MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414477415 · doi:10.1002/mdc3.70367

High Cerebrospinal <scp>DOPA</scp> Decarboxylase Level Predicts Cognitive Decline in Parkinson's Disease

2025· article· en· W4414477415 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea Sturchio, Wojciech Pasławski, Shervin Khosousi, Ioanna Markaki, Michael A. Nalls, Andrew B. Singleton, Hirotaka Iwaki, Per Svenningsson

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders Clinical Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsCognitive declineCerebrospinal fluidBiomarkerDiseaseCognitionCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: DOPA decarboxylase (DDC) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is an emerging Parkinson's disease (PD) biomarker, but its association with nonmotor symptoms is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine if baseline DDC was associated with future cognitive decline in PD. METHODS: We correlated baseline CSF DDC, detected using the proximity extension assay, with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score using longitudinal data from 3 cohorts: Biopark, PPMI, and PDBP. RESULTS: DDC was significantly associated with cognitive decline in both the Biopark cohort (P-value < 0.0001) and the PDBP/PPMI cohorts (P-value < 0.0001). The results were still significant after correcting for levodopa-equivalent daily dose in the Biopark cohort (P-value < 0.0001) and when the analysis was restricted to the de novo subjects, both in Biopark (P-value: 0.0065) and PPMI (P-value<0.0001) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: CSF DDC is a potential biomarker for the prediction of cognitive decline in PD patients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement Disorders Clinical PracticeSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207