ArticleF1000Research2025
A highly sensitive enzyme‑linked immunosorbent assay allows accurate measurements of brain‑derived neurotrophic factor levels in human saliva.
Article in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparison of commercial assays quantifying mature brain-derived neurotrophic factor (mBDNF) and its precursor (pro-BDNF) in human serum.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hitherto, BDNF levels in humans have been primarily measured in serum and/or plasma where these levels are readily measurable, but primarily reflect the content of BDNF in blood platelets. By contrast, previous attempts to measure BDNF levels in readily accessible human body fluids such as saliva have been complicated by a lack of sensitivity and/or specificity of BDNF ELISAs (see Discussion). Recently, the suitability of a highly sensitive BDNF ELISA assay was validated using mouse plasma and serum where conventional BDNF ELISA fail to detect BDNF. In this report, we demonstrate that BDNF levels in human saliva are extremely low, in the low pg/mL range, yet detectable in all saliva samples tested. Methods: Saliva samples were collected from healthy volunteers by a passive drool method. All samples were aliquoted and immediately frozen to keep at -80°C until use. At the time of use, the samples were thawed, centrifuged to remove any remaining particles and BDNF measurement conducted by using a previously validated BDNF ELISA assay (see below). Recombinant mature BDNF was used as a reference. Results: The intra-assay variability was in the range of CV = 1.8 to 4.9%. Saliva samples could be kept frozen at -80°C for 2 months until use for measurements, but more than 4 freeze and thaw cycles caused BDNF losses presumably due to structural change of the antigen. The measurements were not affected by the method of collection provided the samples were diluted at least 2-fold. Conclusions: The results indicate that human saliva samples collected in a non-invasive fashion can be used as a source of material to try and correlate BDNF levels with human conditions of interest. These results also confirm those of an independent study published recently using the same BDNF ELISA kit to measure BDNF levels in human saliva samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.