4.6 Article

Serum Inflammatory Markers and Progression of Nonmotor Symptoms in Early Parkinson's Disease

期刊

MOVEMENT DISORDERS
卷 37, 期 7, 页码 1535-1541

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mds.29056

关键词

Parkinson's disease; interleukin; cytokine; peripheral inflammation; nonmotor symptoms

资金

  1. SNUH Research Fund [0320160420 [2016-1085]]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that peripheral inflammation in early-stage Parkinson's disease (PD) may be related to the progression of nonmotor symptoms (NMSs), particularly mood symptoms. By measuring six inflammatory markers, the researchers found that elevated levels of IL-2 and IL-6 were associated with the progression of NMSs.
Background The influence of peripheral inflammation on nonmotor symptoms (NMSs) in Parkinson's disease (PD) remains unclear. Objective The aim of this study was to explore whether serum inflammatory marker profiles are associated with the progression of NMSs in early PD. Methods We included 45 patients with early PD and 20 healthy control subjects. Six inflammatory markers, including interleukin (IL)-1 beta, IL-2, IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, were measured. NMSs were assessed using the Non-Motor Symptoms Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Composite Autonomic Symptom Score-31 at baseline and after 3 years. Results Principal component (PC) analysis showed that only PC3 scores, mainly loaded by IL-2 and IL-6, were significantly elevated in the PD group compared with the control group. Higher PC3 scores in the PD group were associated with faster progression of Non-Motor Symptoms Scale total and mood/apathy domain scores. There were no significant associations of PC scores with Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Composite Autonomic Symptom Score-31 score changes. Conclusions Peripheral inflammation may be related to the evolution of NMSs, particularly mood symptoms, in the early stages of PD. (c) 2022 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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

4.6
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