Robustness of CSF Aβ42/40 and Aβ42/P‐tau181 measured using fully automated immunoassays to detect AD‐related outcomes
Antoine Leuzy, Niklas Mattsson, Nicholas Cullen, Erik Stomrud, Sebastian Palmqvist, Renaud La Joie, Leonardo Iaccarino, Henrik Zetterberg, Gil D. Rabinovici, Kaj Blennow, Shorena Janelidze, Oskar Hansson
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study investigated the comparability of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cutoffs for Elecsys immunoassays for amyloid beta (Aβ)42/Aβ40 or Aβ42/phosphorylated tau (p-tau)181 and the effects of measurement variability when predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related outcomes (i.e., Aβ-positron emission tomography [PET] visual read and AD neuropathology). METHODS: We studied 750 participants (BioFINDER study, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative [ADNI], and University of California San Francisco [UCSF]). Youden's index was used to identify cutoffs and to calculate accuracy (Aβ-PET visual read as outcome). Using longitudinal variability in Aβ-negative controls, we identified a gray zone around cut-points where the risk of an inconsistent predicted outcome was >5%. RESULTS: For Aβ42/Aβ40, cutoffs across cohorts were <0.059 (BioFINDER), <0.057 (ADNI), and <0.058 (UCSF). For Aβ42/p-tau181, cutoffs were <41.90 (BioFINDER), <39.20 (ADNI), and <46.02 (UCSF). Accuracy was ≈90% for both Aβ42/Aβ40 and Aβ42/p-tau181 using these cutoffs. Using Aβ-PET as an outcome, 8.7% of participants fell within a gray zone interval for Aβ42/Aβ40, compared to 4.5% for Aβ42/p-tau181. Similar findings were observed using a measure of overall AD neuropathologic change (7.7% vs. 3.3%). In a subset with CSF and plasma Aβ42/40, the number of individuals within the gray zone was ≈1.5 to 3 times greater when using plasma Aβ42/40. DISCUSSION: CSF Aβ42/p-tau181 was more robust to the effects of measurement variability, suggesting that it may be the preferred Elecsys-based measure in clinical practice and trials.