A Comparative Study of Plasma Biomarkers of Neurodegeneration in Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca mulatta) and Baboons (Papio anubis).

Authors

Michele M Mulholland, Elizabeth R Magden, Henrieta Scholtzova, William D Hopkins

Published in

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology. Jul 08, 2026. Epub Jul 08, 2026.

Abstract

Many nonhuman primate species recapitulate the neuropathological features of sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD) to varying degrees. As with humans, the assessment of AD-related pathology in nonhuman primates has historically relied on the use of postmortem brain tissues. In vivo alternatives, such as PET imaging tracers and fluid biomarkers, have been developed for use in humans but require further validation in nonhuman primates before replacing postmortem analyses. Here we employed the Nucleic Acid-Linked Immuno-Sandwich Assay (NULISA^™) CNS Disease panel to compare age-related changes in plasma biomarkers in two nonhuman primate species (rhesus monkeys and baboons). In addition, we examined whether amyloid and tau biomarkers were associated with brain atrophy, as measured by gray matter volume. We found significant associations between age and multiple biomarkers of neurodegeneration for both species, as well as significant differences in the patterns of these associations between the two species. For the phosphorylated tau measures, though rhesus monkeys had higher values, baboons showed significant and stronger associations with age. By contrast, rhesus monkeys exhibited an earlier age-related decline in Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio than baboons. Finally, in both species, lower Aβ42/Aβ40 ratios were associated with lower gray matter volumes. This is the first systematic comparative study of age-related changes in neurodegeneration biomarkers in two closely related nonhuman primates using comparable age ranges and sample sizes, and the same multiplex assay. Future studies should examine longitudinal changes in these biomarkers as well as validate the plasma findings using cerebral spinal fluid.

PMID:
42465306
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 15 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.