Head‐to‐head comparison of amplified plasmonic exosome Aβ42 platform and single‐molecule array immunoassay in a memory clinic cohort

• DOI: 10.1111/ene.14704
• Publication Date: 2020-12-28T23:46:07Z
• Authors: Tomotaka Tanaka; Joyce Chong Ruifen; Ying‐Hwey Nai; Chin Hong Tan; Carine Z. J. Lim; Yan Zhang; Mary C. Stephenson; Saima Hilal; Francis N. Saridin; Bibek Gyanwali; Steven Villaraza; Edward G. Robins; Masafumi Ihara; Michael Schöll; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow; Nicholas J. Ashton; Huilin Shao; Anthonin Reilhac; Christopher Chen
• Keywords: Dried blood spot

Various blood biomarkers reflecting brain amyloid-β (Aβ) load have recently been proposed with promising results. However, to date, no comparative study amongst has reported. Our objective was examine the diagnostic performance and cost effectiveness of three on same cohort.Using cohort (n = 68), performances single-molecule array (Simoa) Aβ40, Aβ42, Aβ42/Aβ40 amplified plasmonic exosome (APEX) Aβ42 were compared using amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) as reference standard. The extent which these tests can reduce recruitment clinical trials also determined by identifying positive (Aβ+) participants.Compared Simoa biomarkers, APEX-Aβ42 showed significantly higher correlations PET retention values excellent (sensitivity 100%, specificity 93.3%, area under curve 0.995). When utilized for trial recruitment, our simulation that pre-screening followed a confirmatory imaging would roughly half (56.8% reduction 48.6% Simoa-Aβ42/Aβ40) situation where only is used. Moreover, 100% sensitivity, does not increase required number initial participants.With its high performance, APEX an ideal candidate Aβ+ subject identification, monitoring primary care screening, could efficiently enrich participants whilst halving costs.