SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Establishing a natural history of X-linked dystonia parkinsonism.

Brain Commun · 2023-04-04

DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcad106PMID: 37265597

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

X-linked dystonia parkinsonism is a neurodegenerative movement disorder that affects men whose mothers originate from the island of Panay, Philippines. Current evidence indicates that the most likely cause is an expansion in the TAF1 gene that may be amenable to treatment. To prepare for clinical trials of therapeutic candidates for X-linked dystonia parkinsonism, we focused on the identification of quantitative phenotypic measures that are most strongly associated with disease progression. Our main objective is to establish a comprehensive, quantitative assessment of movement dysfunction and bulbar motor impairments that are sensitive and specific to disease progression in persons with X-linked dystonia parkinsonism. These measures will set the stage for future treatment trials. We enrolled patients with X-linked dystonia parkinsonism and performed a comprehensive oromotor, speech and neurological assessment. Measurements included patient-reported questionnaires regarding daily living activities and both neurologist-rated movement scales and objective quantitative measures of bulbar function and nutritional status. Patients were followed for 18 months from the date of enrollment and evaluated every 6 months during that period. We analysed a total of 87 men: 29 were gene-positive and had symptoms at enrollment, seven were gene-positive and had no symptoms at enrollment and 51 were gene-negative. We identified measures that displayed a significant change over the study. We used principal variables analysis to identify a minimal battery of 21 measures that explains 67.3% of the variance over the course of the study. These measures included patient-reported, clinician-rated and objective quantitative outcomes that may serve as endpoints in future clinical trials.

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.