SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

WGCNA and multiple machine learning methods identified SV2C and DENR as novel biomarkers for Parkinson's disease

· 2023-10-13

DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3424070/v1

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

In the past servel years, the incidence of Parkinson's disease has continued to rise globally, placing a heavy burden on patients and society. Nevertheless, diagnostic and therapeutic tools for the disease have not been completely optimized. Consequently, the current study concentrated on determining promising biomarkers in the brain tissues of Parkinson's disease individuals and performing functional analyses. In the present work, we aimed to determine the hub genes providing Diagnostic and therapeutic targets for Parkinson's disease. GSE8397, GSE20292, GSE20163, GSE20164, and GSE49036 from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database were analyzed. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) and DEGs determined 42 intersecting genes. Subsequently, the genes SV2C and DENR were identified as biomarkers of Parkinson's disease with machine learning. Finally, functional analysis suggested that SV2C may be involved in dopamine vesicle transport. Immune infiltration analysis revealed remarkable differences between SV2C for multiple immune cells. DENR and SV2C expression was demonstrated in PD cell models and clinical human samples.. In conclusion, The SV2C and DENR genes in brain tissue are viable biomarkers and therapeutic targets for Parkinson's disease which can facilitate diagnosis and treatment in clinical practice.

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.