Technical Performance Evaluation for Alzheimer’s Disease Biomarker Discovery
- Clinical research , Inflammation , Neurology , Protein biomarkers
- Read time: 7 minutes
Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is a devastating neurodegenerative disorder affecting nearly 50 million worldwide; with only 1-in-4 people diagnosed there is a genuine need for discovery of blood-based biomarkers. A recent paper from a group at Harvard and Massachusetts General Hospital looks at a technical evaluation of reproducibility and biological variation in AD patient samples collected over time.
Alzheimer’s Disease research needs biomarkers for both diagnosis and disease progression
The devastation of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is clear: As the most common type of dementia, this progressive neurologic disorder causes brain atrophy and eventual death. Characteristic symptoms of dementia include difficulties with memory, language, problem-solving and other cognitive skills. Aside from AD, other types of dementia include cerebrovascular disease (which could be caused by stroke), Lewy body disease (abnormal aggregation of a protein called alpha-synuclein), Parkinson’s Disease (aggregation of alpha-synuclein in a particular area of the brain called the substantia nigra) and Hippocampal sclerosis (the hardening of hippocampus tissue).
Alzheimer’s Disease is estimated to cause 60% to 80% of all cases of dementia, and for AD and AD-related dementias there is great heterogeneity within the disease. There are well-known risk factors in addition to age such as genetic predisposition, namely mutations in the Apolipoprotein E gene (specifically the e4 form of the gene), medical conditions such as diabetes and high cholesterol, and other factors such as smoking and sedentary lifestyle. Overlapping conditions, such as cardiovascular disease and inflammatory disease complicate this picture.
For adults diagnosed with AD over 65 years of age, studies indicate an average survival of four to eight years, although some individuals live as long as 20 years after diagnosis.
The diagnosis of AD historically has been through clinical symptoms, and the exclusion of other causes of cognitive decline. Autopsy of brain tissue is considered the “gold standard” for definitive diagnosis. An autopsy will identify hallmark plaques, tangles, and a structure of protein buildup called Lewy bodies. Obviously, a biopsy of brain tissue post-mortem for diagnosis is neither practical nor desirable.
It is estimated that 75% of individuals with AD are currently undiagnosed.1
Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) is not a practical sample source
Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) biomarkers have been identified and are used to diagnose Mild Cognitive Impairment due to AD. These markers, called amyloid-β and tau-Aβ42 have been shown to be useful in a research setting for monitoring neurodegeneration over time. This neurodegenerative process can then define different stages of the disease, relating the levels of specific biomarkers to defined disease progression. In addition, this information is of critical importance in evaluating secondary effects of testing treatments for the disease in a clinical trial setting.
The challenges with repeated CSF sampling are its acceptability and narrow adoption. Lumbar punctures involve greater complexity, have a non-zero increase in risk with the sampling procedure itself, and are generally viewed as inferior to the wide adoption and convenience of blood-based sampling. In addition, amyloid-β is known to be a poor marker for staging the progression of the disease, and there is a critical unmet need to identify early stages of AD, for which non-invasive biomarkers would be invaluable. This critical gap in identifying AD-related biomarkers in blood has resulted in several groups increasing their search. Identifying these markers would enable the monitoring of AD progression, disease staging (that is, its degree of severity), and the further characterization of disease pathophysiology.
Other biomarkers for AD include PET scans looking for amyloid-β deposits or pathologic tau imaging signatures.
An independent technical evaluation for reproducibility
A recent paper titled “Technical Performance Evaluation of Olink Proximity Extension Assay for Blood-Based Biomarker Discovery in Longitudinal Studies of Alzheimer’s Disease”2 examined a set of samples collected from 54 individuals with and without AD, collected annually over three years. Technical reproducibility, temporal stability, and analysis of variation in the measurements were all reported on, across five Olink® Target 96 panels (specifically, the Cardiometabolic, Cardiovascular III, Immuno-Oncology, Inflammation, and Neuro-Exploratory panels), based on Proximity Extension Assay (PEA) technology.
A total of 415 measurements were taken for 377 unique proteins and evaluated for technical and biological variability. Three patient samples were run in duplicate across plates and panels to assess technical variability (both between samples on the same plate – i.e. intraplate – or between samples on different plates – i.e. interplate).
A summary table is provided of their experimental design (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Study design for technical evaluation of AD biomarkers
Longitudinal sample analysis of technical versus biological variability
Intra-plate coefficients of variation (CVs) were considered “excellent, with only five measured analytes displaying CVs > 15%” (and the vast majority of CVs <5%). The higher CVs were strongly associated with lower NPX values.
