SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Serum Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 in Patients with De Novo, Drug Naïve Parkinson's Disease: A Meta-Analysis.

PLoS One · 2015-12-11

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144755PMID: 26657015

Open accessMeta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectiveInsulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) is reported to be neuroprotective in the setting of Parkinson's disease (PD), and there is increasing interest in the possible association of serum IGF-1 levels with PD patients, but with conflicting results. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the association of serum IGF-1 levels in de novo, drug naïve PD patients compared with healthy controls.MethodsPubmed, ISI Web of Science, OVID, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases from 1966 to October 2014 were utilized to identify candidate studies using Medical Subjective Headings without language restriction. A random-effects model was chosen, with subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis conducted to reveal underlying heterogeneity among the included studies.ResultsIn this meta-analysis, we found that PD patients had higher serum IGF-1 levels compared with healthy controls (summary mean difference [MD] = 17.75, 95%CI = 6.01, 29.48). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the source of heterogeneity was population differences within the total group. Sensitivity analysis showed that the combined MD was consistent at any time omitting any one study.ConclusionsThe results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that serum IGF-1 levels were significantly higher in de novo, drug-naïve PD patients compared with healthy controls. Nevertheless, additional endeavors are required to further explore the association between serum IGF-1 levels and diagnosis, prognosis and early therapy for PD.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.