Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Individuals with Parkinson's disease present with a complex clinical phenotype, encompassing sleep, motor, cognitive, and affective disturbances. However, characterizations of PD are typically made for the "average" patient, ignoring patient heterogeneity and obscuring important individual differences. Modern large-scale data sharing efforts provide a unique opportunity to precisely investigate individual patient characteristics, but there exists no analytic framework for comprehensively integrating data modalities. Here we apply an unsupervised learning method-similarity network fusion-to objectively integrate MRI morphometry, dopamine active transporter binding, protein assays, and clinical measurements from n = 186 individuals with de novo Parkinson's disease from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative. We show that multimodal fusion captures inter-dependencies among data modalities that would otherwise be overlooked by field standard techniques like data concatenation. We then examine how patient subgroups derived from the fused data map onto clinical phenotypes, and how neuroimaging data is critical to this delineation. Finally, we identify a compact set of phenotypic axes that span the patient population, demonstrating that this continuous, low-dimensional projection of individual patients presents a more parsimonious representation of heterogeneity in the sample compared to discrete biotypes. Altogether, these findings showcase the potential of similarity network fusion for combining multimodal data in heterogeneous patient populations.
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.