| Literature DB >> 29392081 |
Jing Zou1, Zhigang Chen1, Caiqian Liang2, Yongmei Fu2, Xiaobo Wei1, Jianjun Lu3, Mengqiu Pan3, Yue Guo4, Xinxue Liao4, Huifang Xie5, Duobin Wu5, Min Li6, Lihui Liang7, Penghua Wang8, Qing Wang1.
Abstract
Trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), cholinesterase activity (ChE activity) and homocysteine (Hcy) play critical roles in modulating recognition, learning and memory in neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) and vascular parkinsonism with dementia (VPD). However, whether they can be used as reliable predictors to evaluate the severity and progression of PDD and VPD remains largely unknown.Entities:
Keywords: ChE activity; Hcy; Parkinson disease dementia; TFF3; pathogenesis; vascular parkinsonism dementia
Year: 2018 PMID: 29392081 PMCID: PMC5772858 DOI: 10.14336/AD.2017.0416
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Aging Dis ISSN: 2152-5250 Impact factor: 6.745
Demographic, motor, and non-motor parameters.
| Clinical parameters | PDD | Healthy subjects | VPD | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||
| Mean (SD) | Min | Max | Mean (SD) | Min | Max | Mean (SD) | Min | Max | ||
| Male n (%) | 49(53.3) | / | / | 44(55) | / | / | 45(54.8) | / | / | |
| Female n (%) | 43(46.7) | / | / | 36(45) | / | / | 37(45.2) | / | / | |
| 65.73(11.18) | 56 | 88 | 64.43(7.10) | 50 | 82 | 70.29(9.87) | 65 | 83 | ||
| 2.85(1.23) | 1 | 5 | / | / | / | 2.68(1.05) | 1 | 5 | ||
| 21.72(3.94) | 6 | 24 | / | / | / | 17.34(5.04) | 1 | 23 | ||
| 50.92(23.13) | 17 | 96 | / | / | / | 44.36(19.03) | 16 | 83 | ||
| UPRDRS(I) | 3.70(2.05) | 1 | 12 | / | / | / | 3.79(3.08) | 0 | 14 | |
| UPRDRS(II) | 18.17(9.64) | 3 | 45 | / | / | / | 16.57(8.79) | 3 | 40 | |
| UPRDRS(III) | 27.02(11.04) | 9 | 51 | / | / | / | 22.49(9.58) | 5 | 51 | |
| UPRDRS(Ⅵ) | 2.03(2.50) | 0 | 9 | / | / | / | 1.52(1.81) | 0 | 7 | |
| 86.77(53.47) | 20 | 188 | / | / | / | 103.22(44.42) | 30 | 235 | ||
| Cardiovascular | 4.06 (2.90) | 0 | 12 | / | / | / | 4.96(3.95) | 0 | 18 | |
| Sleep/Fatigue | 17.50(9.58) | 0 | 36 | / | / | / | 19.64(8.90) | 2 | 46 | |
| Mood | 19.30(14.41) | 3 | 54 | / | / | / | 23.30(12.51) | 0 | 56 | |
| Perceptual problem | 2.87(4.48) | 0 | 18 | / | / | / | 3.47(5.92) | 0 | 26 | |
| Attention/memory | 11.27(7.79) | 0 | 30 | / | / | / | 14.51(7.11) | 0 | 30 | |
| Gastrointestina | 9.35(6.54) | 0 | 28 | / | / | / | 10.15(7.37) | 0 | 31 | |
| Urinar | 8.30(8.16) | 0 | 32 | / | / | / | 11.18(7.93) | 0 | 36 | |
| Sexual function | 5.45(6.23) | 0 | 18 | / | / | / | 8.41(7.69) | 0 | 24 | |
| Miscellaneous | 8.67(10.25) | 0 | 36 | / | / | / | 7.61(7.20) | 0 | 38 | |
| 252.6(58.52) | 206.44 | 291.14 | / | / | / | 275.06(65.77) | 223.35 | 305.21 | ||
| 4.05(3.40) | 0.5 | 15 | / | / | / | 3.53(3.36) | 0.5 | 11 | ||
SD, standard deviation; UPDRS, Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale; H&Y, the modified Hoehn and Yahr staging scale; MMSE, mini-mental state examination and NMSS, non-motor symptoms scale for Parkinson’s disease.
