Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a heterogeneous movement disorder with different motor subtypes including tremor dominant (TD), indeterminate and postural instability, and gait disturbance (PIGD) motor subtypes. Plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) was elevated in PD patients and may be regarded as a biomarker for motor and cognitive progression. Here we explore if there was an association between plasma GFAP and different motor subtypes and whether baseline plasma GFAP level can predict motor subtype conversion. Patients with PD classified as TD, PIGD or indeterminate subtypes underwent neurological evaluation at baseline and 2 years follow-up. Plasma GFAP in PD patients and controls were measured using an ultrasensitive single molecule array. The study enrolled 184 PD patients and 95 control subjects. Plasma GFAP levels were significantly higher in the PIGD group compared to the TD group at 2-year follow-up. Finally, 45% of TD patients at baseline had a subtype shift and 85% of PIGD patients at baseline remained as PIGD subtypes at 2 years follow-up. Baseline plasma GFAP levels were significantly higher in TD patients converted to PIGD than non-converters in the baseline TD group. Higher baseline plasma GFAP levels were significantly associated with the TD motor subtype conversion (OR = 1.283, P = 0.033) and lower baseline plasma GFAP levels in PIGD patients were likely to shift to TD and indeterminate subtype (OR = 0.551, P = 0.021) after adjusting for confounders. Plasma GFAP may serve as a clinical utility biomarker in differentiating motor subtypes and predicting baseline motor subtypes conversion in PD patients.
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.