SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

More than an "inverted-U"? An exploratory study of the association between the catechol-o-methyltransferase gene polymorphism and executive functions in Parkinson's disease.

PLoS One · 2019-03-21

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214146PMID: 30897147

Open accessResearch 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

Executive dysfunction is common in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. The catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) Val158Met polymorphism has been proposed to affect executive functions (EFs) in the prefrontal cortex. The present study attempted to explore the influence of the COMT polymorphism on EFs in patients with PD. Fifty-four PD patients were recruited and underwent neuropsychological assessments for three core EFs. The COMT polymorphism was genotyped using the TaqMan SNP Genotyping Assay. Participants were divided into three study groups: Val homozygotes, heterozygotes, and Met homozygotes. The three COMT genotype groups had significantly different performances in set-shifting [χ2 (2, 54) = 9.717, p = 0.008] and working memory tasks [χ2 (2, 54) = 7.806, p = 0.020]. Post-hoc analyses revealed that PD Val homozygotes performed significantly poorer in the set-shifting task than did either the PD Met homozygotes (z = -2.628, p = 0.009) or PD heterozygotes (z = -2.212, p = 0.027). Our explorative results suggest that the putative level of prefrontal dopamine influenced set-shifting through a "cane-shaped" dopamine level-response relationship. Our results have clinical implications, which may influence PD treatment with dopamine in the future because the optimal dopamine level to maximize EFs may vary based on the clinical course and COMT polymorphism status. Further study recruiting a larger number of participants is needed to confirm our preliminary findings.

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.