Figure 3.MRI images in normal controls and PDD and VPD patients
(A) Normal subjects, (B) PDD patients, (C) VPD patients. The extent of white matter hyperintensities and multiple infarctions in the basal ganglia in the VPD patients are shown in T2-weighted and FLAIR images. Arrows indicate the infarction.
Comparison of age, MMSE, TFF3, Hcy and ChE activity among PDD, VPD and normal healthy subjects.
| Variable | PDD | VPD | Control | Tukey’s
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PDD/VPD | PDD/Control | VPD/Control | ||||||
| Age | 65.73±11.18 | 70.29±9.87 | 64.43±7.10 | 2.925 | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.295 | 0.005 |
| MMSE | 21.72±3.94 | 17.34±5.04 | 30 | 3.523 | 0.001 | 0.008 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| TFF3 | 15.21±11.83 | 14.03±12.25 | 18.20±6.21 | -2.668 | 0.006 | 0.089 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| ChE activity | 7528±1573 | 7232±1254 | 7785±1962 | -1.815 | 0.042 | 0.882 | 0.067 | 0.028 |
| Hcy | 16.18±4.96 | 18.21±5.72 | 10.45±3.19 | 3.478 | 0.002 | 0.625 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001. Kruskal-Wallis test for the comparison among PDD, VPD and normal subjects, Tukey’s post hoc analysis for the comparison in PDD vs. VPD, PDD vs. Control, or VPD vs. Control.
Comparison of TFF3, Hcy and ChE activity between normal subjects and PDD patients according to genders.
| Variable | PDD (mean ± SD) | Control (mean ± SD) | PDD vs. Control | PDD(Male) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Value | Value | ||||||
| TFF3 | Male | 15.03±11.26 | 20.12±9.51 | -2.558 | 0.009 | -2.976 | 0.003 |
| Female | 17.29±10.17 | 20.43±7.10 | -2.911 | 0.006 | |||
| ChE activity | Male | 7596±1433 | 7736±1648 | -2.083 | 0.038 | -0.863 | 0.520 |
| Female | 7680±1259 | 7839±1542 | -1.915 | 0.026 | |||
| Hcy | Male | 18.21±4.72 | 11.39±2.80 | 3.974 | 0.000 | 3.239 | 0.003 |
| Female | 14.59±5.73 | 10.74±2.25 | 3.015 | 0.002 | |||
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.
Mann-Whitney U-test.
Student’s t-test.
Comparison of TFF3, Hcy and ChE activity between healthy subjects and VPD patients according to genders.
| Variable | VPD (mean ± SD) | Control (mean ± SD) | VPD vs. Control | VPD(Male) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Value | Value | ||||||
| TFF3 | Male | 14.67±11.51 | 20.12±9.51 | -3.956 | 0.000* | -3.241 | 0.004** |
| Female | 16.98±12.36 | 20.43±7.10 | -3.579 | 0.002* | |||
| ChE activity | Male | 7286±1626 | 7736±1648 | -2.066 | 0.032* | -0.571 | 0.739 |
| Female | 7351±1820 | 7839±1542 | -2.017 | 0.041* | |||
| Hcy | Male | 21.11±5.24 | 11.39±2.80 | 3.923 | 0.000*** | 2.939 | 0.003** |
| Female | 16.27±4.19 | 10.74±2.25 | 3.381 | 0.000*** | |||
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.
Mann-Whitney U-test.
Student’s t-test.
