NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundPredicting prognosis in Parkinson's disease (PD) has important implications for individual prognostication and clinical trials design and targeting novel treatments. Blood biomarkers could help in this endeavor.MethodsWe identified 4 blood biomarkers that might predict prognosis: apolipoprotein A1, C-reactive protein, uric acid and vitamin D. These biomarkers were measured in baseline serum from 624 Parkinson's disease subjects (median disease duration, 1.0 years; interquartile range, 0.5-2.0) from the Oxford Discovery prospective cohort. We compared these biomarkers against PD subtypes derived from clinical features in the baseline cohort using data-driven approaches. We used multilevel models with MDS-UPDRS parts I, II, and III and Montreal Cognitive Assessment as outcomes to test whether the biomarkers predicted subsequent progression in motor and nonmotor domains. We compared the biomarkers against age of PD onset and age at diagnosis. The q value, a false-discovery rate alternative to P values, was calculated as an adjustment for multiple comparisons.ResultsApolipoprotein A1 and C-reactive protein levels differed across our PD subtypes, with severe motor disease phenotype, poor psychological well-being, and poor sleep subtype having reduced apolipoprotein A1 and higher C-reactive protein levels. Reduced apolipoprotein A1, higher C-reactive protein, and reduced vitamin D were associated with worse baseline activities of daily living (MDS-UPDRS II).ConclusionBaseline clinical subtyping identified a pro-inflammatory biomarker profile significantly associated with a severe motor/nonmotor disease phenotype, lending biological validity to subtyping approaches. No blood biomarker predicted motor or nonmotor prognosis. © 2019 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.