How often do blood biomarkers flag concussion?

In a study of 323 athletes with concussion, the blood marker GFAP was elevated in only 16.0% within 12 hours. What concussion blood biomarkers show.

In a study of 323 athletes with concussion, the brain protein GFAP was elevated, meaning it had changed reliably from each athlete’s own baseline, in 16.0% at 0 to 12 hours after injury and 19.0% at 12 to 36 hours. In 37% of athletes, no marker measured was elevated at 0 to 12 hours, so a single marker flagged only a subset.

What did the CARE Consortium biomarker study measure?

Croghan et al., Sports Medicine 2026 analysed baseline and post-injury blood samples from 521 participants: 323 athletes with concussion and 198 controls. The panel included GFAP, UCH-L1, tau, neurofilament light, p-tau181 and inflammatory markers.

The study used a reliable change index: the difference between a post-injury and a baseline value, divided by the standard error of that difference in uninjured controls. A marker counted as elevated when the index exceeded 1.65 (the upper 5%). That is a personal-baseline question, not a population-cutoff one, the distinction behind our post on lab ranges versus personal baselines.

At 0 to 12 hours, GFAP was elevated in 16.0% of athletes with concussion and IL-1RA in 16.4%. At 12 to 36 hours GFAP was elevated in 19.0%, and at 36 to 60 hours in 14.6%. The share with no elevated marker was 37%, 45% and 63% across those three windows.

Are blood biomarkers enough to identify concussion on their own?

In this study, not as a single measure. Loss of consciousness or post-traumatic amnesia was associated with elevated GFAP at 12 to 36 hours (45% versus 15%, p = 0.004).

A separate 2026 prospective study followed 68 professional rugby players and collected samples after 23 concussion episodes (Oris et al., Sports Medicine Open 2026). At 36 hours, GFAP alone had 100% specificity but 17% sensitivity. Combining GFAP with S100B raised sensitivity to 52%, with specificity still 100%. With so few episodes, these figures are imprecise.

In the CARE study, elevations appeared in single markers rather than as a global rise across markers, and the authors concluded that any single marker has limited ability to aid concussion diagnosis.

The bottom line

  • In 323 athletes with concussion, GFAP was elevated in 16.0% at 0 to 12 hours and 19.0% at 12 to 36 hours, and 37% had no elevated marker at 0 to 12 hours.
  • In a small rugby study (23 episodes), GFAP alone had 17% sensitivity at 100% specificity, and adding S100B raised sensitivity to 52%.
  • GFAP alone flagged a minority of concussion cases in both studies (16.0% to 19.0% in CARE, 17% in rugby), in different populations and at different sampling times.

Frequently asked questions

Can blood biomarkers identify concussion in athletes?
Not reliably on their own. In the CARE Consortium study of 323 athletes with concussion, GFAP was elevated in 16.0% to 19.0% within 36 hours, and 37% had no elevated marker at 0 to 12 hours. The authors concluded that any single marker has limited ability to aid diagnosis.
What does reliable change mean for a blood biomarker?
In the CARE study it is the difference between a post-injury and a baseline value, divided by the standard error of that difference in uninjured controls. A marker counted as elevated above 1.65 (the upper 5%), so each athlete was compared with their own baseline, not a population cutoff.

Sources

  1. Croghan AE, Churchill R, Brett BL, Huber DL, Harezlak J, Gill JM, Pasquina P, Broglio SP, McAllister TW, McCrea MA, Meier TB, CARE Consortium Investigators, 2026. Reliable Change of Blood-Based Biomarkers Following Acute Sport-Related Concussion: A CARE Consortium Study. Sports Medicine (online first, DOI 10.1007/s40279-026-02479-4).
  2. Oris C, Gaulmin R, Durif J, Goddelière V, Pereira B, Bouvier D, Sapin V, 2026. Evaluation of GFAP, UCH-L1 and S100B Blood Biomarkers for the Management of Sports-Related Concussion in Professional Rugby Players: A Prospective Observational Study. Sports Medicine Open, article 115.

Hydra's editorial team. We write from primary research and cite every study we rely on, with its year and journal. We quantify claims wherever the evidence allows and state plainly where it does not: where a finding rests on a small or single trial, we say so in the text rather than in a footnote.