Comparison of TFF3, Hcy and ChE activity between PDD and VPD patients according to genders and UPDRS-III scores.
| Variable | PDD | VPD | PDD vs. VPD
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | |||||
| TFF3 | |||||
| Gender | Male | 15.03±11.26 | 14.67±11.51 | 0.153 | 0.8786 |
| Female | 17.29±10.17 | 16.98±12.36 | 0.902 | 0.123 | |
| UPDRS(III) | UPDRS(III)≤30 | 16.85±10.33 | 15.37±10.16 | 2.629 | 0.011 |
| 31<UPDRS(III)<50 | 15.74±10.29 | 14.16±10.03 | 3.140 | 0.003 | |
| UPDRS(III)≤30 | 14.33±9.81 | 13.85±9.27 | 1.218 | 0.082 | |
| ChE activity | |||||
| Gender | Male | 7596±1433 | 7286±1626 | 0.982 | 0.3285 |
| Female | 7680±1259 | 7351±1820 | 0.951 | 0.345 | |
| UPDRS(III) | UPDRS(III)≤30 | 8027±1003 | 7829±1579 | 1.883 | 0.075 |
| 31<UPDRS(III)<50 | 7829±1282 | 7320±1050 | 2.145 | 0.037 | |
| UPDRS(III)>50 | 7462±1291 | 7057±1331 | 2.335 | 0.020 | |
| Hcy | |||||
| Gender | Male | 18.21±4.72 | 21.11±5.24 | 2.832 | 0.006 |
| Female | 14.59±5.73 | 16.27±4.19 | 1.476 | 0.144 | |
| UPDRS(III) | UPDRS(III)≤30 | 17.82±3.94 | 19.33±4.91 | 0.232 | 0.713 |
| 31<UPDRS(III)<50 | 16.35±4.31 | 18.56±4.43 | 0.537 | 0.281 | |
| UPDRS(III)>50 | 15.78±4.60 | 17.41±3.89 | 0.891 | 0.371 | |
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.
Tukey’s post hoc analysis.
Mann-Whitney U-test.
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rs) and p-values between TFF3/ChE activity and Hcy Levels in PDD and VPD patients.
| Variable | Hcy in PDD | Hcy in VPD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| TFF3 | -0.799 | 0.000 | -0.771 | 0.000 |
| ChE activity | -0.732 | 0.000 | -0.713 | 0.000 |
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001. rs, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.
Figure 1.Correlation analysis between TFF3/ChE activity and Hcy Levels in PDD and VPD patients
A significant negative correlation between (A) TFF3 and Hcy Levels in PDD patients (r =-0.799, ***p<0.001); (B) ChE activity and Hcy Levels in PDD patients (r =-0.732, ***p<0.001). (C) TFF3 and Hcy Levels in VPD patients (r =-0.771, ***p<0.001). (D) ChE activity and Hcy Levels in VPD patients (r =-0.713, ***p<0.001).
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rs) and p-values between clinical variables and H&Y, MMSE, NMSS(total/domain) s in PDD and VPD patients.
| Variable | TFF3 (PDD) | Hcy (PDD) | ChE activity (PDD) | TFF3 (VPD) | Hcy (VPD) | ChE activity (VPD) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Age | 0.423 | 0.091 | 0.138 | 0.550 | 0.168 | 0.433 | 0.474 | 0.087 | 0.257 | 0.375 | 0.134 | 0.647 |
| UPDRS | -0.126 | 0.007 | 0.134 | 0.053 | -0.319 | 0.019 | -0.795 | 0.001 | 0.193 | 0.195 | -0.367 | 0.015 |
| Up(Ⅰ) | -0.096 | 0.521 | 0.169 | 0.256 | -0.270 | 0.237 | -0.133 | 0.535 | 0.030 | 0.220 | -0.463 | 0.096 |
| Up(Ⅱ) | -0.091 | 0.541 | 0.173 | 0.247 | -0.134 | 0.367 | -0.458 | 0.065 | 0.143 | 0.289 | -0.197 | 0.355 |
