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
Review
. 2021 Feb 5:12:619721.
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.619721. eCollection 2021.

Acute Stroke Biomarkers: Are We There Yet?

Affiliations
Review

Acute Stroke Biomarkers: Are We There Yet?

Marie Dagonnier et al. Front Neurol. .

Abstract

Background: Distinguishing between stroke subtypes and knowing the time of stroke onset are critical in clinical practice. Thrombolysis and thrombectomy are very effective treatments in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Neuroimaging helps decide who should be treated and how they should be treated but is expensive, not always available and can have contraindications. These limitations contribute to the under use of these reperfusion therapies. Aim: An alternative approach in acute stroke diagnosis is to identify blood biomarkers which reflect the body's response to the damage caused by the different types of stroke. Specific blood biomarkers capable of differentiating ischemic from hemorrhagic stroke and mimics, identifying large vessel occlusion and capable of predicting stroke onset time would expedite diagnosis and increase eligibility for reperfusion therapies. Summary of Review: To date, measurements of candidate biomarkers have usually occurred beyond the time window for thrombolysis. Nevertheless, some candidate markers of brain tissue damage, particularly the highly abundant glial structural proteins like GFAP and S100β and the matrix protein MMP-9 offer promising results. Grouping of biomarkers in panels can offer additional specificity and sensitivity for ischemic stroke diagnosis. Unbiased "omics" approaches have great potential for biomarker identification because of greater gene, protein, and metabolite coverage but seem unlikely to be the detection methodology of choice because of their inherent cost. Conclusion: To date, despite the evolution of the techniques used in their evaluation, no individual candidate or multimarker panel has proven to have adequate performance for use in an acute clinical setting where decisions about an individual patient are being made. Timing of biomarker measurement, particularly early when decision making is most important, requires urgent and systematic study.

Keywords: acute; biomarker; microarray; review; stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sources of the major candidate biomarkers.

References

    1. Whiteley W, Tian Y, Jickling GC. Blood biomarkers in stroke: research and clinical practice. Int J Stroke. (2012) 7:435–9. 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00784.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther. (2001) 69:89–95. 10.1067/mcp.2001.113989 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Quinn DA, Fogel RB, Smith CD, Laposata M, Taylor Thompson B, Johnson SM, et al. D-dimers in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. (1999) 159:1445–9. 10.1164/ajrccm.159.5.9808094 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Daubert MA, Jeremias A. The utility of troponin measurement to detect myocardial infarction: review of the current findings. Vasc Health Risk Manage. (2010) 7:691–9. 10.2147/VHRM.S5306 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hacke W, Donnan G, Fieschi C, Kaste M, von Kummer R, Broderick J, et al. . Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke trials. Lancet. (2004) 363:768–74. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15692-4 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources