Observational analysis reports elevated glial fibrillary acidic protein in Alzheimer patients, indicating age-adjusted reference values are crucial for accurate diagnosis.
Background Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) is a biomarker for astrocytic injury and astrogliosis. Concentrations are elevated in numerous neurological disorders, including a pronounced increase in Alzheimer disease (AD). However, GFAP levels in the serum also increase with age. Consequently, the integration of GFAP levels into clinical routine and their interpretation demands age-adjusted reference values. Methods Serum from 1273 subjects (952 noninflammatory and nonneurodegenerative neurological controls and 321 subjects with AD) was analyzed for GFAP using the microfluidic Ella system. Age-dependent serum GFAP reference values were estimated by additive quantile regression analysis and visualized with percentiles and z-scores. Results AD exhibited elevated serum GFAP levels in comparison to control patients (P < 0.0001). This remained the case when the newly generated age-corrected z-scores were applied (P < 0.0001). In the control cohort, a nonlinear elevation of serum GFAP with increasing age was observed (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.62, 95% CI 0.58–0.66, P < 0.0001). In contrast, the AD cohort exhibited a more linear increase (0.16, 95% CI 0.05–0.26, P = 0.004). Age-dependent cut-offs for serum GFAP were determined for different AD age groups. The calculated areas under the curve (AUCs; 0.97) demonstrated excellent diagnostic test performance in the early-onset age group. This effect was less marked in the elderly subjects (AUC 0.72). Conclusions Our novel GFAP z-scores enable the integration and interpretation of serum GFAP levels in clinical practice, moving from the group to individual level. They support both intra- and interindividual interpretation of single GFAP levels in neurological diseases with astrocytic pathology, including an accurate discrimination of AD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Halbgebauer et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: