Charles H Adler1, Thomas G Beach1, Nan Zhang1, Holly A Shill1, Erika Driver-Dunckley1, Shyamal H Mehta1, Alireza Atri1, John N Caviness1, Geidy Serrano1, David R Shprecher1, Lucia I Sue1, Christine M Belden1. 1. Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders Center (CHA, EDD, SHM), Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale; Civin Laboratory for Neuropathology (TGB, GS, LIS), Banner Sun Health Research Institute, Sun City, AZ; Department of Biostatistics (NZ), Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale; Barrow Neurologic Institute (HAS), Phoenix, AZ; Cleo Roberts Center (AA, DRS, CMB), Banner Sun Health Research Institute, Sun City, AZ; and Center for Brain/Mind Medicine (AA), Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To update data for diagnostic accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of Parkinson disease (PD) using neuropathologic diagnosis as the gold standard. METHODS: Data from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND) were used to determine the predictive value of a clinical PD diagnosis. Two clinical diagnostic confidence levels were used, possible PD (PossPD, never treated or not responsive) and probable PD (ProbPD, 2/3 cardinal clinical signs and responsive to dopaminergic medications). Neuropathologic diagnosis was the gold standard. RESULTS: Based on the first visit to AZSAND, 15/54 (27.8%) PossPD participants and 138/163 (84.7%) ProbPD participants had confirmed PD. PD was confirmed in 24/34 (70.6%) ProbPD with <5 years and 114/128 (89.1%) with ≥5 years disease duration. Using the consensus final clinical diagnosis following death, 161/187 (86.1%) ProbPD had neuropathologically confirmed PD. Diagnostic accuracy for ProbPD improved if included motor fluctuations, dyskinesias, and hyposmia, and hyposmia for PossPD. CONCLUSIONS: This updated study confirmed lower clinical diagnostic accuracy for elderly, untreated or poorly responsive PossPD participants and for ProbPD with <5 years of disease duration, even when medication responsive. Caution continues to be needed when interpreting clinical studies of PD, especially studies of early disease, that do not have autopsy confirmation. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that a clinical diagnosis of ProbPD at the first visit identifies participants who will have pathologically confirmed PD with a sensitivity of 82.6% and a specificity of 86.0%.
OBJECTIVE: To update data for diagnostic accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of Parkinson disease (PD) using neuropathologic diagnosis as the gold standard. METHODS: Data from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND) were used to determine the predictive value of a clinical PD diagnosis. Two clinical diagnostic confidence levels were used, possible PD (PossPD, never treated or not responsive) and probable PD (ProbPD, 2/3 cardinal clinical signs and responsive to dopaminergic medications). Neuropathologic diagnosis was the gold standard. RESULTS: Based on the first visit to AZSAND, 15/54 (27.8%) PossPD participants and 138/163 (84.7%) ProbPD participants had confirmed PD. PD was confirmed in 24/34 (70.6%) ProbPD with <5 years and 114/128 (89.1%) with ≥5 years disease duration. Using the consensus final clinical diagnosis following death, 161/187 (86.1%) ProbPD had neuropathologically confirmed PD. Diagnostic accuracy for ProbPD improved if included motor fluctuations, dyskinesias, and hyposmia, and hyposmia for PossPD. CONCLUSIONS: This updated study confirmed lower clinical diagnostic accuracy for elderly, untreated or poorly responsive PossPD participants and for ProbPD with <5 years of disease duration, even when medication responsive. Caution continues to be needed when interpreting clinical studies of PD, especially studies of early disease, that do not have autopsy confirmation. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that a clinical diagnosis of ProbPD at the first visit identifies participants who will have pathologically confirmed PD with a sensitivity of 82.6% and a specificity of 86.0%.
Authors: Ronald B Postuma; Daniela Berg; Matthew Stern; Werner Poewe; C Warren Olanow; Wolfgang Oertel; José Obeso; Kenneth Marek; Irene Litvan; Anthony E Lang; Glenda Halliday; Christopher G Goetz; Thomas Gasser; Bruno Dubois; Piu Chan; Bastiaan R Bloem; Charles H Adler; Günther Deuschl Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: I Litvan; Y Agid; D Calne; G Campbell; B Dubois; R C Duvoisin; C G Goetz; L I Golbe; J Grafman; J H Growdon; M Hallett; J Jankovic; N P Quinn; E Tolosa; D S Zee Journal: Neurology Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Charles H Adler; John N Caviness; Marwan N Sabbagh; Holly A Shill; Donald J Connor; Lucia Sue; Virgilio G H Evidente; Erika Driver-Dunckley; Thomas G Beach Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2010-09-14 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Jonathan McKinnon; Virgilio Evidente; Erika Driver-Dunckley; Ashvini Premkumar; Joseph Hentz; Holly Shill; Marwan Sabbagh; John Caviness; Donald Connor; Charles Adler Journal: Int J Neurosci Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.292
Authors: Thomas G Beach; Charles H Adler; LihFen Lue; Lucia I Sue; Jyothi Bachalakuri; Jonette Henry-Watson; Jeanne Sasse; Sarah Boyer; Scophil Shirohi; Reed Brooks; Jennifer Eschbacher; Charles L White; Haru Akiyama; John Caviness; Holly A Shill; Donald J Connor; Marwan N Sabbagh; Douglas G Walker Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2009-04-28 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Sara Hall; Christina D Orrù; Byron Caughey; Oskar Hansson; Geidy E Serrano; Douglas Galasko; Andrew G Hughson; Bradley R Groveman; Charles H Adler; Thomas G Beach Journal: Acta Neuropathol Commun Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 7.578
Authors: Christopher H Gibbons; Roy Freeman; Bailey Bellaire; Charles H Adler; Dan Moore; Todd Levine Journal: Biomark Med Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 2.498