It would seem difficult to put up worse numbers than experimental Alzheimer’s drugs, 99 percent of which have failed in clinical trials since 2002. But another corner of Alzheimer’s research has managed it: blood tests to either diagnose the disease in asymptomatic patients or predict which healthy people will develop it years in the future. Although you wouldn’t know it from frequent headlines proclaiming, “Blood test can predict Alzheimer’s,” the percentage of tests that looked promising in a (usually small) study but eventually fell flat is … 100 percent.

Despite the two dozen such failures, scientists aren’t giving up. On Wednesday, researchers in Europe and Australia reported in the journal Science Advances that blood levels of 10 proteins did a pretty good job of identifying which cognitively unimpaired people had high enough brain levels of beta-amyloid, a marker of the disease, to be classified as having preclinical (meaning, without symptoms) Alzheimer’s. The test isn’t accurate enough to make diagnoses as part of medical care, its creators say, but if it’s validated in additional studies, it could give drug companies a desperately needed tool: a cheap, easy way to identify preclinical Alzheimer’s.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!


What is it?

STAT Plus is a premium subscription that delivers daily market-moving biopharma coverage and in-depth science reporting from a team with decades of industry experience.

What's included?

  • Authoritative biopharma coverage and analysis, interviews with industry pioneers, policy analysis, and first looks at cutting edge laboratories and early stage research
  • Subscriber-only networking events and panel discussions across the country
  • Monthly subscriber-only live chats with our reporters and experts in the field
  • Discounted tickets to industry events and early-bird access to industry reports

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • Bravo! It’s so refreshing to have the statistical aspects of the test, including PPV, NPV, and sample size and makeup limitations, clearly explained. The world would be a better place if every article about medical research “breakthroughs” followed this example. Thank you!

Sign up for our Daily Recap newsletter

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy