Advertisement

Cerebrospinal fluid non-phosphorylated tau in the differential diagnosis of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease: a comparative prospective study with 14-3-3

  • Franc LlorensEmail author
  • Anna Villar-PiquéEmail author
  • Peter Hermann
  • Matthias Schmitz
  • Stefan Goebel
  • Katharina Waniek
  • Ingolf Lachmann
  • Inga Zerr
Original Communication

Abstract

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) non-phosphorylated tau (non-p-tau) is increased in sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (CJD), but its accuracy in the differential diagnosis has not been previously established. Here, we first used a retrospective cohort of non-CJD (n = 135) and CJD (n = 137) cases to determine the optimal cutoff point for the discrimination of CJD cases. Next, we prospectively quantified non-p-tau and 14-3-3 protein in a cohort of 1427 cases received for CSF testing at the German National Reference Center for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Among them, 36 were subsequently diagnosed as CJD. The diagnostic accuracy of both proteins discriminating CJD cases was evaluated. Using a cutoff of 650 pg/mL, non-p-tau displayed 94.39% accuracy in discriminating CJD cases, while 92.92% accuracy was achieved by 14-3-3 using a cutoff of 20,000 AU/mL. Diagnostic test evaluation for both proteins showed a slightly better performance of non-p-tau compared to 14-3-3. The two biomarkers’ concentrations showed a significant positive correlation, both in the total population and in CJD cases (p < 0.001). Finally, the analysis of CSF non-p-tau concentrations when undergoing pre-analytical factors showed high stability in front of temperature storage and freeze/thaw cycles. Therefore, we conclude that when used in the appropriate clinical context of a prion disease surveillance center, non-p-tau is a highly sensitive and specific diagnostic marker for CJD.

Keywords

Cerebrospinal fluid Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease Tau Non-phosphorylated tau 14-3-3 RT-QuIC Biomarker 

Notes

Author contributions

FL, AV-P, and IZ designed the study. AV-P and FL performed experiments. FL, AV-P, PH and MS analysed data and interpreted the results. PH, SG and IZ contributed to sample collection and characterization. KW and IL contributed to technical expertise. FL, AV-P and PH wrote the manuscript draft. All authors critically revised the manuscript and approved its content before submission.

Funding

This study was funded by Robert Koch Institute through funds from the Federal Ministry of Health of Germany (Grant no. 1369–341) to IZ, by the Instituto Carlos III/ Fondo Social Europeo (CP16/00041) and by Fundació la Marató de TV3 (grant 201821-30-31-32) to FL. This project has been funded at 65% by the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) through the Interreg V-A España-Francia-Andorra (POCTEFA 2014-2020) programme.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

Dr. Lachmann and Dr. Waniek report they are employers of AJ Roboscreen GmbH, Leipzig, Germany. No other conflict of interest is reported.

Ethical approval

This study was conducted according to the revised Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines and was approved by local Ethics commitee (Reference number 11/11/93), Universitätzmedizin Göttingen, Germany).

References

  1. 1.
    Puoti G, Bizzi A, Forloni G et al (2012) Sporadic human prion diseases: molecular insights and diagnosis. Lancet Neurol 11:618–628.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70063-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zerr I, Schmitz M, Karch A et al (2018) Cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light levels in neurodegenerative dementia: evaluation of diagnostic accuracy in the differential diagnosis of prion diseases. Alzheimers Dement.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.12.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hermann P, Laux M, Glatzel M et al (2018) Validation and utilization of amended diagnostic criteria in Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease surveillance. Neurology.  https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000005860 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schmitz M, Ebert E, Stoeck K et al (2015) Validation of 14-3-3 protein as a marker in sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease diagnostic. Mol Neurobiol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-015-9167-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sanchez-Juan P, Green A, Ladogana A et al (2006) CSF tests in the differential diagnosis of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Neurology 67:637–643.  https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000230159.67128.00 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Llorens F, Schmitz M, Zerr I (2017) Progress in CSF biomarker discovery in sCJD. Oncotarget 8:5666–5667.  https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13998 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thompson AGB, Mead SH (2019) Review: Fluid biomarkers in the human prion diseases. Mol Cell Neurosci 97:81–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Llorens F, Kruse N, Schmitz M et al (2016) Evaluation of α-synuclein as a novel cerebrospinal fluid biomarker in different forms of prion diseases. Alzheimers Dement.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2016.09.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Villar-Piqué A, Schmitz M, Lachmann I et al (2018) Cerebrospinal fluid total prion protein in the spectrum of prion diseases. Mol Neurobiol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-018-1251-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ermann N, Lewczuk P, Schmitz M et al (2018) CSF nonphosphorylated Tau as a biomarker for the discrimination of AD from CJD. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 5:883–887.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.584 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paterson RW, Torres-Chae CC, Kuo AL et al (2012) Differential diagnosis of Jakob–Creutzfeldt disease. Arch Neurol 69:1578–1582.  https://doi.org/10.1001/2013.jamaneurol.79 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zerr I, Hermann P (2018) Diagnostic challenges in rapidly progressive dementia. Expert Rev Neurother 18:761–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Geschwind MD, Murray K (2018) Differential diagnosis with other rapid progressive dementias in human prion diseases. In: Handbook of clinical neurology. pp 371–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zerr I, Kallenberg K, Summers DM et al (2009) Updated clinical diagnostic criteria for sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Brain 132:2659–2668.  https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awp191 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lewczuk P, Lelental N, Lachmann I et al (2016) Non-phosphorylated tau as a potential biomarker of Alzheimer’s disease: analytical and diagnostic characterization. J Alzheimers Dis 55:159–170.  https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-160448 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmitz M, Cramm M, Llorens F et al (2016) The real-time quaking-induced conversion assay for detection of human prion disease and study of other protein misfolding diseases. Nat Protoc 11:2233–2242.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2016.120 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2531595 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A et al (2011) pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinform.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stock C, Hielscher T (2014) DTComPair: comparison of binary diagnostic tests in a paired study design. R package version 1.0.3. https://CRANR-project.org/package=DTComPair. Accessed 2014
  20. 20.
    Cramm M, Schmitz M, Karch A et al (2016) Stability and reproducibility underscore utility of RT-QuIC for diagnosis of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Mol Neurobiol 53:1896–1904.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-015-9133-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McGuire LI, Peden AH, Orru CD et al (2012) Real time quaking-induced conversion analysis of cerebrospinal fluid in sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Ann Neurol 72:278–285.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.23589 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Goossens J, Bjerke M, Struyfs H et al (2017) No added diagnostic value of non-phosphorylated tau fraction (p-taurel) in CSF as a biomarker for differential dementia diagnosis. Alzheimers Res Ther 9:49.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-017-0275-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Poser S, Mollenhauer B, Krauß A et al (1999) How to improve the clinical diagnosis of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Brain 122:2345–2351.  https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/122.12.2345 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Geschwind M et al (2008) Rapidly progressive dementia. Ann Neurol 64:97–108.  https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2014.371 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Llorens F, Zafar S, Ansoleaga B et al (2015) Subtype and regional regulation of prion biomarkers in sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 41:631–645.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nan.12175 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Atarashi R, Satoh K, Sano K et al (2011) Ultrasensitive human prion detection in cerebrospinal fluid by real-time quaking-induced conversion. Nat Med 17:175–178.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.2294 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Leitão MJ, Baldeiras I, Almeida MR et al (2016) Sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease diagnostic accuracy is improved by a new CSF ELISA 14-3-3γ assay. Neuroscience 322:398–407.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.02.057 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stoeck K, Sanchez-Juan P, Gawinecka J et al (2012) Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker supported diagnosis of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and rapid dementias: a longitudinal multicentre study over 10 years. Brain 135:3051–3061.  https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/aws238 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Toombs J, Paterson RW, Schott JM, Zetterberg H (2014) Amyloid-beta 42 adsorption following serial tube transfer. Alzheimer’s Res Ther.  https://doi.org/10.1186/alzrt236 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Network Center for Biomedical Research in Neurodegenerative Diseases, (CIBERNED), Institute Carlos IIIL’Hospitalet de LlobregatSpain
  2. 2.Department of Neurology, Clinical Dementia Center and National Reference Center for CJD SurveillanceUniversity Medical SchoolGöttingenGermany
  3. 3.Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL)L’Hospitalet de LlobregatSpain
  4. 4.German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)GöttingenGermany
  5. 5.AJ Roboscreen GmbHLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations