SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Immunogenetic Epidemiology of Dementia and Parkinson's Disease in 14 Continental European Countries: Shared Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) Profiles.

J Immunol Sci · 2021-04-01

DOI: 10.29245/2578-3009/2021/2.1209PMID: 40370814

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

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA), which is critically involved in immune response to foreign antigens and in autoimmunity, has been implicated in dementia and Parkinson's disease. Here we report on the correlations between the population frequencies of 127 HLA Class I and II alleles and the population prevalence of dementia and Parkinson's disease in 14 Continental Western European countries, extending previous work1,2. We used these correlations to construct and compare HLA profiles for each disease3. We found that (a) the HLA profiles of the two diseases were significantly correlated across both HLA Class I and Class II alleles, (b) negative ("protective") HLA-disease correlations did not differ significantly for either HLA class, but (c) positive ("susceptibility") HLA-disease correlations were significantly higher in dementia than in Parkinson's disease for both HLA classes of alleles. These findings indicate that (a) dementia and Parkinson's disease share immunogenetic HLA-related mechanisms, (b) HLA-related protective mechanisms (presumably against pathogens) do not differ between the two diseases, but (c) HLA-related susceptibility mechanisms (presumably underlying autoimmunity) are significantly stronger in dementia than in Parkinson's disease.

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.