Rachel Saunders-Pullman1, Roberto Angel Ortega2, Cuiling Wang2, Deborah Raymond2, Sonya Elango2, Katherine Leaver2, Nikita Urval2, Viktoriya Katsnelson2, Rachel Gerber2, Matthew Swan2, Vicki Shanker2, Roy N Alcalay2, Anat Mirelman2, Michael C Brumm2, Helen Mejia-Santana2, Christopher S Coffey2, Kenneth Marek2, Laurie J Ozelius2, Nir Giladi2, Karen S Marder2, Susan B Bressman2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (R.S.-P., R.A.O., D.R., S.E., K.L., N.U., V.K., R.G., M.S., V.S., S.B.B.), Mount Sinai Beth Israel; Albert Einstein College of Medicine (C.W.), Bronx, NY; Department of Neurology (R.N.A., H.M.-S., K.S.M.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York; Neurological Institute (A.M., N.G.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Sackler School of Medicine and Sagol School of Neurosciences, Tel Aviv University, Israel; University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine (M.C.B., C.S.C.), and Biostatistics (M.C.B., C.S.C.), University of Iowa, Iowa City; Department of Neurology (K.M.), Institute for Neurodegenerative Disorders, New Haven, CT; and Department of Genetics (L.J.O.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. rachel.saunders-pullman@mountsinai.org. 2. From the Department of Neurology (R.S.-P., R.A.O., D.R., S.E., K.L., N.U., V.K., R.G., M.S., V.S., S.B.B.), Mount Sinai Beth Israel; Albert Einstein College of Medicine (C.W.), Bronx, NY; Department of Neurology (R.N.A., H.M.-S., K.S.M.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York; Neurological Institute (A.M., N.G.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Sackler School of Medicine and Sagol School of Neurosciences, Tel Aviv University, Israel; University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine (M.C.B., C.S.C.), and Biostatistics (M.C.B., C.S.C.), University of Iowa, Iowa City; Department of Neurology (K.M.), Institute for Neurodegenerative Disorders, New Haven, CT; and Department of Genetics (L.J.O.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is clinical and phenotypic heterogeneity in LRRK2 G2019S Parkinson disease (PD), including loss of smell. Olfactory scores have defined subgroups of LRRK2 PD at baseline. We now extend this work longitudinally to better determine features associated with olfactory classes and to gain further insight into this heterogeneity. METHODS: Evaluation of 162 patients with LRRK2 PD and 198 patients with idiopathic PD (IPD) from the LRRK2 Ashkenazi Jewish Consortium was performed, with follow-up available for 92 patients with LRRK2 PD and 74 patients with IPD. Olfaction (University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test [UPSIT]), motor function (Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale), and cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), as well as sleep, nonmotor, and mood, were measured. Gaussian mixture models were applied on the UPSIT percentile score to determine subgroups based on olfactory performance. Linear mixed effects models, using PD duration as the time scale, assessed the relationship between UPSIT subgroup membership and motor/cognitive change. RESULTS: Baseline olfaction was better in LRRK2 PD compared with IPD (mean UPSIT ± SD: 24.2 ± 8.8 vs 18.9 ± 7.6), with higher mean percentile scores (difference: 15.3 ± 11.6) (p < 0.001) and less frequent hyposmia (55.6% vs 85.4%; p < 0.001). Analysis suggested 3 classes among LRRK2 PD. Age at onset in LRRK2 PD was earlier in the worst olfaction group (group 1), compared with groups 2 and 3 (54.5 ± 11.1 vs 61.7 ± 9.3) (p = 0.012), and separately in the hyposmic group overall (55.0 ± 11.3 vs 61.7 ± 9.1) (p < 0.001). Longitudinal motor deterioration in LRRK2 PD was also significantly faster in the worst UPSIT group than the best UPSIT group (group 3 vs group 1: B = 0.31, SE = 0.35 vs B = 0.96, SE = 0.28) (rate difference = -0.65, SE = 0.29) (p = 0.03). However, olfactory group membership was not significantly associated with cognitive decline. DISCUSSION: In this large LRRK2 cohort with longitudinal analysis, we extend prior work demonstrating subgroups defined by olfaction in LRRK2 G2019S PD and show that the worst olfaction group has earlier age at PD onset and more rapid motor decline. This supports a subgroup of LRRK2 PD that might show more rapid change in a clinical trial of LRRK2-related agents and highlights the need to integrate careful phenotyping into allocation schema in clinical trials of LRRK2-related agents. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that worse olfactory scores were associated with an earlier age at symptomatic onset and a faster rate of motor deterioration in patients with LRRK2 PD.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is clinical and phenotypic heterogeneity in LRRK2 G2019S Parkinson disease (PD), including loss of smell. Olfactory scores have defined subgroups of LRRK2 PD at baseline. We now extend this work longitudinally to better determine features associated with olfactory classes and to gain further insight into this heterogeneity. METHODS: Evaluation of 162 patients with LRRK2 PD and 198 patients with idiopathic PD (IPD) from the LRRK2 Ashkenazi Jewish Consortium was performed, with follow-up available for 92 patients with LRRK2 PD and 74 patients with IPD. Olfaction (University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test [UPSIT]), motor function (Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale), and cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), as well as sleep, nonmotor, and mood, were measured. Gaussian mixture models were applied on the UPSIT percentile score to determine subgroups based on olfactory performance. Linear mixed effects models, using PD duration as the time scale, assessed the relationship between UPSIT subgroup membership and motor/cognitive change. RESULTS: Baseline olfaction was better in LRRK2 PD compared with IPD (mean UPSIT ± SD: 24.2 ± 8.8 vs 18.9 ± 7.6), with higher mean percentile scores (difference: 15.3 ± 11.6) (p < 0.001) and less frequent hyposmia (55.6% vs 85.4%; p < 0.001). Analysis suggested 3 classes among LRRK2 PD. Age at onset in LRRK2 PD was earlier in the worst olfaction group (group 1), compared with groups 2 and 3 (54.5 ± 11.1 vs 61.7 ± 9.3) (p = 0.012), and separately in the hyposmic group overall (55.0 ± 11.3 vs 61.7 ± 9.1) (p < 0.001). Longitudinal motor deterioration in LRRK2 PD was also significantly faster in the worst UPSIT group than the best UPSIT group (group 3 vs group 1: B = 0.31, SE = 0.35 vs B = 0.96, SE = 0.28) (rate difference = -0.65, SE = 0.29) (p = 0.03). However, olfactory group membership was not significantly associated with cognitive decline. DISCUSSION: In this large LRRK2 cohort with longitudinal analysis, we extend prior work demonstrating subgroups defined by olfaction in LRRK2 G2019S PD and show that the worst olfaction group has earlier age at PD onset and more rapid motor decline. This supports a subgroup of LRRK2 PD that might show more rapid change in a clinical trial of LRRK2-related agents and highlights the need to integrate careful phenotyping into allocation schema in clinical trials of LRRK2-related agents. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that worse olfactory scores were associated with an earlier age at symptomatic onset and a faster rate of motor deterioration in patients with LRRK2 PD.
Authors: Heiko Braak; Kelly Del Tredici; Udo Rüb; Rob A I de Vos; Ernst N H Jansen Steur; Eva Braak Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Ziad S Nasreddine; Natalie A Phillips; Valérie Bédirian; Simon Charbonneau; Victor Whitehead; Isabelle Collin; Jeffrey L Cummings; Howard Chertkow Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Laura Silveira-Moriyama; Renato Pupi Munhoz; Margarete de J Carvalho; Salmo Raskin; Ekaterina Rogaeva; Patricia de C Aguiar; Rodrigo A Bressan; Andre C Felicio; Orlando G P Barsottini; Luiz Augusto F Andrade; Hsin F Chien; Vincenzo Bonifati; Egberto R Barbosa; Helio A Teive; Andrew J Lees Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2010-12-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Andrew Siderowf; Danna Jennings; Shirley Eberly; David Oakes; Keith A Hawkins; Albert Ascherio; Matthew B Stern; Kenneth Marek Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Dennis W Dickson; Heiko Braak; John E Duda; Charles Duyckaerts; Thomas Gasser; Glenda M Halliday; John Hardy; James B Leverenz; Kelly Del Tredici; Zbigniew K Wszolek; Irene Litvan Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Roy N Alcalay; Anat Mirelman; Rachel Saunders-Pullman; Ming-X Tang; Helen Mejia Santana; Deborah Raymond; Ernest Roos; Martha Orbe-Reilly; Tanya Gurevich; Anat Bar Shira; Mali Gana Weisz; Kira Yasinovsky; Maayan Zalis; Avner Thaler; Andres Deik; Matthew James Barrett; Jose Cabassa; Mark Groves; Ann L Hunt; Naomi Lubarr; Marta San Luciano; Joan Miravite; Christina Palmese; Rivka Sachdev; Harini Sarva; Lawrence Severt; Vicki Shanker; Matthew Carrington Swan; Jeannie Soto-Valencia; Brooke Johannes; Robert Ortega; Stanley Fahn; Lucien Cote; Cheryl Waters; Pietro Mazzoni; Blair Ford; Elan Louis; Oren Levy; Llency Rosado; Diana Ruiz; Tsvyatko Dorovski; Michael Pauciulo; William Nichols; Avi Orr-Urtreger; Laurie Ozelius; Lorraine Clark; Nir Giladi; Susan Bressman; Karen S Marder Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Francesc Valldeoriola; Carles Gaig; Africa Muxí; Ignacio Navales; Pilar Paredes; Francisco Lomeña; Andres De la Cerda; Mariateresa Buongiorno; Mario Ezquerra; Pilar Santacruz; Maria Jose Martí; Eduardo Tolosa Journal: J Neurol Date: 2011-01-08 Impact factor: 4.849