Memory problems are scary, and getting clear answers often takes a long time. For years, the dependable ways to check patients for Alzheimer’s disease have been PET scans or spinal taps, no blood tests involved.
Both can be effective. Both can also be expensive, invasive, or hard to get. That leaves many people waiting, worrying, and bouncing between appointments.
A new blood test aims to change that first step in care. It looks for the same biological signals that define Alzheimer’s disease and turns them into a single score – how likely it is that Alzheimer’s biology is present.
This breakthrough gives doctors a faster, simpler way to decide what should happen next.
Alzheimer’s blood test is huge
Most people with early memory concerns start in primary care. Those clinics are busy and don’t have advanced imaging on hand.
A reliable blood test would help sort patients sooner. Some could be referred to a specialist right away.
Others could be monitored while doctors check for sleep issues, depression, thyroid problems, medication effects, or other common causes of cognitive symptoms.
That kind of triage saves time, cuts costs, and reduces unnecessary procedures. It also helps families move from uncertainty to a plan. Not months from now, but much sooner.
How it works
Alzheimer’s has two key features in the brain: abnormal amyloid and tau proteins. The new blood test examines a form of tau called p-tau217 and the ratio of two amyloid fragments: Aβ42 to Aβ40.
Together, these numbers capture the core biology doctors care about. The result is a probability score that indicates how closely a person’s blood pattern matches Alzheimer’s changes.
Using both markers strengthens the signal. P-tau217 tracks Alzheimer’s-type changes, and the amyloid ratio helps keep false positives in check.
When combined, the result becomes clearer – either likely Alzheimer’s biology or not.
Testing blood for Alzheimer’s anywhere
To see how the test would perform in everyday practice – not just in labs – researchers enrolled more than a thousand people in Sweden who came in with memory or thinking concerns.
Some were evaluated in primary care. Others were seen in specialty memory clinics. Everyone received the usual clinical evaluations provided in those settings.
Blood samples were handled the way a hospital lab would: in batches, on a set schedule. That detail matters because it tests reliability under normal conditions, not just under perfect, hands-on supervision.
Comparing test methods
In straightforward terms, the blood test matched more definitive measures of Alzheimer’s biology approximately nine times out of ten. Its performance held up in both primary care and specialty clinics, which is exactly where it needs to work.
“Primary care doctors’ accuracy in identifying Alzheimer’s disease was 61 percent, while specialist physicians were correct 73 percent of the time,” explained Lund University neurologist Sebastian Palmqvist.
“This underscores the lack of good, cost-effective diagnostic tools, particularly in primary care, and indicates the potential improvement in diagnosis with the adoption of this blood test in healthcare settings.”
Fixed thresholds were used
The team set the Alzheimer’s blood test thresholds ahead of time and kept them fixed. That’s how a real diagnostic would be used in practice.
No tuning after reviewing the results. No custom cutoffs for each clinic. A fixed cutoff increases the chance that the same test will work the same way in other places.
That approach adds confidence for doctors who need predictable tools. Consistency across settings is the difference between a research project and something a health system can actually roll out.
When standard evaluations were used alone, clinicians did well. With blood test information added, decisions became more precise.
A negative result in someone with mild, vague memory complaints gives doctors support to forgo invasive tests and monitor for changes over time.
As symptoms progress to mild cognitive impairment or dementia, a positive result supports referrals for confirmatory testing and, when appropriate, treatments that target Alzheimer’s biology.
The blood test does not replace PET scans or spinal fluid analysis. It helps focus those tools where they are most useful.
What the public should know
This isn’t a casual screening for people without symptoms. It’s a first-line tool when memory concerns are real and doctors need to decide what to do next.
Used appropriately, it can shorten the path to answers for those who need a deeper look and spare others from procedures they don’t need.
It also fits into normal workflows. A routine draw, a lab run on schedule, and a clear, interpretable score. That kind of practicality is what busy clinics need to act quickly and confidently.
“The test is already available in the USA and is likely to become available in many other countries soon,” says senior researcher Oskar Hansson, a neurologist at Lund University.
“Initially, it will mainly be used in specialist memory clinics, and it may take approximately one to two years to implement guidelines and training in primary care.”
As availability grows, expect specialist clinics to lead the way. Primary care will follow as training, protocols, and reimbursement catch up. That staged rollout is typical when new diagnostics enter real-world care.
What’s next for Alzheimer’s blood tests
To sum it all up, this new blood test that reads the biology of Alzheimer’s gives primary care doctors something they’ve never really had: a quick, evidence-based signal that is correct 90 percent of the time to guide next steps.
It won’t cure the disease. It will bring clearer direction, earlier in the process, for the people who need it most.
For families, that means fewer dead ends and faster referrals when appropriate. For clinicians, it means a practical tool that strengthens decisions.
For health systems, it means aiming advanced testing where it can make the biggest difference. That’s progress measured not just in lab values, but in how care actually feels – faster, calmer, and more to the point.
The full study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
—–
Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.
Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.
—–