Editorial: Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in psychiatric and neurological disorders

Editorial on the Research Topic
Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in psychiatric and neurological disorders

Psychiatric and neurological disorders significantly contribute to morbidity, mortality, and disability (1, 2). These conditions present challenges in clinical practice due to their broad symptom spectrum and limited objective, specific diagnostic and follow-up tools, particularly in psychiatry.

To address this critical need, biomarker studies have emerged as a promising avenue for improving diagnostic, prognostic, and treatment approaches. The FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group defines biomarkers as “a characteristic that is measured as an indicator of normal biological processes, pathogenic processes, or responses to an exposure or intervention” (3). Research exploring biomarkers includes neuroimaging, genetic, and molecular markers.

As psychiatric and neurological disorders primarily affect the brain, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is the biofluid of choice for biomarker measurement due to its free exchange of molecules with the brain. However, most studies traditionally focus on peripheral blood due to practical considerations.

The goal of this Research Topic was to compile CSF studies advancing understanding of psychiatric and neurological disorders and informing new treatments. Below, we briefly overview each study’s key findings and highlight future directions.

Wang et al. investigated the relationship between CSF levels of total ferritin, ferritin light chain, and ferritin heavy chain and depressive symptoms in 163 cognitively unimpaired participants and 380 individuals with mild cognitive impairment from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study. Three distinct trajectories of depressive symptoms were identified using Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (GDS-15) scores: (1) consistently low, (2) moderately increasing, and (3) rapidly increasing. They found that lower total CSF ferritin levels were associated with a rapidly increasing symptom trajectory. These findings are consistent with previous studies (4) and underscore the importance of considering iron metabolism in depression pathophysiology and its potential as a prognostic biomarker.

Piel et al. in a retrospective study investigating delirium biomarkers, analyzed CSF and blood samples from 16 patients with delirium, 33 patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and 22 age-matched individuals without AD. Biomarkers related to neuroaxonal damage (NFL, UCHL-1, and tau protein) and neuroinflammation (GFAP) were measured in serum, while sTREM2 (neuroinflammation), SNAP-25, and NPTX2 (synaptic dysfunction) were measured in CSF. The authors found that serum NFL was elevated in patients with delirium compared to the other two groups. They also observed elevated tau protein in delirium patients compared to non-AD controls, suggesting that tau elevations are not exclusively indicative of dementia. In CSF, no significant findings were observed in delirium patients; however, elevated SNAP-25 levels were found in AD participants compared to non-AD controls, congruent with previous reports (5).

In another retrospective study, Seeliger et al. investigated blood-CSF barrier dysfunction in 419 subjects with immune-mediated neuropathies by comparing total CSF protein values to the albumin quotient (Qalb), calculated as the ratio of CSF albumin/serum albumin. They identified a significant divergence between CSF total protein and Qalb in nearly 9% of cases among patients with immune-mediated neuropathies. Notably, they observed that 2.3% of patients had a normal CSF total protein value despite an elevated Qalb, suggesting blood-CSF barrier dysfunction even in the presence of normal CSF total protein levels. These results highlight the importance of incorporating Qalb in the assessment of blood-CSF barrier dysfunction in immune-mediated neuropathies, rather than relying solely on CSF total protein values.

Finally, Hansen et al. measured several CSF biomarkers in 20 individuals with possible psychiatric autoimmune encephalitis (pAE), 7 individuals with definite pAE, and 27 individuals with AD. They found that P-tau 181 and total tau protein were significantly increased in individuals with AD and possible pAE, but not in those with definite pAE. The authors concluded that neuroaxonal cell damage may occur in possible but not in definite pAE and speculated that tau pathology in pAE might be a non-specific phenomenon occurring in the presence of specific antibody subclasses (such as IgLON5, glycine, titin, and recoverin autoantibodies) and non-specific neuropil autoantibodies. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the modest sample size.

This Research Topic offers insights into biological abnormalities in depression, delirium, immune-mediated neuropathies, and autoimmune encephalitis, with all studies reporting case-control differences or symptom severity associations. Replication studies are needed to generalize findings across broader patient populations and diverse geographical contexts. Multisite studies, like those by in Germany and Wang et al. using ADNI data, are essential for larger samples, increasing power and detecting meaningful clinical differences.

