SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Plasma NfL and GFAP in the preclinical stages of neurodegenerative diseases: insights from the UK Biobank.

J Neurol · 2025-11-09

DOI: 10.1007/s00415-025-13498-yPMID: 41206819

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundPlasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are promising blood-based biomarkers of neuroaxonal injury and astrocytic activation, relevant in neurodegeneration. We investigated their pre-diagnostic profiles across common neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease (PD), atypical parkinsonian disorders (APD), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).MethodsForty-eight thousand five hundred and twenty-four UK Biobank participants with baseline plasma proteomic data for NfL and GFAP were included. Incident diagnoses of PD, APD, AD, and ALS were identified through ICD-10-coded health records, after careful inclusion/exclusion procedures. Baseline plasma NfL and GFAP concentrations were standardized as z-scores adjusted for relevant covariates. The hazard ratio (HR) for incident neurodegenerative diseases was estimated using Cox regression models adjusted for demographic, clinical, socioeconomic and genetic factors.ResultsThe final sample included 1196 cases (505 PD, 26 APD, 476 AD, 189 ALS) and 44,107 control subjects. In Cox regression models, NfL was associated with higher risk of incident ALS (HR 1.69; 95% CI, 1.58-1.80, p ConclusionPlasma NfL and GFAP showed distinct pre-diagnostic profiles. NfL was associated with incident diagnosis of several neurodegenerative diseases, while GFAP was specific to AD, reinforcing its role in dementia. These results may help optimize the identification of target populations at risk of neurodegenerative diseases for future neuroprotective treatments.

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.