Araştırma özeti
Aşağıdaki metin kaynak makalenin lisansı doğrulanmış orijinal özetidir. cc by
BackgroundReactive astrogliosis has been demonstrated to have a role in Parkinson's disease (PD); however, astrocyte-specific plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP)'s correlation with PD progression remains unknown. We aimed to determine whether plasma GFAP can monitor and predict PD progression.MethodsA total of 184 patients with PD and 95 healthy controls (HCs) were included in this prospective cohort study and followed-up for 5 years. Plasma GFAP, amyloid-beta (Aβ), p-tau181, and neurofilament light chain (NfL) were measured at baseline and at 1- and 2-year follow-ups. Motor and non-motor symptoms, activities of daily living, global cognitive function, executive function, and disease stage were evaluated using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) part III, UPDRS-I, UPDRS-II, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), and Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) scales at each visit, respectively.ResultsPlasma GFAP levels were higher in patients with PD (mean [SD]: 69.80 [36.18], pg/mL) compared to HCs (mean [SD]: 57.89 [23.54], pg/mL). Higher levels of GFAP were observed in female and older PD patients. The adjusted linear mixed-effects models showed that plasma GFAP levels were significantly associated with UPDRS-I scores (β: 0.006, 95% CI [0.001-0.011], p = 0.027). Higher baseline plasma GFAP correlated with faster increase in UPDRS-I (β: 0.237, 95% CI [0.055-0.419], p = 0.011) and UPDRS-III (β: 0.676, 95% CI [0.023-1.330], p = 0.043) scores and H&Y stage (β: 0.098, 95% CI [0.047-0.149], p ConclusionsPlasma GFAP might be a potential biomarker for monitoring and predicting disease progression in PD.
Bilimsel değerlendirme
Araştırma sorusu
Sorunun kapsamı orijinal çalışma üzerinden değerlendirilir.
Yöntem ve örneklem
Çalışma tasarımı ve örneklem için kaynak makaleyi kontrol edin.
Temel bulgular
Bu kayıt için editoryal olarak onaylanmış bulgu özeti henüz yayımlanmadı.
Sınırlılıklar
Sonuçların genellenebilirliği, yanlılık ve klinik anlamı ayrıca incelenmelidir.
Bibliyografik veriden yöntem, örneklem veya klinik sonuç çıkarımı yapılmaz.