SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Cognitive dysfunction in de novo Parkinson disease: Remitting vs. progressive cognitive impairment.

Parkinsonism Relat Disord · 2023-12-28

DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2023.105984PMID: 38198926

Check source for accessJournal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

IntroductionParkinson's disease (PD) exhibits divergent cognitive trajectories; however, the factors contributing to these variations remain elusive. This study aimed to examine the clinical features of patients with different long-term cognitive trajectories in de novo PD over a five-year follow-up.MethodsWe analyzed 258 patients who completed every annual evaluation for five years. According to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores, we classified patients into three groups: cognitively normal (n = 118, CN), remitting MoCA decline (n = 74, RMD), and progressive MoCA decline (n = 66, PMD).ResultsThe RMD group was associated with lower olfactory scores (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.958, p = 0.040), whereas PMD was associated with higher depression scores (OR = 1.158, p = 0.045), probable RBD (OR = 3.169, p = 0.002), older age (OR = 1.132, p ConclusionsWhile PMD exhibited known risk factors for cognitive impairment, along with worse cognitive performance and hippocampal volume decline, RMD displayed baseline lower olfactory scores and intermediate cognitive and hippocampal volume decline between the two groups. These findings suggest individuals in RMD may still be at risk for cognitive deficits. However, further long-term follow-up data are needed to unravel the determinants and dynamics of cognitive functions.

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.