variability of Aβ40 and Aβ42 as well as an Aβ diurnal pattern in all of the sponsors' studies. In contrast, Aβ concentrations from CSF samples collected at two time points by lumbar puncture showed no significant differences. Repeated measures analysis of variance found that only time and draw frequency were significantly associated with the slope of linear rise in Aβ40 and Aβ42 concentrations during the first 6 hours of collection. Based on our findings, we recommend minimizing the frequency of CSF draws in studies measuring Aβ levels and keeping the frequency standardized between experimental groups. The Aβ diurnal pattern was noted in all sponsors' studies and was not an artifact of study design. Averaging Aβ concentrations at each time point is recommended to minimize the effect of individual variability. Indwelling lumbar catheters are an invaluable research tool for following changes in CSF Aβ over 24-48 hours, but factors affecting Aβ concentration such as linear rise and diurnal variation need to be accounted for in planning study designs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Master 6 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Professor 5 9%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 13%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 16 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,177,584
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#905
of 1,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,707
of 263,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.