Transcriptomics of Human Brain Tissue in Parkinson’s Disease: a Comparison of Bulk and Single-cell RNA Sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a chronic and progressive neurodegenerative disease leading to motor dysfunction and, in some cases, dementia. Transcriptome analysis is one promising approach for characterizing PD and other neurodegenerative disorders by informing how specific disease events influence gene expression and contribute to pathogenesis. With the emergence of single-cell and single-nucleus RNA sequencing (scnRNA-seq) technologies, the transcriptional landscape of neurodegenerative diseases can now be described at the cellular level. As the application of scnRNA-seq is becoming routine, it calls to question how results at a single-cell resolution compare to those obtained from RNA sequencing of whole tissues (bulk RNA-seq), whether the findings are compatible, and how the assays are complimentary for unraveling the elusive transcriptional changes that drive neurodegenerative disease. Herein, we review the studies that have leveraged RNA-seq technologies to investigate PD. Through the integration of bulk and scnRNA-seq findings from human, post-mortem brain tissue, we use the PD literature as a case study to evaluate the compatibility of the results generated from each assay and demonstrate the complementarity of the sequencing technologies. Finally, through the lens of the PD transcriptomic literature, we evaluate the current feasibility of bulk and scnRNA-seq technologies to illustrate the necessity of both technologies for achieving a comprehensive insight into the mechanism by which gene expression promotes neurodegenerative disease. We conclude that the continued application of both assays will provide the greatest insight into neurodegenerative disease pathology, providing both cell-specific and whole-tissue level information.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".