Lerche Stefanie, Liepelt-Scarfone Inga, Alves Guido, Barone Paolo, Behnke Stefanie, Ben-Shlomo Yoav, Berendse Henk, Burn David, Dodel Richard, Grosset Donald, Heinzel Sebastian, Hu Michele, Kasten Meike, Krüger Rejko, Maetzler Walter, Moccia Marcello, Mollenhauer Brit, Oertel Wolfgang, Roeben Benjamin, Sünkel Ulrike, Walter Uwe, Wirdefeldt Karin, Berg Daniela
Center of Neurology, Department of Neurodegeneration and Hertie-Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Neuroepidemiology. 2015;45(4):282-97. doi: 10.1159/000439221. Epub 2015 Nov 3.
Enormous effort is being put into the identification and characterization of symptoms that may be used as predictive and progression markers in Parkinson's disease (PD). An impressive number of PD patients and individuals at risk for or in the prodromal stage of PD are currently followed in longitudinal studies; however, there does not exist an overview on the kind of markers evaluated and the assessments used.
Information on the design, sample size, evaluated markers and assessments of 21 studies of the Joint Programme - Neurodegenerative Disease Research BioLoC-PD working group were collected by questionnaire. The studies were classified into at risk/prodromal or clinical PD cohorts. The assessments were grouped into quantitative assessments, investigator-rated assessments, investigator interviews, patient-rated questionnaires and caregiver-rated questionnaires.
Compilation of these data revealed an interesting consensus on evaluated markers, but there was an enormous variability of assessments. Furthermore, there is a remarkable similarity in the markers assessed and evaluation methods applied in the risk/prodromal and clinical PD cohorts.
The inventory of the longitudinal cohorts that are part of the BioLoC-PD consortium reveals that there is a growing consensus on the markers that should be assessed in longitudinal cohort studies in PD. However, controversy still exists on the specific type of assessment. To allow comparison of data and common analyses it will be essential to harmonize scales and assessment outcomes.
人们正在付出巨大努力来识别和描述可作为帕金森病(PD)预测和病情进展标志物的症状。目前,大量帕金森病患者以及处于帕金森病风险期或前驱期的个体正在接受纵向研究;然而,对于所评估的标志物类型和所采用的评估方法尚无综述。
通过问卷调查收集了联合项目——神经退行性疾病研究BioLoC-PD工作组的21项研究的设计、样本量、评估的标志物和评估方法等信息。这些研究被分为风险/前驱期或临床帕金森病队列。评估方法分为定量评估、研究者评分评估、研究者访谈、患者自评问卷和照料者自评问卷。
这些数据的汇总揭示了在评估标志物方面存在有趣的共识,但评估方法存在巨大差异。此外,风险/前驱期和临床帕金森病队列中评估的标志物和应用的评估方法有显著相似性。
BioLoC-PD联盟纵向队列的清单显示,对于帕金森病纵向队列研究中应评估的标志物,人们的共识日益增加。然而,在具体评估类型上仍存在争议。为了能够比较数据并进行共同分析,统一量表和评估结果至关重要。