Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundWe aimed to characterize subtypes of synucleinopathies using a clustering approach based on cognitive and other nonmotor data and to explore structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain differences between identified clusters.MethodsSixty-two patients (n = 6 E46K-SNCA, n = 8 dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and n = 48 idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD)) and 37 normal controls underwent nonmotor evaluation with extensive cognitive assessment. Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) was performed on patients' samples based on nonmotor variables. T1, diffusion-weighted, and resting-state functional MRI data were acquired. Whole-brain comparisons were performed.ResultsHCA revealed two subtypes, the mild subtype (n = 29) and the severe subtype (n = 33). The mild subtype patients were slightly impaired in some nonmotor domains (fatigue, depression, olfaction, and orthostatic hypotension) with no detectable cognitive impairment; the severe subtype patients (PD patients, all DLB, and the symptomatic E46K-SNCA carriers) were severely impaired in motor and nonmotor domains with marked cognitive, visual and bradykinesia alterations. Multimodal MRI analyses suggested that the severe subtype exhibits widespread brain alterations in both structure and function, whereas the mild subtype shows relatively mild disruptions in occipital brain structure and function.ConclusionsThese findings support the potential value of incorporating an extensive nonmotor evaluation to characterize specific clinical patterns and brain degeneration patterns of synucleinopathies.
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.