SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Physical Activities and Parkinson's Disease Progression: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.

CNS Neurosci Ther · 2025-02-01

DOI: 10.1111/cns.70296PMID: 39992049

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

AimsTo explore the causal relationship between physical activity (PA) and the progression of Parkinson's disease (PD), we conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis.MethodsGenetic variants were obtained from publicly available genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics for PA (N = 377,000), age at onset (N = 28,568), and PD progression (N = 4093). Causal estimates were calculated using the inverse variance weighted (IVW) method, with MR-Egger and weighted median analyses performed to assess the robustness of the results.ResultsGenetically predicted accelerometer-based overall acceleration average (OAA) was associated with a reduced risk of constipation in PD progression (OR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.42-0.86, p = 5.50 × 10-3). Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) demonstrated a similar but stronger effect on constipation risk (OR: 0.03, 95% CI: 9.38 × 10-4-0.90, p = 0.043). Additionally, OAA showed a protective effect on motor experiences of daily living (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71-1.00, p = 0.046). No causal effects were identified for vigorous physical activity (VPA) or the fraction of accelerations exceeding 425 milligravities (FAA) on PD progression.ConclusionOur findings suggest a negative causal relationship between PA and PD progression, highlighting the potential role of physical activity in guiding therapeutic strategies for PD management.

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.