4.5 Article

A geroscience approach for Parkinson ' s disease: Conceptual framework and design of PROPAG-AGEING project

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mad.2020.111426

关键词

Parkinson's disease; Inflammaging; Neurodegeneration; Omics

资金

  1. Horizon 2020 Framework Programme [634821]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The PROPAG-AGEING project aims to characterize the contribution of the ageing process to PD development, focusing on the continuum between ageing and PD and using a Geroscience approach. The project emphasizes the role of inflammaging and utilizes a multi-omic characterization of peripheral samples to identify molecular perturbations that can lead to PD development.
Advanced age is the major risk factor for idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD), but to date the biological relationship between PD and ageing remains elusive. Here we describe the rationale and the design of the H2020 funded project PROPAG-AGEING, whose aim is to characterize the contribution of the ageing process to PD development. We summarize current evidences that support the existence of a continuum between ageing and PD and justify the use of a Geroscience approach to study PD. We focus in particular on the role of inflammaging, the chronic, low-grade inflammation characteristic of elderly physiology, which can propagate and transmit both locally and systemically. We then describe PROPAG-AGEING design, which is based on the multi-omic characterization of peripheral samples from clinically characterized drug-naive and advanced PD, PD discordant twins, healthy controls and super-controls, i.e. centenarians, who never showed clinical signs of motor disability, and their offspring. Omic results are then validated in a large number of samples, including in vitro models of dopaminergic neurons and healthy siblings of PD patients, who are at higher risk of developing PD, with the final aim of identifying the molecular perturbations that can deviate the trajectories of healthy ageing towards PD development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据