SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

RT-QuIC and Related Assays for Detecting and Quantifying Prion-like Pathological Seeds of α-Synuclein.

Biomolecules · 2022-04-14

DOI: 10.3390/biom12040576PMID: 35454165

Open accessResearch Support, N.I.H., Intramural; review-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Various disease-associated forms or strains of α-synuclein (αSynD) can spread and accumulate in a prion-like fashion during synucleinopathies such as Parkinson's disease (PD), Lewy body dementia (DLB), and multiple system atrophy (MSA). This capacity for self-propagation has enabled the development of seed amplification assays (SAAs) that can detect αSynD in clinical samples. Notably, α-synuclein real-time quaking-induced conversion (RT-QuIC) and protein misfolding cyclic amplification (PMCA) assays have evolved as ultrasensitive, specific, and relatively practical methods for detecting αSynD in a variety of biospecimens including brain tissue, CSF, skin, and olfactory mucosa from synucleinopathy patients. However, αSyn SAAs still lack concordance in detecting MSA and familial forms of PD/DLB, and the assay parameters show poor correlations with various clinical measures. End-point dilution analysis in αSyn RT-QuIC assays allows for the quantitation of relative amounts of αSynD seeding activity that may correlate moderately with clinical measures and levels of other biomarkers. Herein, we review recent advancements in α-synuclein SAAs for detecting αSynD and describe in detail the modified Spearman-Karber quantification algorithm used with end-point dilutions.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.