Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Parkinson's disease (PD) is the fastest growing neurodegenerative disease, but at present there is no cure, nor any disease-modifying treatments. Synaptic biomarkers from in vivo imaging have shown promise in imaging loss of synapses in PD and other neurodegenerative disorders. Here, we provide new clinical insights from a cross-sectional, high-resolution positron emission tomography (PET) study of 30 PD individuals and 30 age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HC) with the radiotracer [11C]UCB-J, which binds to synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A (SV2A), and is therefore, a biomarker of synaptic density in the living brain. We also examined a measure of relative brain perfusion from the early part of the same PET scan. Our results provide evidence for synaptic density loss in the substantia nigra that had been previously reported, but also extend this to other early-Braak stage regions known to be affected in PD (brainstem, caudate, olfactory cortex). Importantly, we also found a direct association between synaptic density loss in the nigra and severity of symptoms in patients. A greater extent and wider distribution of synaptic density loss in PD patients with longer illness duration suggests that [11C]UCB-J PET can be used to measure synapse loss with disease progression. We also demonstrate lower brain perfusion in PD vs. HC groups, with a greater extent of abnormalities in those with longer duration of illness, suggesting that [11C]UCB-J PET can simultaneously provide information on changes in brain perfusion. These results implicate synaptic imaging as a useful PD biomarker for future disease-modifying interventions.
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.