SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Association between irritable bowel syndrome and Parkinson's disease by Cohort study and Mendelian randomization analysis.

NPJ Parkinsons Dis · 2024-03-28

DOI: 10.1038/s41531-024-00691-5PMID: 38548756

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

This study aimed to investigate the association between irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and Parkinson's disease (PD) utilizing prospective cohort study and Mendelian randomization. The dataset contained a substantial cohort of 426,911 participants from the UK Biobank, discussing the association between IBS and PD with Cox proportional hazards models and case-control analysis while adjusting for covariates such as age, gender, ethnicity and education level. In univariate Cox regression model, the risk of PD was reduced in IBS patients (HR: 0.774, 95%CI: 0.625-0.956, P = 0.017), but the statistical significance diminished in the three models after adjusting for other variables. In a few subgroup analyses, IBS patients are less likely to develop into PD, and patients diagnosed with IBS after 2000 also had a lower risk (HR: 0.633, 95%CI: 0.403-0.994, P = 0.047) of subsequently developing PD. In addition, we matched five healthy control participants based on gender and age at the end of the study for each IBS patient diagnosed during the follow-up period, and logistic regression results (OR:1.239, 95%CI: 0.896-1.680, P = 0.181) showed that IBS was not associated with the risk of PD. Mendelian randomization did not find significant evidence of the causal relationship between IBS and Parkinson's disease (OR: 0.801, 95%CI: 0.570-1.278, P = 0.204). Overall, we suggest that IBS status is not associated with the risk of developing PD, and that these findings provide valuable insights into the clinical management and resource allocation of patients with IBS.

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.