SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Investigating the aspect of asymmetry in brain-first versus body-first Parkinson's disease.

NPJ Parkinsons Dis · 2024-03-30

DOI: 10.1038/s41531-024-00685-3PMID: 38555343

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

Parkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by a progressive loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra. Recent literature has proposed two subgroups of PD. The "body-first subtype" is associated with a prodrome of isolated REM-sleep Behavior Disorder (iRBD) and a relatively symmetric brain degeneration. The "brain-first subtype" is suggested to have a more asymmetric degeneration and a prodromal stage without RBD. This study aims to investigate the proposed difference in symmetry of the degeneration pattern in the presumed body and brain-first PD subtypes. We analyzed 123I-FP-CIT (DAT SPECT) and 18F-FDG PET brain imaging in three groups of patients (iRBD, n = 20, de novo PD with prodromal RBD, n = 22, and de novo PD without RBD, n = 16) and evaluated dopaminergic and glucose metabolic symmetry. The RBD status of all patients was confirmed with video-polysomnography. The PD groups did not differ from each other with regard to the relative or absolute asymmetry of DAT uptake in the putamen (p = 1.0 and p = 0.4, respectively). The patient groups also did not differ from each other with regard to the symmetry of expression of the PD-related metabolic pattern (PDRP) in each hemisphere. The PD groups had no difference in symmetry considering mean FDG uptake in left and right regions of interest and generally had the same degree of symmetry as controls, while the iRBD patients had nine regions with abnormal left-right differences (p < 0.001). Our findings do not support the asymmetry aspect of the "body-first" versus "brain-first" hypothesis.

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.