RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Plasma neurofilament light in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia compared to mood and psychotic disorders JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2023.02.19.23286151 DO 10.1101/2023.02.19.23286151 A1 Dhamidhu Eratne A1 Matthew Kang A1 Charles Malpas A1 Steve Simpson-Yap A1 Courtney Lewis A1 Christa Dang A1 Jasleen Grewal A1 Amy Coe A1 Hannah Dobson A1 Michael Keem A1 Wei-Hsuan Chiu A1 Tomas Kalincik A1 Suyi Ooi A1 David Darby A1 Amy Brodtmann A1 Oskar Hansson A1 Shorena Janelidze A1 Kaj Blennow A1 Henrik Zetterberg A1 Adam Walker A1 Olivia Dean A1 Michael Berk A1 Cassandra Wannan A1 Christos Pantelis A1 Samantha Loi A1 Mark Walterfang A1 Samuel Berkovic A1 Alexander Santillo A1 Dennis Velakoulis A1 The MiND Study Group YR 2023 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/02/23/2023.02.19.23286151.abstract AB Objective Blood biomarkers of neuronal injury such as neurofilament light (NfL) are being intensively studied to improve diagnosis and treatment of neurodegenerative disorders, but gaps remain in its ability to assist in distinguishing neurodegenerative from primary psychiatric disorders (PPD) with overlapping clinical presentations that commonly cause diagnostic dilemmas. This study aimed to investigate plasma NfL in a range of PPDs, and the diagnostic utility of plasma NfL in differentiating PPD from behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), a neurodegenerative disorder commonly misdiagnosed initially as PPD. Furthermore, improved understanding of NfL in a diverse range of PPDs, the role and performance of a large normative/reference data sets and models to facilitate precision interpretation of an individual’s levels, and the influence of covariates, will be critical for future research and clinical translation.Methods Plasma NfL was analysed using Single molecule array (Simoa) technology in major depressive disorder (MDD, n=42), bipolar affective disorder (BPAD, n=121), treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS, n=82), and bvFTD (n=22). Comparisons were made between the four clinical cohort groups, and the reference cohort (Control Group 2, n=1926, using generalised additive models for location, scale, and shape (GAMLSS), and age-matched controls (Control Group 1, n=96, using general linear models),Results Large differences were seen between bvFTD (mean NfL 34.9pg/mL) and all PPDs and controls (all <11pg/mL). Plasma NfL distinguished bvFTD from PPD with high accuracy; a 13.3pg/mLcut-off resulted in 86% sensitivity, 88% specificity. GAMLSS models using the large Control Group 2 performed equally to or outperformed models using local controls. An internet-based application was developed to provide individualised z-scores and percentiles based on this reference cohort, which can facilitate precision interpretation of an individual level. Slightly higher plasma NfL levels were found in BPAD, compared to both control groups, and compared to TRS.Conclusions This study adds further evident on the strong diagnostic utility of NfL to distinguish bvFTD from clinically relevant PPDs, and includes the largest cohort of BPAD to date. The finding of higher plasma NfL levels in the largest cohort of BPAD to date should prompt further investigation. Use of large reference cohorts and GAMLSS modelling may have important implications for future research and clinical translation. Studies are underway investigating clinical and diagnostic utility of plasma NfL and the serviceability of the internet-based application for diverse neurodegenerative and primary psychiatric conditions in real-world primary care and specialist clinical settings.View this table:Table 1. Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was supported by was supported by: MACH MRFF RART 2.2, NHMRC (1185180), and Psychiatry and Rehabilitation Division, Region Skane, Sweden. The role of these funding sources was to support research study staff and biosample analyses.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:All studies that contributed cohort data and samples to this study, had ethical approval at the relevant Human Research Ethics Committees, and all participants provided written informed consent prior to participation. This study, which is part of The Markers in Neuropsychiatric Disorders Study (The MiND Study, https://themindstudy.org), was approved by the Melbourne Health Human Research Ethics Committee (MH HREC 2020.142).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript