SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Prediction of Parkinson's Disease Risk Based on Genetic Profile and Established Risk Factors.

Genes (Basel) · 2021-08-20

DOI: 10.3390/genes12081278PMID: 34440451

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder, and literature suggests that genetics and lifestyle/environmental factors may play a key role in the triggering of the disease. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of a 12-Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) polygenic risk score (PRS) in combination with already established PD-environmental/lifestyle factors.MethodsGenotypic and lifestyle/environmental data on 235 PD-patients and 464 controls were obtained from a previous study carried out in the Cypriot population. A PRS was calculated for each individual. Univariate logistic-regression analysis was used to assess the association of PRS and each risk factor with PD-status. Stepwise-regression analysis was used to select the best predictive model for PD combining genetic and lifestyle/environmental factors.ResultsThe 12-SNPs PRS was significantly increased in PD-cases compared to controls. Furthermore, univariate analyses showed that age, head injury, family history, depression, and Body Mass Index (BMI) were significantly associated with PD-status. Stepwise-regression suggested that a model which includes PRS and seven other independent lifestyle/environmental factors is the most predictive of PD in our population.ConclusionsThese results suggest an association between both genetic and environmental factors and PD, and highlight the potential for the use of PRS in combination with the classical risk factors for risk prediction of 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.