TABLE 3.

Discrimination accuracy (ROC analyses) of plasma and CSF tau immunoassays in the BIODEGMAR cohort

Tau biomarkers AUC (95% CI)	Plasma	CSF	P-valuea
ADx
p-tau181	0.94 (0.91–0.97)a,b,c,d,e	0.96 (0.93–0.98)o,p,q,r	0.50
p-tau231	0.66 (0.58–0.74)d,f,g,h,i,j	0.93 (0.88–0.97)o,s,t	<0.001
Janssen
p-tau217	0.96 (0.93–0.99)c,d,e,j,k	0.98 (0.96–1.00)q,u,v,w,x	0.23
Lilly
p-tau181	0.91 (0.86–0.96)c,e,l	0.95 (0.91–0.98)q,s,v	0.23
p-tau217	0.94 (0.90–0.98)c,d,e	0.98 (0.96–1.00)q,v,x,y	0.14
t-tau	0.73 (0.65–0.81)j	0.85 (0.79–0.90)r,w,z	0.041
Quanterix
p-tau181	0.80 (0.73–0.87)m	0.96 (0.93–0.99)r	<0.001
UGot (in house)
p-tau181	0.80 (0.73–0.87)n	0.94 (0.90–0.97)	<0.001
p-tau231	0.88 (0.83–0.93)	0.91 (0.87–0.95)	0.33
Significant differences between plasma tau immunoassays:		Significant differences between CSF tau immunoassays:
aP < 0.001 vs. Plasma p-tau231 (ADx)		oP < 0.05 vs CSF p-tau217 (Janssen)
bP < 0.05 vs. plasma p-tau217 (Jansen)		pP < 0.05 vs CSF p-tau217 (Lilly)
cP < 0.001 vs. plasma t-tau (Lilly)		qP < 0.001 vs CSF t-tau (Lilly)
dP < 0.001 vs. plasma p-tau181 (Quanterix)		rP < 0.05 vs CSF p-tau231 (UGot)
eP < 0.001 vs. plasma p-tau181 (UGot)		sP < 0.01 vs CSF p-tau217 (Lilly)
fP < 0.001 vs. plasma p-tau217 (Jansen)		tP < 0.01 vs CSF t-tau (Lilly)
gP < 0.001 vs. plasma p-tau181 (Lilly)		u P < 0.01 vs CSF p-tau181 (Lilly)
hP < 0.001 vs. plasma p-tau 217 (Lilly)		v P < 0.05 vs CSF p-tau181 (Quanterix)
iP < 0.01 vs. plasma p-tau181 (UGot)		wP < 0.001 vs CSF p-tau181 (UGot)
jP < 0.001 vs. plasma p-tau231 (UGot)		xP < 0.001 vs CSF p-tau231 (UGot)
kP < 0.05 vs. plasma p-tau181 (Lilly)		yP < 0.01 vs CSF p-tau181 (UGot)
lP < .01 vs. plasma p-tau181 (Quanterix)		z P < 0.001 vs CSF p-tau181 (Quanterix)
mP < 0.01 vs. plasma p-tau231 (UGot)
nP < .005 vs. plasma p-tau231 (UGot)

^aP-value of the comparison between the AUC of plasma and CSF of the same immunoassay (DeLong test).

We also assessed the AUCs differences (DeLong test) between the plasma tau immunoassays or CSF tau immunoassays.