Parkinson's Disease Subtypes: Critical Appraisal and Recommendations
- PMID: 33682731
- PMCID: PMC8150501
- DOI: 10.3233/JPD-202472
Parkinson's Disease Subtypes: Critical Appraisal and Recommendations
Abstract
Background: In Parkinson's disease (PD), there is heterogeneity in the clinical presentation and underlying biology. Research on PD subtypes aims to understand this heterogeneity with potential contribution for the knowledge of disease pathophysiology, natural history and therapeutic development. There have been many studies of PD subtypes but their impact remains unclear with limited application in research or clinical practice.
Objective: To critically evaluate PD subtyping systems.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review of PD subtypes, assessing the characteristics of the studies reporting a subtyping system for the first time. We completed a critical appraisal of their methodologic quality and clinical applicability using standardized checklists.
Results: We included 38 studies. The majority were cross-sectional (n = 26, 68.4%), used a data-driven approach (n = 25, 65.8%), and non-clinical biomarkers were rarely used (n = 5, 13.1%). Motor characteristics were the domain most commonly reported to differentiate PD subtypes. Most of the studies did not achieve the top rating across items of a Methodologic Quality checklist. In a Clinical Applicability Checklist, the clinical importance of differences between subtypes, potential treatment implications and applicability to the general population were rated poorly, and subtype stability over time and prognostic value were largely unknown.
Conclusion: Subtyping studies undertaken to date have significant methodologic shortcomings and most have questionable clinical applicability and unknown biological relevance. The clinical and biological signature of PD may be unique to the individual, rendering PD resistant to meaningful cluster solutions. New approaches that acknowledge the individual-level heterogeneity and that are more aligned with personalized medicine are needed.
Keywords: Parkinson’s disease; heterogeneity; subtypes.
Conflict of interest statement
Michele Hu reports that ODPC Discovery COhort was funded by the Monument Trust Discovery Award from Parkinson’s UK and supported by the Na-tional Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre based at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust and University of Oxford and the Dementias and Neurodegenerative Diseases Research Network (DeNDRoN).
Nicholas Bohnen received research funding from the NIH, Department of Veterans Affairs and the Michael J. Fox Foundation.
Glenda Halliday is a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Leadership Fellow (#1176607).
The remaining authors report there are no disclosures or conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (2018) Critical Appraisal of Prognostic Studies.OxfordUniversity,Oxford. https://www.cebm.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Prognosis.pdf
-
- Fereshtehnejad SM, Zeighami Y, Dagher A, Postuma RB (2017) Clinical criteria for subtyping Parkinson’s disease: Biomarkers and longitudinal progression. Brain 140, 1959–1976. - PubMed
-
- Lawton M, Ben-Shlomo Y, May MT, Baig F, Barber TR, Klein JC, Swallow DMA, Malek N, Grosset KA, Bajaj N, Barker RA, Williams N, Burn DJ, Foltynie T, Morris HR, Wood NW, Grosset DG, Hu MTM (2018) Developing and validating Parkinson’s disease subtypes and their motor and cognitive progression. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 89, 1279–1287. - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
