Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25510818›Full record

ReviewMetabolism: clinical and experimental2015

Biomarkers of Parkinson's disease: present and future.

Diane B Miller, James P O'Callaghan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Metabolism: clinical and experimental, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 167 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
167citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

167 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Factors Associated With Ambulatory Activity in De Novo Parkinson Disease.Journal of neurologic physical therapy : JNPT · 2017
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Global research trends on the human exposome: a bibliometric analysis (2005-2024).Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

107 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Diane B MillerCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV 26505. Electronic address: dum6@cdc.gov.
James P O'CallaghanCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV 26505. Electronic address: jdo5@cdc.gov.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sporadic or idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) is an age-related neurodegenerative disorder of unknown origin that ranks only second behind Alzheimer's disease (AD) in prevalence and its consequent social and economic burden. PD neuropathology is characterized by a selective loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta; however, more widespread involvement of other CNS structures and peripheral tissues now is widely documented. The onset of molecular and cellular neuropathology of PD likely occurs decades before the onset of the motor symptoms characteristic of PD. The hallmark symptoms of PD, resting tremors, rigidity and postural disabilities, are related to dopamine (DA) deficiency. Current therapies treat these symptoms by replacing or boosting existing DA. All current interventions have limited therapeutic benefit for disease progression because damage likely has progressed over an estimated period of ~5 to 15years to a loss of 60%-80% of the nigral DA neurons, before symptoms emerge. There is no accepted definitive biomarker of PD. An urgent need exists to develop early diagnostic biomarkers for two reasons: (1) to intervene at the onset of disease and (2) to monitor the progress of therapeutic interventions that may slow or stop the course of the disease. In the context of disease development, one of the promises of personalized medicine is the ability to predict, on an individual basis, factors contributing to the susceptibility for the development of a given disease. Recent advances in our understanding of genetic factors underlying or contributing to PD offer the potential for monitoring susceptibility biomarkers that can be used to identify at-risk individuals and possibly prevent the onset of disease through treatment. Finally, the exposome concept is new in the biomarker discovery arena and it is suggested as a way to move forward in identifying biomarkers of neurological diseases. It is a two-stage scheme involving a first stage of exposome-wide association studies (EWAS) to profile omic features in serum to discover molecular biomarkers. The second stage involves application of this knowledge base in follow-up studies. This strategy is unique in that it promotes the use of data-driven (omic) strategies in interrogating diseased and healthy populations and encourages a movement away from using only reductionist strategies to discover biomarkers of exposure and disease. In this short review we will examine 1) advances in our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying PD that have led to candidate biomarkers for diagnosis and treatment efficacy and 2) new technologies on the horizon that will lead to novel approaches in biomarker development.

Indexed as

alpha-SynucleinAntiparkinson AgentsApoptosisBiomarkersDisease ProgressionDopamineEarly DiagnosisHumansMotor SkillsNeuroimagingParkinson DiseasePars CompactaPredictive Value of TestsRisk FactorsSleep, REMSmellalpha-SynucleinAntiparkinson AgentsBiomarkersDopamineSNCA protein, humanFluid biomarkersImagingTranscranial sonographyα-Synuclein

Identifiers

PMID25510818
PMCPMC4721253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.