SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The Potential of cfDNA as Biomarker: Opportunities and Challenges for Neurodegenerative Diseases.

J Mol Neurosci · 2025-03-13

DOI: 10.1007/s12031-025-02317-8PMID: 40080233

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), multiple sclerosis (MS), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), are characterized by the progressive and gradual degeneration of neurons. The prevalence and rates of these disorders rise significantly with age. As life spans continue to increase in many countries, the number of cases is expected to grow in the foreseeable future. Early and precise diagnosis, along with appropriate surveillance, continues to pose a challenge. The high heterogeneity of neurodegenerative diseases calls for more accurate and definitive biomarkers to improve clinical therapy. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA), including fragmented DNA released into bodily fluids via apoptosis, necrosis, or active secretion, has emerged as a promising non-invasive diagnostic tool for various disorders including neurodegenerative diseases. cfDNA can serve as an indicator of ongoing cellular damage and mortality, including neuronal loss, and may provide valuable insights into disease processes, progression, and therapeutic responses. This review will first cover the key aspects of cfDNA and then examine recent advances in its potential use as a biomarker for neurodegenerative disorders.

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.