MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417152072 · doi:10.64898/2025.12.01.25341351

Understanding the pattern of cognitive decline in GBA1-related Parkinson’s Disease: a longitudinal multi-cohort study

2025· article· W4417152072 on OpenAlexaff
Merle Bode, Claire Pauly, Sonja R. Jónsdóttir, Claudia Schulte, Sara Becker, Isabel Wurster, Benjamin Röeben, Stefanie Lerche, Werner Poewe, Rejko Krüger, Inga Liepelt‐Scarfone, Kathrin Brockmann

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAllerganMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsCognitionCognitive declineNeuropsychologyVerbal fluency testLongitudinal studyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceDiseaseCognitive impairmentEpisodic memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective People with Parkinson’s disease (PD) who carry a pathogenic GBA1 variant (PD GBA1 ) are at higher risk of cognitive impairment than those without the variant (PD GBA1_wildtype ). To date, little is known about the pattern and evolution of cognitive decline in PD GBA1 . This multi-center study characterized the cognitive profile of PD GBA , focusing on the longitudinal trajectories and the group-specific onset times among cognitive functions, as well as their clinical relevance. Methods In this longitudinal multicohort-study (PPMI, ABC-PD, Luxembourg Parkinson’s Study), comprehensive neuropsychological assessments were standardized across 548 healthy controls (follow-up-years=2.84±4.33), 906 PD GBA1_wildtype (follow-up-years=4.29±4.16), and 210 PD GBA1 (follow-up-years=4.09±3.35). We evaluated performance across age and disease duration using regression (generalized) linear mixed models within each cognitive domain. Time-to-first-event models, assessing risks of clinically relevant performance impairment (test-score z ≤-1.5, MoCA<26), and an expanding-time-window approach identified the course of cognitive impairment. Additionally, correlations between cognitive functions were calculated. Results At baseline, PD GBA1 showed lower performance in attention (processing speed) and memory (verbal learning) than PD GBA1_wildtype , but more widespread probability of performance impairment. Over time, attention, visuoperception, memory, and semantic fluency performance declined more rapidly in PD GBA1 compared to PD GBA1_wildtype . Impairment in processing speed occurred earlier in the disease process of PD GBA1 . Risks for clinically relevant cognitive impairment in PD GBA1 during the disease course were generally increased. Moderate-to-strong correlations between cognitive functions were observed within and across cognitive domains in PD GBA1 and PD GBA1_wildtype , particularly in attentional-executive functions. Interpretation PD GBA1 exhibits accelerated domain-generalized cognitive decline compared to PD GBA1_wildtype , with susceptibility of semantic fluency, attention, and memory. Summary for Social Media If you and/or a co-author has a X handle that you would like to be tagged, please enter it here. (format: @AUTHORSHANDLE) . None What is the current knowledge on the topic? (one to two sentences) Pathogenic coding variants in the Glucocerebrosidase (GBA1) gene in Parkinson’s Disease (PD-GBA1) are linked to more severe cognitive impairment. However, the domain-specific trajectories of cognitive decline are currently unknown. What question did this study address? (one to two sentences) This study aimed to analyze the course of longitudinal cognitive profile in PD-GBA1 across disease duration and age in regard to cognitive domains and clinical relevance. What does this study add to our knowledge? (one to two sentences) PD-GBA1 exhibits accelerated cognitive decline with susceptibility of semantic fluency, attention, and memory. Cognitive decline risk elevated 2-to-3 years post-diagnosis. How might this potentially impact on the practice of neurology? (one to two sentences) The results can help to identify individuals at risk of cognitive decline and to better design clinical trials aiming at disease modification with cognition as endpoint.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207