brandonb
6 hours ago
This Alzheimer's blood test, PrecivityAD2, is based on the p-tau217 biomarker.
In one recent study, people very high p-tau217 had a 38% chance of progressing to cognitive impairment within 5 years vs 12% for those with low levels. The current tests cost about $200-300, so they're not unreasonable as a screening test. PrecivityAD2 looks to be priced around $1,400-$1,500 so at that price, this specific test likely only makes sense for people with established disease.
vintermann
6 hours ago
That sounds pretty expensive for me for a test with that low accuracy, especially when there's not much you can do different if it comes back high vs. coming back low.
brandonb
5 hours ago
Agreed that we can't do as much as we'd like. There are some general health things that are believed to prevent cognitive decline, such as managing cholesterol, HbA1c, blood pressure, sleep apnea, etc. One phrase I've heard is that cholesterol at age 50 predicts cognitive health at age 70.
But hopefully we'll start to have more options and wider approvals for things like anti-amyloid drugs.
xattt
2 hours ago
> anti-amyloid drugs
Isn’t the viewpoint in the last decade that amyloid plaques are likely a finding rather than the underlying cause of Alzheimer’s Disease?
btilly
2 hours ago
That's the viewpoint of everyone sensible outside of Alzheimer's research.
Those in it are still throwing billions per year at the idea.
Meanwhile, back in reality, no amyloid-beta drug has had any clinical effect in humans, other than reducing the plaques. But both the shingles and RSV vaccines are proven to reduce Alzheimer's risk.
isolli
an hour ago
Which did not stop the FDA from approving a useless anti-amyloid drug, leading to the resignation of several experts, one of whom called it "probably the worst drug approval decision in recent U.S. history" in his resignation letter. [0]
I can't think of a good reason why this happened.
[0] https://www.npr.org/2021/06/11/1005567149/3-experts-have-res...
astura
an hour ago
You can do all that without an expensive blood test.
pokot0
4 hours ago
if cholesterol predicted future cognitive health we wouldn’t need dedicated tests, do we?
malfist
2 hours ago
The forecast predicts rain, I'm still going to look outside before I throw on a raincoat
simmerup
5 hours ago
I guess you can start spending your retirement money faster
ButlerianJihad
2 hours ago
The sad fact is that some people really should. Many people find it far easier to be or become indigent and fall on Medicaid services. If you do not qualify for Medicaid, then there is a real possibility that your insurance carrier will help put you or your caregivers into massive debt for a long-term illness like this.
If you do go into long-term care, Medicaid will probably seize your assets to help pay for everything. For example, a house in your name. They'll use those to pay back what they paid for your care.
So if you're gonna get sick and you're gonna be a burden in your old age, best to plan for leaving this world the way you came in: naked and penniless.
Pawenniag
2 hours ago
That price difference seems like the key point. A $200 test can plausibly be used to decide who should get further workup; a $1500 test is already competing with the cost of the workup itself
criddell
39 minutes ago
From a medical perspective, what's the point of the initial test or the workup though? Is it just to check a box? If it comes back positive you will be told to exercise, eat well, take sleep seriously, and manage cholesterol. If it comes back negative you will be told to do the same things.
I've seen up close what dying with these kinds of illnesses look like. For me, a positive test would be a sign that it may be time to say my goodbyes and plan my exit.
FL33TW00D
4 hours ago
Seems like a no brainer for hetero/homozygous APOE4 folks.
vogu66
5 hours ago
do you have the reference for that one? I'd be interested in reading it.
brandonb
5 hours ago
Sure! The study is from July 2026: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2851720
vogu66
2 hours ago
thanks!