In total, 36 proteins were present on more than one panel, enabling an opportunity to measure the same analyte on different panels. The correlations across the 36 proteins averaged 0.9, with only 4 out of 36 proteins with a correlation of less than 0.85.
The researchers were also able to look at intra-plate technical variability, inter-plate technical variability, and the biological variability across the three samples run in duplicate. ANOVA analyses indicated that sample variability was “primarily due to individual biological variation”.
A strong endorsement of PEA technology
The discussion states the following: “In accordance with standard criteria for immunocapture-based assays, Olink technology proved to be technically robust, providing acceptable performance for inter-and intraplate precision (CV <15%) for the majority of proteins.” They point out that the Olink PEA technology is “an attractive technology for biomarker analysis as it measures a large number of proteins using a very small volume of sample (1 μL)”.
The biological variation of individual protein levels over time was shown in this research to be larger than technical variability attributing this to a number of external factors such as “circadian rhythms, environmental stressors, sleep, age, diet and disease process.”
Additional technical variability information, both on the Olink Target 48 Cytokine Panel and commonly used multiplex proteomics platforms, can be found on the whitepaper “Multiplex analysis of inflammatory proteins: a comparative study across multiple platforms”.3
References
- 2022 Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures. Alzheimers Dement. 2022 18(4):700-789. doi:10.1002/alz.12638
- Carlyle BC and Arnold SE et al. Technical Performance Evaluation of Olink Proximity Extension Assay for Blood-Based Biomarker Discovery in Longitudinal Studies of Alzheimer’s Disease. Front Neurol. 2022 13:889647. doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.889647
- Olink whitepaper “Multiplex analysis of inflammatory proteins: A comparative study across multiple platforms” available online: https://info.olink.com/olink-multiplex-analysis-of-inflammatory-proteins
How the proteome behaves in healthy individuals
Clinical research, Multiomics
To achieve the goal of precision medicine, not only do different molecular profiles need to be understood in disease populations, but they must also be understood in the context of healthy populations.
Key proteomics publications from 2020
Proteomics
Welcome to the first post of the all-new weekly Olink to Science! Our customer survey revealed that you would like to know more about the many publications, research, and other science happening at Olink, therefore this blog aims to do just that: keep you informed on the exciting science taking place with our technology.
Protein biomarkers are crucial in early detection of cancer
Clinical research, Oncology, Protein biomarkers
A central premise of precision medicine is to identify biomarkers indicative of disease transitions early on. This is especially important in cancer where early treatment intervention could increase a patient’s chance of survival and reduce the probability of cancer recurrence.
Using PEA and RNA-Seq to study disease pathology
Clinical research, Proteomics
The following study illustrates how transcriptomics and proteomics complement one another to clarify the pathology of a complex, and little understood disease. Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common chronic skin condition affecting up to 20% of children and 7-10% of adults, depending on the population.
Olink protein biomarker panel indicates fermented foods fight inflammation
Inflammation, Proteomics
Could food be used to fight chronic disease?
Study identifies proteins involved in immunotherapy response
Oncology, Proteomics
'Ultimately, it is all about understanding and treating patients better in the future.'
Proteins diagnostic of lung cancer up to 5 years before disease onset
Oncology
An earlier Olink to Science blog post covered some amazing research that found that certain blood protein biomarkers have the potential to predict cancer up to 3 years before diagnosis. This may also be the case for lung cancer, as detailed in a recent study by Dagnino and her colleagues, where elevated levels of CDCP1 were detected in participants of a cohort who later developed the disease.
Utilizing proteogenomics technology for novel drug target discovery
Drug discovery & development
High-throughput multiplexed proteomic technology is leading the way to the latest developments in pre-clinical disease analysis in drug discovery. The pharmaceutical industry is now increasing its efforts in the discovery of novel drug targets by using protein quantitative trait loci (pQTLs), which allows for a more confident inference of disease causality and associated protein regulation.
Developing a high-performance biomarker panel for Alzheimer’s disease
Clinical research, Neurology, Protein biomarkers
A simple search of the term ‘scourge of Alzheimer’s Disease’ brings up over half a million website hits. A major disease, about 15% of us that reach the age of 67 to 74, and 44% of those 75 to 84 will develop AD.
How proteomics helped diabetic kidney disease research advance
Clinical research, Proteomics
Dr. Krolewski and his team at the Harvard Medical School found 56 proteins to be significant in diabetic kidney disease patients. Potentially, these could serve as prognostic biomarkers for disease progression and treatment response. This is how adding proteomics to the methodologies elevated their research.