SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Ultrasensitive Protein Aggregate Quantification Assays for Neurodegenerative Diseases on the Simoa Platform.

Anal Chem · 2024-12-24

DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.4c04188PMID: 39718440

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Nanoscale aggregates play a key role in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. However, quantifying these aggregates in complex biological samples, such as biofluids and postmortem brain tissue, has been challenging due to their low concentration and small size, necessitating the development of methods with high sensitivity and specificity. Here, we have developed ultrasensitive assays utilizing the Quanterix Simoa platform to detect α-synuclein, β-amyloid and tau aggregates, including those with common posttranslational modifications such as truncation of α-synuclein and AT8 phosphorylation of tau aggregates. All assays had a detection limit in the low pM range. As a part of this work, we developed silica-nanoparticle calibrators, allowing for the quantification of all aggregates. These assays were validated for aggregate and target specificity through denaturation and cross-reactivity experiments. We then applied these assays to brain homogenate samples from Alzheimer's disease and control samples, demonstrating their applicability to postmortem tissue. Lastly, we explored the potential of these assays for blood-based diagnostics by detecting aggregates in serum samples from early Alzheimer's disease patients.

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.