RESUMO
Recent studies reported increased plasma glial acidic fibrillary protein (GFAP) levels in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients compared to controls. We expanded these findings in a larger cohort, including 156 ALS patients and 48 controls, and investigated the associations of plasma GFAP with clinical variables and other biofluid biomarkers. Plasma GFAP and Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers were assessed by the single molecule array and the Lumipulse platforms, respectively. In ALS patients, plasma GFAP was higher than in controls (p < 0.001) and associated with measures of cognitive decline. Twenty ALS patients (12.8%) showed a positive amyloid status (A+), of which nine also exhibited tau pathology (A+T+, namely ALS-AD). ALS-AD patients showed higher plasma GFAP than A- ALS participants (p < 0.001) and controls (p < 0.001), whereas the comparison between A- ALS and controls missed statistical significance (p = 0.07). Plasma GFAP distinguished ALS-AD subjects more accurately (area under the curve (AUC) 0.932 ± 0.027) than plasma p-tau181 (AUC 0.692 ± 0.058, p < 0.0001) and plasma neurofilament light chain protein (AUC, 0.548 ± 0.088, p < 0.0001). Cognitive measures differed between ALS-AD and other ALS patients. AD co-pathology deeply affects plasma GFAP values in ALS patients. Plasma GFAP is an accurate biomarker for identifying AD co-pathology in ALS, which can influence the cognitive phenotype.
RESUMO
Background: Neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a validated biofluid marker of neuroaxonal damage with great potential for monitoring patients with neurodegenerative diseases. We aimed to further validate the clinical utility of plasma (p) vs. CSF (c) NfL for distinguishing patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) from ALS mimics. We also assessed the association of biomarker values with clinical variables and survival and established the longitudinal changes of pNfL during the disease course. Methods: We studied 231 prospectively enrolled patients with suspected ALS who underwent a standardized protocol including neurological examination, electromyography, brain MRI, and lumbar puncture. Patients who received an alternative clinical diagnosis were considered ALS mimics. We classified the patients based on the disease progression rate (DPR) into fast (DPR > 1), intermediate (DPR 0.5-1), and slow progressors (DPR < 0.5). All patients were screened for the most frequent ALS-associated genes. Plasma and CSF samples were retrospectively analyzed; NfL concentrations were measured with the SIMOA platform using a commercial kit. Results: ALS patients (n = 171) showed significantly higher pNfL (p < 0.0001) and cNfL (p < 0.0001) values compared to ALS mimics (n = 60). Both cNfL and pNfL demonstrated a good diagnostic value in discriminating the two groups, although cNfL performed slightly better (cNfL: AUC 0.924 ± 0.022, sensitivity 86.8%, specificity 92.4; pNfL: AUC 0.873 ± 0.036, sensitivity 84.7%, specificity 83.3%). Fast progressors showed higher cNfL and pNfL as compared to intermediate (p = 0.026 and p = 0.001) and slow progressors (both p < 0.001). Accordingly, ALS patients with higher baseline cNfL and pNfL levels had a shorter survival (highest tertile of cNfL vs. lowest tertile, HR 4.58, p = 0.005; highest tertile of pNfL vs. lowest tertile, HR 2.59, p = 0.015). Moreover, there were positive associations between cNfL and pNfL levels and the number of body regions displaying UMN signs (rho = 0.325, p < 0.0001; rho = 0.308, p = 0.001). Finally, longitudinal analyses in 57 patients showed stable levels of pNfL during the disease course. Conclusion: Both cNfL and pNfL have excellent diagnostic and prognostic performance for symptomatic patients with ALS. The stable longitudinal trajectory of pNfL supports its use as a marker of drug effect in clinical trials.