Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Feb 18;9(2):e88854.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088854. eCollection 2014.

A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Alzheimer's disease

Affiliations

A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Alzheimer's disease

David J M McGhee et al. PLoS One. .

Erratum in

  • PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e97960

Abstract

Background: Using surrogate biomarkers for disease progression as endpoints in neuroprotective clinical trials may help differentiate symptomatic effects of potential neuroprotective agents from true slowing of the neurodegenerative process. A systematic review was undertaken to determine what biomarkers for disease progression in Alzheimer's disease exist and how well they perform.

Methods: MEDLINE and Embase (1950-2011) were searched using five search strategies. Abstracts were assessed to identify papers meriting review in full. Studies of participants with probable Alzheimer's disease diagnosed by formal criteria were included. We made no restriction on age, disease duration, or drug treatment. We only included studies with a longitudinal design, in which the putative biomarker and clinical measure were both measured at least twice, as this is the only appropriate study design to use when developing a disease progression biomarker. We included studies which attempted to draw associations between the changes over time in the biomarker used to investigate disease progression and a clinical measure of disease progression.

Results: Fifty-nine studies were finally included. The commonest biomarker modality examined was brain MRI (17/59, 29% of included studies). Median follow-up in included studies was only 1.0 (IQR 0.8-1.7) year and most studies only measured the putative biomarker and clinical measure twice. Included studies were generally of poor quality with small numbers of participants (median 31 (IQR 17 to 64)), applied excessively restrictive study entry criteria, had flawed methodologies and conducted overly simplistic statistical analyses without adjusting for confounding factors.

Conclusions: We found insufficient evidence to recommend the use of any biomarker as an outcome measure for disease progression in Alzheimer's disease trials. However, further investigation into the efficacy of using MRI measurements of ventricular volume and whole brain volume appeared to be merited. A provisional 'roadmap' to improve the quality of future disease progression biomarker studies is presented.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow diagram outlining the selection procedure to identify 59 articles which were included in the systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Alzheimer's disease.
Note that of the 20 articles identified by reviewing reference lists, nine were excluded, and 11 were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Both articles identified by hand searching were included in the final qualitative synthesis.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Flow diagram outlining a provisional ‘roadmap’ for conducting a study to determine whether a given biomarker is a suitable surrogate for a clinical measure of disease progression.

References

    1. Knapp M, Prince M, Albanese E, Banjeree S, Dhanasiri S, et al.. (2007) A report to the Alzheimer's Society on the prevalance and economic cost of dementia in the UK produced by King's College London and the London School of Economics. London: Alzheimer's Society.
    1. Knopman DS (2008) Clinical trial design issues in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. Cogn Behav Neurol 21: 197–201. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Knopman D (2006) Finding potent drugs for Alzheimer's disease is more important than proving the drugs are disease modifying. Alzheimers Dement 2: 147–149. - PubMed
    1. Temple RJ (1995) A regulatory authority's opinion about surrogate endpoints. In: Nimmo W, Tucker G, editors. Clinical Measurement in Drug Evaluation. New York: J. Wiley.
    1. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group (2001) Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther 69: 89–95. - PubMed

Publication types