Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Patients with Parkinson's disease and cognitive impairment (PD-CI) deteriorate faster than those without cognitive impairment (PD-NCI), suggesting an underlying difference in the neurodegeneration process. We aimed to verify brain age differences in PD-CI and PD-NCI and their clinical significance. A total of 94 participants (PD-CI, n = 27; PD-NCI, n = 34; controls, n = 33) were recruited. Predicted age difference (PAD) based on gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) features were estimated to represent the degree of brain aging. Patients with PD-CI showed greater GM-PAD (7.08 ± 6.64 years) and WM-PAD (8.82 ± 7.69 years) than those with PD-NCI (GM: 1.97 ± 7.13, Padjusted = 0.011; WM: 4.87 ± 7.88, Padjusted = 0.049) and controls (GM: -0.58 ± 7.04, Padjusted = 0.004; WM: 0.88 ± 7.45, Padjusted = 0.002) after adjusting demographic factors. In patients with PD, GM-PAD was negatively correlated with MMSE (Padjusted = 0.011) and MoCA (Padjusted = 0.013) and positively correlated with UPDRS Part II (Padjusted = 0.036). WM-PAD was negatively correlated with logical memory of immediate and delayed recalls (Padjusted = 0.003 and Padjusted < 0.001). Also, altered brain regions in PD-CI were identified and significantly correlated with brain age measures, implicating the neuroanatomical underpinning of neurodegeneration in PD-CI. Moreover, the brain age metrics can improve the classification between PD-CI and PD-NCI. The findings suggest that patients with PD-CI had advanced brain aging that was associated with poor cognitive functions. The identified neuroimaging features and brain age measures can serve as potential biomarkers of PD-CI.
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.