Genetic risk of Parkinson disease and progression:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To determine if any association between previously identified alleles that confer risk for Parkinson disease and variables measuring disease progression. Methods We evaluated the association between 31 risk variants and variables measuring disease progression. A total of 23,423 visits by 4,307 patients of European ancestry from 13 longitudinal cohorts in Europe, North America, and Australia were analyzed. Results We confirmed the importance of GBA on phenotypes. GBA variants were associated with the development of daytime sleepiness (p.N370S: hazard ratio [HR] 3.28 [1.69–6.34]) and possible REM sleep behavior (p.T408M: odds ratio 6.48 [2.04–20.60]). We also replicated previously reported associations of GBA variants with motor/cognitive declines. The other genotype-phenotype associations include an intergenic variant near LRRK2 and the faster development of motor symptom (Hoehn and Yahr scale 3.0 HR 1.33 [1.16–1.52] for the C allele of rs76904798) and an intronic variant in PMVK and the development of wearing-off effects (HR 1.66 [1.19–2.31] for the C allele of rs114138760). Age at onset was associated with TMEM175 variant p.M393T (−0.72 [−1.21 to −0.23] in years), the C allele of rs199347 (intronic region of GPNMB, 0.70 [0.27–1.14]), and G allele of rs1106180 (intronic region of CCDC62, 0.62 [0.21–1.03]). Conclusions This study provides evidence that alleles associated with Parkinson disease risk, in particular GBA variants, also contribute to the heterogeneity of multiple motor and nonmotor aspects. Accounting for genetic variability will be a useful factor in understanding disease course and in minimizing heterogeneity in clinical trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".