Future studies need mechanistic designs integrating CSF biomarkers with multimodal data: neuroimaging, genomics, proteomics, detailed clinical phenotyping. This approach is essential to characterize and disentangle biomarker alterations, identifying if they reflect primary disease mechanisms, downstream neurodegeneration/inflammation consequences, or state-related effects. Harmonized protocols and the application of biology and machine-learning systems could identify biomarker signatures, accelerating translation toward informed diagnostics and targeted interventions.

A common limitation in CSF research is its cross-sectional nature, partly due to the invasiveness of lumbar puncture that makes patients less inclined to participate in follow-up procedures. However, initiatives like ADNI (6) and the Psychiatric Biomarkers Network (PBN) (7) show feasibility for longitudinal studies with repeated lumbar punctures, especially with stakeholder engagement (8). Longitudinal designs are crucial for understanding disease mechanisms, determining causality, and assessing biomarker changes in relation to illness stages, symptomatology, or treatment response. Experimental/quasi-experimental approaches like treatment-response studies or Mendelian randomization may further clarify causal pathways.

Lastly, few submissions addressed CSF biomarker studies in common psychiatric disorders. Fluid biomarkers are radically transforming clinical development and treatment of neurodegenerative conditions like Alzheimer’s and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (9). A badly needed revolution in psychiatry requires similar efforts, leveraging lessons from neurological biomarkers and new tools for proteomics and data analysis to accelerate timelines.

In conclusion, this Research Topic underscores both the relevance and the untapped potential of the evolving field of CSF biomarker research in psychiatric and neurological disorders. It also teaches us what the shortcomings in the common designs are. Mechanistic, longitudinal and multimodal studies may in the future deepen our understanding of these pathologies and may ultimately translate into tangible benefits for patients through the development of precision diagnostics and targeted therapeutics.

Author contributions

KG-B: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JL: Writing – review & editing. MJ: Writing – review & editing. JG: Writing – review & editing.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author JG declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. This editorial was written by the authors. Generative AI, specifically GPT 4 Omni accessed through Northwell AI Hub, was utilized for refining language, checking grammar, spelling, and punctuation, and optimizing sentence structure for clarity and conciseness. The AI did not contribute to the conceptualization, argumentation, critical analysis, or intellectual content of the editorial. All ideas, arguments, and conclusions presented are original to, and solely the responsibility of the authors.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. Chesney E, Goodwin GM, and Fazel S. Risks of all-cause and suicide mortality in mental disorders: a meta-review. World Psychiatry. (2014) 13:153–60. doi: 10.1002/wps.20128

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Feigin VL, Nichols E, Alam T, Bannick MS, Beghi E, Blake N, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. (2019) 18:459–80. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30499-X

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Biomarker Working Group F-N. BEST (Biomarkers, endpoints, and other tools) resource. In: Spring S, editor. BEST (Biomarkers, endpoints, and other tools) resource. FDA-NIH, Silver Spring (MD (2016).

Google Scholar

4. Hidese S, Saito K, Asano S, and Kunugi H. Association between iron-deficiency anemia and depression: A web-based Japanese investigation. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. (2018) 72:513–21. doi: 10.1111/pcn.12656

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Olsson B, Lautner R, Andreasson U, Öhrfelt A, Portelius E, Bjerke M, et al. CSF and blood biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. (2016) 15:673–84. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00070-3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Shaw LM, Korecka M, Lee EB, Cousins KAQ, Vanderstichele H, Schindler S, et al. Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. ADNI Biomarker Core: A review of progress since 2004 and future challenges. (2025).

Google Scholar

7. Psychiatric Biomarkers Network. Available online at: https://psychiatricbiomarkers.org/ (Accessed January 30, 2026).

Google Scholar

8. Stafford E, Jakob S, Gur RE, Corcoran CM, and Bearden CE. Securing direct stakeholder feedback to inform clinical research in serious mental illness: Results of a patient and family perspectives survey. Psychiatry Res. (2023) 330:115574. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2023.115574

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Mullard A. NfL makes regulatory debut as neurodegenerative disease biomarker. Nat Rev Drug Discov. (2023) 22:431–4. doi: 10.1038/d41573-023-00083-z

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar