Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41884666›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2026

Machine learning analysis of population-wide plasma proteins identifies hormonal biomarkers of Parkinson's disease.

Fayzan Chaudhry, Tae Wan Kim, Olivier Elemento, Doron Betel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Fayzan ChaudhryTri-Institutional PhD Program in Computational Biology, New York, NY, United States.
Tae Wan KimDivision of Hematology, Department of Interdisciplinary Engineering, Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Olivier ElementoInstitute for Computational Biomedicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States.
Doron BetelInstitute for Computational Biomedicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the number of Parkinson's patients expected to rise due to an aging population, there is an increasing need to identify new diagnostic markers. These markers should be affordable and suitable for routine use to monitor the population, help stratify patients for treatment pathways, and provide new avenues for therapy. Genetic predisposition and familial forms account for approximately 10% of Parkinson's disease (PD) cases, leaving a large fraction of the population with minimal effective markers for identifying high-risk individuals. The establishment of population-wide omics and longitudinal health monitoring studies provides an opportunity to apply machine learning approaches to these unbiased cohorts to identify novel PD markers. In this study, we present the application of three machine learning models to identify protein plasma biomarkers of PD using plasma proteomic measurements from 43,408 UK Biobank subjects as the training and test set and an additional 103 samples from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) as external validation. We identified a group of highly predictive protein plasma markers, including known markers Dopa decarboxylase (DDC) and Calbindin 2 (CALB2) as well as new markers involved in the JAK-STAT and PI3K-AKT pathways and hormonal signaling. We further demonstrated that these features are well correlated with UPDRS severity scores and stratified these into protective and risk-associated features that potentially contribute to the pathogenesis of PD.

Indexed as

biomarkersdeep learningneurodegenerative diseaseParkinson’s diseaseproteomics

Identifiers

PMID41884666
PMCPMC13008742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.