Do CSF biomarkers help clinicians predict the progression of mild cognitive impairment to dementia?

There is increasing interest in the value of CSF biomarkers to predict those individuals with mild cognitive impairment who will progress to dementia. However, lumbar puncture is not routine in these patients and biomarker assays are not universally available. To change clinical practice there must...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPractical Neurology Vol. 10; no. 4; pp. 202 - 207
Main Authors Mitchell, Alex J, Monge-Argilés, J A, Sánchez-Paya, J
Format Journal Article Book Review
LanguageEnglish
Published London BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 01.08.2010
BMJ Publishing Group
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:There is increasing interest in the value of CSF biomarkers to predict those individuals with mild cognitive impairment who will progress to dementia. However, lumbar puncture is not routine in these patients and biomarker assays are not universally available. To change clinical practice there must be very good evidence that biomarkers are helpful over and above clinical impression. Here we discuss the merits of CSF biomarkers compared with clinicians using simple bedside cognitive tests. Although every biomarker has a superior positive predictive value, most have inferior negative predictive values. When predicting the progression of mild cognitive impairment, the overall misclassification rate by clinicians using bedside cognitive tests is approximately 38% but this could be reduced to approximately 30% by using Aβ1–42 and to 24% with phosphorylated tau or total tau (or a combination of CSF biomarkers). Clinicians and patients together should decide whether this is sufficient to warrant the additional burden of a lumbar puncture, and the cost of the test, or whether further studies are needed before useful and clinically practical conclusions can be reached.
Bibliography:istex:B85A6548DC8DAA55B978BFB10F4F007DE3CF0D07
ArticleID:practneurol217778
local:practneurol;10/4/202
ark:/67375/NVC-S7VCT12Z-Z
href:practneurol-10-202.pdf
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
ISSN:1474-7758
1474-7766
DOI:10.1136/jnnp.2010.217778