4.5 Article

Prediction of Mild Cognitive Impairment that Evolves into Alzheimer's Disease Dementia within Two Years using a Gene Expression Signature in Blood: A Pilot Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALZHEIMERS DISEASE
卷 35, 期 3, 页码 611-621

出版社

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-122404

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; biomarkers; diagnostic tests; gene expression signatures; mild cognitive impairment

资金

  1. Norwegian Research Council
  2. Pfizer Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The focus on Alzheimer's disease (AD) is shifting from dementia to the prodromal stage of the disorder, to a large extent due to increasing efforts in trying to develop disease modifying treatment for the disorder. For development of disease-modifying drugs, a reliable and accurate test for identification of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to AD is essential. Objective: In the present study, MCI progressing to AD will be predicted using blood-based gene expression. Material and Methods: Gene expression analysis using qPCR was performed on blood RNA from a cohort of patients with amnestic MCI (aMCI; n = 66). Within the aMCI cohort, patients progressing to AD within 1 to 2 years were grouped as MCI converters (n = 34) and the patients remaining at the MCI stage after 2 years were grouped as stable MCI (n = 32). AD and control populations were also included in the study. Results: Multivariate statistical method partial least square regression was used to develop predictive models which later were tested using leave-one-out cross validation. Gene expression signatures that identified aMCI subjects that progressed to AD within 2 years with a prediction accuracy of 74%-77% were identified for the complete dataset and subsets thereof. Conclusion: The present pilot study demonstrates for the first time that MCI that evolves into AD dementia within 2 years may be predicted by analyzing gene expression in blood. Further studies will be needed to validate this gene signature as a potential test for AD in the predementia stage.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据