Reconceptualization of the Erlangen Score for the Assessment of Dementia Risk: The ERlangen Score.

BACKGROUND: The established Erlangen Score (ES) for the interpretation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers in the diagnostics of Alzheimer's disease (AD) uses markers of amyloidopathy and tauopathy, equally weighted to form an easy-interpretable ordinal scale. However, these biomarkers are not equally predictive for AD. OBJECTIVE: The higher weighting of the Aß42/Aß40 ratio, as a reconceptualized ERlangen Score (ERS), was tested for advantages in diagnostic performance. METHODS: Non-demented subjects (N = 154) with a mean follow up of 5 years were assigned to a group ranging from 0 to 4 in ES or ERS. Psychometric trajectories and dementia risk were assessed. RESULTS: The distribution of subjects between ES and ERS among the groups differed considerably, as grouping allocated 32 subjects to ES group 2, but only 2 to ERS group 2. The discriminative accuracy between the ES (AUC 73.2%, 95% CI [64.2, 82.2]) and ERS (AUC 72.0%, 95% CI [63.1, 81.0]) for dementia risk showed no significant difference. Without consideration of the Aß42/Aß40 ratio in ES grouping, the optimal cut-off of the ES shifted to ≥2. CONCLUSIONS: The ERS showed advantages over the ES in test interpretation with comparable overall test performance, as fewer cases were allocated to the intermediate risk group. The established cut-off of ≥2 can be maintained for the ERS, whereas it must be adjusted for the ES when determining the Aß42/Aß40 ratio.

Interlaboratory proficiency processing scheme in CSF aliquoting: implementation and assessment based on biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we tested to which extent possible between-center differences in standardized operating procedures (SOPs) for biobanking of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples influence the homogeneity of the resulting aliquots and, consequently, the concentrations of the centrally analyzed selected Alzheimer's disease biomarkers. METHODS: Proficiency processing samples (PPSs), prepared by pooling of four individual CSF samples, were sent to 10 participating centers, which were asked to perform aliquoting of the PPSs into two secondary aliquots (SAs) under their local SOPs. The resulting SAs were shipped to the central laboratory, where the concentrations of amyloid beta (Aß) 1-42, pTau181, and albumin were measured in one run with validated routine analytical methods. Total variability of the concentrations, and its within-center and between-center components, were analyzed with hierarchical regression models. RESULTS: We observed neglectable variability in the concentrations of pTau181 and albumin across the centers and the aliquots. In contrast, the variability of the Aß1-42 concentrations was much larger (overall coefficient of variation 31%), with 28% of the between-laboratory component and 10% of the within-laboratory (i.e., between-aliquot) component. We identified duration of the preparation of the aliquots and the centrifugation force as two potential confounders influencing within-center variability and biomarker concentrations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Proficiency processing schemes provide objective evidence for the most critical preanalytical variables. Standardization of these variables may significantly enhance the quality of the collected biospecimens. Studies utilizing retrospective samples collected under different local SOPs need to consider such differences in the statistical evaluations of the data.

Assessment of the effects of adjunctive gabapentin on postoperative pain after intervertebral disc surgery in dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of adjunctive gabapentin (GBP) on pain after thoracolumbar intervertebral disc surgery in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical, 'blinded' trial. ANIMALS: Sixty-three client owned dogs undergoing hemilaminectomy METHODS: Dogs were assigned to two treatment groups. The GBP group received gabapentin 10 mg kg(-1) orally every 12 hours starting before anaesthesia; the placebo (P) group received empty gelatin capsules. Background analgesia was initiated with intravenous levomethadone 0.6 mg kg(-1) (as the combination 'L-Polamivet) at anaesthesia induction, followed by a fentanyl patch and levomethadone 0.2 mg kg(-1) subcutaneously every 8 hours for 24 hours. Pain was assessed by the short form of the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Score (CMPS-SF) without the gait category, and by a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Serum GBP concentrations and cortisol concentrations were measured. Statistical analyses utilized chi square test, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, two-way analysis of variances for repeated measurements, Wilcoxon test and Friedmann test as relevant. Correlations were tested by Spearman's and Pearson's correlation coefficient. p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Median CMPS-SF was lower in group GBP than in group P on days 0.5, 1, 4 and 5. However, CMPS-SF and VAS were not significantly different between groups. Both pain scores decreased significantly over time. Cortisol concentrations were not significantly different between groups. Minimum serum concentrations of GBP fell below the detection limit of 1 µg mL(-1) in 6 of 29 and 7 of 28 dogs at 24 and 72 hours, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: 10 mg kg(-1) GBP orally twice a day did not result in a detectable reduction in pain behaviour compared to background opioid analgesia alone, although a trend to lower pain levels (p < 0.1) was present. Further studies are needed to determine if this is related to effective background analgesia or an ineffective dose of GBP.