An International Multicenter Analysis of Brain Structure across Clinical Stages of Parkinson’s Disease: The ENIGMA-Parkinson’s Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Brain structure abnormalities throughout the course of Parkinson’s disease (PD) have yet to be fully elucidated. Inconsistent findings across studies may be partly due to small sample sizes and heterogeneous analysis methods. Using a multicenter approach and harmonized analysis methods, we aimed to overcome these limitations and shed light on disease stage-specific profiles of PD pathology as suggested by in vivo neuroimaging. Methods Individual brain MRI and clinical data from 2,367 PD patients and 1,183 healthy controls were collected from 19 sites, deriving from 20 countries. We analyzed regional cortical thickness, cortical surface area, and subcortical volume using mixed-effect linear models. Patients were grouped according to the Hoehn & Yahr (HY) disease stages and compared to age- and sex-matched controls. Within the PD sample, we investigated associations between Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores and brain morphology. Findings The main analysis showed a thinner cortex in 38 of 68 regions in PD patients compared to controls ( dmax = −0·25, dmin = −0·13). The bilateral putamen (left: d = −0·16, right: d = −0·16) and left amygdala ( d = −0·15) were smaller in patients, while the left thalamus was larger ( d = 0·17). HY staging indicated that a thinner cortex initially presents in the occipital, parietal and temporal cortex, and extends towards caudally located brain regions with increased disease severity. From HY stage 2 and onwards the bilateral putamen and amygdala were consistently smaller with larger effects denoting each increment. Finally, we found that poorer cognitive performance was associated with widespread cortical thinning as well as lower volumes of core limbic structures. Interpretation Our findings offer robust and novel imaging signatures that are specific to the disease severity stages and in line with an ongoing neurodegenerative process, highlighting the importance of such multicenter collaborations. Funding NIH Big Data to Knowledge program, ENIGMA World Aging Center, and ENIGMA Sex Differences Initiative, and other international agencies (listed in full in the Acknowledgments).
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".