SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Olfactory Network Functional Connectivity as a Marker for Parkinson's Disease Severity.

Life (Basel) · 2025-08-20

DOI: 10.3390/life15081324PMID: 40868971

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

Olfactory impairment was assessed in akinetic-rigid (PDAR) and tremor-predominant (PDT) subtypes of Parkinson's disease (PD), classified based on motor symptoms. Seventeen PDAR, fifteen PDT, and twenty-four cognitively normal (CN) participants completed the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). Groups were well-matched for age and demographic variables, with cognitive performance statistically controlled. Resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) and seed-based functional connectivity (FC) analyses were conducted to characterize olfactory network (ON) connectivity across groups. UPSIT scores were significantly lower in PDAR compared to PDT. Consistently, ON FC values were reduced in PDAR relative to both PDT and CN. FC of the primary olfactory cortex (POC) significantly differed between CN and the PD subtypes. Furthermore, connectivity in the orbitofrontal cortex and insula showed significant differences between PDAR and PDT, as well as between PDAR and CN. Notably, ON FC between the left hippocampus and the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) also differed significantly between PDAR and PDT. These findings reveal distinct ON FC patterns across PDAR and PDT subtypes. Variations in UPSIT scores suggest that motor symptom subtype is associated with olfactory performance. Moreover, ON connectivity closely paralleled the UPSIT scores, reinforcing a neural basis for olfactory deficits in PD. Given the accelerated motor and cognitive decline often observed in the PDAR, these results support the potential of olfactory impairment as a clinical marker for disease severity.

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.