SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Sex and gender differences in the molecular etiology of Parkinson's disease: considerations for study design and data analysis.

Biol Sex Differ · 2025-02-03

DOI: 10.1186/s13293-025-00692-wPMID: 39901234

Open accessreview-article; Review; 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 more prevalent in men than women, and presents with different clinical features in each sex. Despite widespread recognition of these differences, females are under-represented in clinical and experimental studies of PD, and much remains to be elucidated regarding the biological underpinnings of sex differences in PD. In this review, we summarize known contributors to sex differences in PD etiology across the life course, with a focus on neurological development and gene regulation. Sex differences that are established at conception and heightened during adolescence and midlife may partially embed future PD risk, due to the complex interactions between gonadal hormones, gene regulation, lifestyle factors, and aging. While the neuroprotective properties of estrogen are strongly implicated in reduced prevalence of PD in women, interactions with genotype and gender-biased lifestyle factors are incompletely understood. Consideration of sex and gender-related factors in study design, data analysis, and interpretation have the power to expedite our knowledge of the etiology of PD in men and in women, and to inform prevention and therapeutic strategies tailored to each sex.

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.