Longitudinal decline in striatal dopamine transporter binding in Parkinson's disease: Associations with apathy and anhedonia
Costello, H.; Yamamori, Y.; Reeves, S.; Schrag, A.; Howard, R.; Roiser, J.
Show abstract
BackgroundMotivational symptoms such as apathy and anhedonia are common in Parkinsons disease, respond poorly to treatment, and have been hypothesised to share underlying neural mechanisms. Striatal dopaminergic dysfunction is considered central to motivational symptoms in Parkinsons disease, but the association has never been examined longitudinally. We investigated whether the progression of dopaminergic neurodegeneration was associated with emergent apathy and anhedonia symptoms in Parkinsons disease. MethodsLongitudinal cohort study of 412 newly diagnosed Parkinsons disease patients followed over five years as part of the Parkinsons Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) cohort. Apathy and anhedonia were measured using a composite score derived from relevant items of the 15-item geriatric depression scale (GDS-15) and part I of the MDS-Unified Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). Dopaminergic neurodegeneration was measured using repeated ioflupane [123-I] single photon emission computed tomography imaging of striatal dopamine transporters (DAT). ResultsLinear mixed-effects modelling across all contemporaneous data points identified a significant negative relationship between striatal DAT specific binding ratio(SBR) and apathy/anhedonia symptoms, which emerged as Parkinsons disease progressed (interaction: {beta}=-0.09, 95%CI[-0.15 -0.03], p=0.002). Appearance and subsequent worsening of apathy/anhedonia symptoms began on average two years after diagnosis and below a threshold striatal DAT SBR level. The interaction between striatal DAT SBR and time was specific to apathy/anhedonia symptoms, with no evidence of a similar interaction for general depressive symptoms from the GDS-15 (excluding apathy/anhedonia items) ({beta}=-0.06, 95%CI[-0.13 0.01]) or motor symptoms indexed by the MDS-UPDRS part III ({beta}=0.20, 95%CI[-0.25 0.65]). ConclusionThe relationship between the progression of dopaminergic neurodegeneration and emergent apathy/anhedonia symptoms supports a central role for dopaminergic dysfunction in motivational symptoms in Parkinsons disease. Striatal DAT imaging may be a useful indicator of apathy/anhedonia risk that could inform intervention strategies.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Neuronal alpha-Synuclein Disease stage progression over five years 96%
- Distinct Longitudinal Clinical-Neuroanatomical Trajectories in Parkinson’s Disease Clinical Subtypes: Insight Towards Precision Medicine 96%
- Validation of Serum Neurofilament Light Chain as a Biomarker of Parkinson's Disease Progression 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Disrupted reward processing in Parkinson’s Disease and its relationship with dopamine state and neuropsychiatric syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis 96%
- Cognitive and executive impairments in Parkinson’s Disease psychosis: a Bayesian meta-analysis 95%
- Parkinsons disease determinants, prediction and gene-environment interactions in the UK Biobank 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative: A Milestone-Based Strategy to Monitor PD Progression 95%
- Amplification parameters of the alpha-synuclein seed amplification assay on CSF predict the clinical subtype of Parkinson's Disease at 10-year follow-up 94%
- Non-Motor symptoms in prodromal Parkinson’s disease are linked to reduced Quality of Life 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Apathy progression is associated with brain atrophy and white matter damage in Parkinson's disease 95%
- White matter microstructure in Parkinson’s disease with and without elevated REM sleep muscle tone 94%
- Disrupted functional brain network associated with presence of hallucinations in Parkinson’s Disease 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.