Correlation analysis of serum neurofilament light chain and glial fibrillary acidic protein levels with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Rattachement africain : cn. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Neurofilament light chain (NFL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are considered to be a promising biomarker for the diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and assessment of disease progression. To investigate the correlation between serum neurofilament light chain protein (NFL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) levels and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Serum NFL and GFAP levels were measured in 12 ALS patients and 12 healthy controls (HC) using the Single-molecule array (Simoa) technique. Serum NFL and GFAP levels in ALS patients were 81.49 ± 47.06 pg/mL and 104.42 ± 37.31 pg/mL, respectively, significantly higher than those in healthy controls (9.21 ± 3.05 pg/mL and 57.71 ± 11.64 pg/mL; P < 0.001). Serum NFL and GFAP levels in ALS patients were correlated with the duration of the disease as respectively (r = 0.746, P = 0.005; r = 0.668, P = 0.018). In this study, we investigated the diagnostic value of serum NFL and GFAP levels in the ALS population and their clinical significance using the Simoa technique. The results showed that serum NFL and GFAP levels may be potential biomarkers for ALS diagnosis, and is positively correlated with disease progression. However, its diagnostic specificity awaits further studies that include disease controls.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Correlation analysis of serum neurofilament light chain and glial fibrillary acidic protein levels with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
- Date Crossref
- 05/12/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.