Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

medicalxpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 175 posts

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#31

Post by monster_truck »

refurb wrote: post #22

94.5% is actually terrible. If you have a prevalence of 10 in 1000, how do the numbers shake out? Well, you test all 1,000. If we assume a 95% accuracy for false-positive and false negatives? Of the 990 that you test that don't have the disease, the test will false state 50 do have the disease. Yikes! And of the 10 that do have the disease? You'll miss 1 of them.

I got bad news about the specificity for most things this serious. Think the only one we absolutely nail is infectious disease detection.

Spoilers: It's anywhere between 1-15 and 5-30% for false positives and 1-15/5-40 for false negatives. That's imaging, biomarkers, cancer screenings, etc

Like, where do you think the concept of "second opinions" came from? Whimsy? Lets go ask a second doctor if I actually have cancer, it'll be fun!

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#32

Post by jcranmer »

melling wrote: post #6
janalsncm wrote: post #4

For a disease which (to my knowledge) can’t be slowed down or reversed, I think it’s a fair question why we would want to detect Alzheimer’s. Maybe there are other reasons, but my suspicion is that we will be able to, and an easy detection method significantly widens the pool of subjects to study later on. If it turns out that driving a Prius on Tuesdays slows down Alzheimer’s, a larger pool of subjects would allow u…

This again? The test is optional. Feel free to skip it. Tell 50 million people they’re likely to have Alzheimer’s then tell them where to donate towards a cure, or treatments to slow it by a decade.

> Tell 50 million people they’re likely to have Alzheimer’s then tell them where to donate towards a cure, or treatments to slow it by a decade.

Pharmaceutical companies have spent something like $50 billion on developing Alzheimer's drugs with, well, the most furtive of straw-grasping to show for it. It's probably the most expensive single disease target (especially as things like cancer are families of diseases)... the failure to have good results isn't for lack of money, and merely throwing more money at it is unlikely to actually make progress towards meaningful treatments.

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#33

Post by redox99 »

janalsncm wrote: post #4

For a disease which (to my knowledge) can’t be slowed down or reversed, I think it’s a fair question why we would want to detect Alzheimer’s. Maybe there are other reasons, but my suspicion is that we will be able to, and an easy detection method significantly widens the pool of subjects to study later on. If it turns out that driving a Prius on Tuesdays slows down Alzheimer’s, a larger pool of subjects would allow u…

> For a disease which (to my knowledge) can’t be slowed down or reversed

There's Lecanemab and Donanemab. The effects are modest however.

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#34

Post by hattmall »

irjustin wrote: post #19
janalsncm wrote: post #4

For a disease which (to my knowledge) can’t be slowed down or reversed, I think it’s a fair question why we would want to detect Alzheimer’s. Maybe there are other reasons, but my suspicion is that we will be able to, and an easy detection method significantly widens the pool of subjects to study later on. If it turns out that driving a Prius on Tuesdays slows down Alzheimer’s, a larger pool of subjects would allow u…

> why we would want to detect Alzheimer’s At a personal level, I've been through this with my grandfather. I want to know. My family wants to know. I want to prepare because there are things I want to do today that I know I won't be able to do in the future. In many ways, it's just like many terminal cancer diagnoses. You're going to lose that person, but you have some time.

But it is a wildly variated, almost meaningless diagnosis. 3 of my 4 grandparents got Alzheimer's diagnosis as well as my mom and mother-in-law. The variation of progression and symptoms is so wide that it really seems like a catch-all. One grandmother was fine until about 72 and in 2 years forgot who people were and 4 years had lost all executive function and passed away. The other one was diagnosed in her early 80s and lived to be 96 with no major progression, like slightly more repeating, but never forgetting people or not knowing how to talk etc. Similar dichotomy between my mother and mother-in-law but with considerably different presentations of symptoms.

It's a weird disease and IMO not even really a disease it's a bunch of different causes of cognitive impairment under one umbrella but shouldn't be separated out much further to find actual causes and treatments.

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#35

Post by gabll »

suprgeek wrote: post #24

Since the recent discoveries about Shingles Vaccine delaying dementia https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/link-between-shingles-vaccine-... One of interesting checks in this study might be to check when (if) any of the participants had taken this vax and what the impact might be on an Alzimer's diagnosis.

Purely anecdotal, but I witnessed a person starting to experience a severe cognitive decline right after the two doses of the Shingles Vaccine. It can surely be a coincidence, but I was very surprised when I read about this study.

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#36

Post by hattmall »

jcranmer wrote: post #32
melling wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This again? The test is optional. Feel free to skip it. Tell 50 million people they’re likely to have Alzheimer’s then tell them where to donate towards a cure, or treatments to slow it by a decade.

> Tell 50 million people they’re likely to have Alzheimer’s then tell them where to donate towards a cure, or treatments to slow it by a decade. Pharmaceutical companies have spent something like $50 billion on developing Alzheimer's drugs with, well, the most furtive of straw-grasping to show for it. It's probably the most expensive single disease target (especially as things like cancer are families of diseases)...…

It just seems really obvious to me that it's not one disease. One problem with the research is that there is SO much money. It's corrupting. There's a whole thing about the plaque cartel and if you aren't testing around a possibly flawed concept the availability of funds is much lower.

I just feel the thinking is off, it's like we are trying to treat cuts by removing scabs and scar tissue. We really need deep investigation on the sources, which I feel in many cases are industrial chemicals and how some people's body / immune system respond to them.

One of the most compelling studies I saw was how distance from a Golf Course predicted neurodegenerative diseases, based on their use of certain pesticides.

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#37

Post by aix1 »

maybelsyrup wrote: post #30
Baeocystin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know two people who have been taking the new monoclonal antibody treatment for it. One who was a bit further along when she started, and did not show any significant improvement. The one who started while she was still in the early stages has completely arrested her descent. She hasn't recovered much of what she already lost, but she's still able to live independently and enjoy life, and her mental acuity scores ar…

Wait what treatment is this?

Probably either lecanemab (older) or donanemab (newer).

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#38

Post by ulfw »

Baeocystin wrote: post #14
janalsncm wrote: post #4

For a disease which (to my knowledge) can’t be slowed down or reversed, I think it’s a fair question why we would want to detect Alzheimer’s. Maybe there are other reasons, but my suspicion is that we will be able to, and an easy detection method significantly widens the pool of subjects to study later on. If it turns out that driving a Prius on Tuesdays slows down Alzheimer’s, a larger pool of subjects would allow u…

I know two people who have been taking the new monoclonal antibody treatment for it. One who was a bit further along when she started, and did not show any significant improvement. The one who started while she was still in the early stages has completely arrested her descent. She hasn't recovered much of what she already lost, but she's still able to live independently and enjoy life, and her mental acuity scores ar…

How do you know it's completely arrested?

Best these type of drugs can do is give you a few months extra window (say 4-6 months). They're not a cure. Sadly.

Re: Blood test boosts Alzheimer's diagnosis accuracy to 94.5%, clinical study shows

#40

Post by cik »

gabll wrote: post #35
suprgeek wrote: post #24

Since the recent discoveries about Shingles Vaccine delaying dementia https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/link-between-shingles-vaccine-... One of interesting checks in this study might be to check when (if) any of the participants had taken this vax and what the impact might be on an Alzimer's diagnosis.

Purely anecdotal, but I witnessed a person starting to experience a severe cognitive decline right after the two doses of the Shingles Vaccine. It can surely be a coincidence, but I was very surprised when I read about this study.

This anecdote is just that - a one off. We can use experiments, and papers to learn more, and should.
Post reply on HN