SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Identification of Parkinson's disease subtypes with distinct brain atrophy progression and its association with clinical progression.

Psychoradiology · 2024-02-24

DOI: 10.1093/psyrad/kkae002PMID: 38666137

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

BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) patients suffer from progressive gray matter volume (GMV) loss, but whether distinct patterns of atrophy progression exist within PD are still unclear.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify PD subtypes with different rates of GMV loss and assess their association with clinical progression.MethodsThis study included 107 PD patients (mean age: 60.06 ± 9.98 years, 70.09% male) with baseline and ≥ 3-year follow-up structural MRI scans. A linear mixed-effects model was employed to assess the rates of regional GMV loss. Hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted to explore potential subtypes based on individual rates of GMV loss. Clinical score changes were then compared across these subtypes.ResultsTwo PD subtypes were identified based on brain atrophy rates. Subtype 1 (n = 63) showed moderate atrophy, notably in the prefrontal and lateral temporal lobes, while Subtype 2 (n = 44) had faster atrophy across the brain, particularly in the lateral temporal region. Furthermore, subtype 2 exhibited faster deterioration in non-motor (MDS-UPDRS-Part Ⅰ, β = 1.26 ± 0.18, P = 0.016) and motor (MDS-UPDRS-Part Ⅱ, β = 1.34 ± 0.20, P = 0.017) symptoms, autonomic dysfunction (SCOPA-AUT, β = 1.15 ± 0.22, P = 0.043), memory (HVLT-Retention, β = -0.02 ± 0.01, P = 0.016) and depression (GDS, β = 0.26 ± 0.083, P = 0.019) compared to subtype 1.ConclusionThe study has identified two PD subtypes with distinct patterns of atrophy progression and clinical progression, which may have implications for developing personalized treatment strategies.

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.