| Up(Ⅲ) | -0.327 | 0.025 | 0.283 | 0.213 | -0.397 | 0.015 | -0.578 | 0.015 | 0.073 | 0.274 | -0.298 | 0.017 |
| Up(Ⅳ) | -0.052 | 0.645 | 0.042 | 0.712 | -0.037 | 0.742 | -0.266 | 0.106 | 0.185 | 0.079 | -0.037 | 0.745 |
| H&Y | -0.315 | 0.031 | 0.342 | 0.019 | -0.269 | 0.025 | -0.206 | 0.047 | 0.306 | 0.026 | -0.379 | 0.022 |
| MMSE | 0.378 | 0.009 | -0.364 | 0.012 | 0.358 | 0.014 | 0.249 | 0.026 | -0.339 | 0.030 | 0.418 | 0.008 |
| NMSS | 0.241 | 0.103 | 0.006 | 0.978 | 0.065 | 0.681 | 0.086 | 0.074 | 0.127 | 0.071 | 0.049 | 0.462 |
| Cardiovascular | -0.205 | 0.168 | 0.359 | 0.015 | -0.201 | 0.178 | -0.094 | 0.138 | 0.115 | 0.014 | -0.207 | 0.048 |
| Sleep/Fatigue | -0.478 | 0.084 | 0.417 | 0.064 | -0.057 | 0.755 | -0.026 | 0.616 | 0.085 | 0.218 | -0.041 | 0.526 |
| Mood | -0.351 | 0.015 | 0.067 | 0.681 | -0.391 | 0.001 | -0.343 | 0.028 | 0.070 | 0.601 | -0.393 | 0.001 |
| Perceptual problem | -0.058 | 0.218 | 0.080 | 0.253 | -0.185 | 0.105 | -0.074 | 0.646 | 0.054 | 0.392 | -0.035 | 0.831 |
| Attention/ | -0.118 | 0.014 | 0.009 | 0.950 | -0.249 | 0.026 | -0.243 | 0.029 | 0.362 | 0.013 | -0.341 | 0.034 |
| Gastrointestina | -0.668 | 0.009 | -0.141 | 0.341 | -0.069 | 0.645 | -0.769 | 0.001 | 0.113 | 0.103 | -0.112 | 0.075 |
| Urinar | -0.045 | 0.763 | 0.018 | 0.915 | -0.021 | 0.894 | -0.063 | 0.190 | 0.054 | 0.462 | -0.205 | 0.198 |
| Sexual function | -0.219 | 0.140 | 0.029 | 0.846 | -0.227 | 0.164 | -0.083 | 0.071 | 0.073 | 0.301 | -0.250 | 0.115 |
| Miscellaneous | -0.044 | 0.350 | -0.007 | 0.919 | -0.208 | 0.155 | -0.410 | 0.081 | 0.230 | 0.119 | -0.104 | 0.487 |
| Daily dose of L-Dopa (mg) | -0.071 | 0.130 | 0.131 | 0.058 | -0.100 | 0.497 | -0.031 | 0.502 | 0.027 | 0.695 | -0.002 | 0.972 |
*p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001. rs, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient; UPDRS, Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale; H&Y, the modified Hoehn and Yahr staging scale; MMSE, mini-mental state examination; NMSS, non-motor symptoms scale for Parkinson’s disease.
Figure 2.ROC curves to evaluate the utility of serum levels of TFF3, ChE activity and Hcy Levels for the discrimination of PDD/VPD patients from healthy controls
(A-D) The AUC of ROC curves for discrimination of PDD patients from healthy controls (A) TFF3, (B) ChE activity, and (C) Hcy were 0.778 (95%CI: 0.706-0.850, *p=0.037), 0.516 (95%CI: 0.423-0.609, p=0.737), and 0.690 (95%CI: 0.606-0.774, *p=0.043), respectively. The AUC of (D) TFF3+ChE activity+Hcy was 0.880 (95%CI: 0.828-0.932, *p=0.027). (E-H) The AUC of ROC curves for discrimination of VPD patients from healthy controls. (E) TFF3, (F) ChE activity, and (G) Hcy were 0.748 (95%CI: 0.671-0.826, *p=0.040), 0.567 (95%CI: 0.475-0.660, *p=0.047), and 0.623 (95%CI: 0.533-0.713, *p=0.046), respectively. The AUC of (H) TFF3+ChE activity+Hcy was 0.846 (95%CI:0.785-0.908, *p=0.031).