Comprehensive proteomics of CSF, plasma, and urine identify DDC and other biomarkers of early Parkinson's disease.

Parkinson's disease (PD) starts at the molecular and cellular level long before motor symptoms appear, yet there are no early-stage molecular biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis prediction, or monitoring therapeutic response. This lack of biomarkers greatly impedes patient care and translational research-L-DOPA remains the standard of care more than 50 years after its introduction. Here, we performed a large-scale, multi-tissue, and multi-platform proteomics study to identify new biomarkers for early diagnosis and disease monitoring in PD. We analyzed 4877 cerebrospinal fluid, blood plasma, and urine samples from participants across seven cohorts using three orthogonal proteomics methods: Olink proximity extension assay, SomaScan aptamer precipitation assay, and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry proteomics. We discovered that hundreds of proteins were upregulated in the CSF, blood, or urine of PD patients, prodromal PD patients with DAT deficit and REM sleep behavior disorder or anosmia, and non-manifesting genetic carriers of LRRK2 and GBA mutations. We nominate multiple novel hits across our analyses as promising markers of early PD, including DOPA decarboxylase (DDC), also known as L-aromatic acid decarboxylase (AADC), sulfatase-modifying factor 1 (SUMF1), dipeptidyl peptidase 2/7 (DPP7), glutamyl aminopeptidase (ENPEP), WAP four-disulfide core domain 2 (WFDC2), and others. DDC, which catalyzes the final step in dopamine synthesis, particularly stands out as a novel hit with a compelling mechanistic link to PD pathogenesis. DDC is consistently upregulated in the CSF and urine of treatment-naïve PD, prodromal PD, and GBA or LRRK2 carrier participants by all three proteomics methods. We show that CSF DDC levels correlate with clinical symptom severity in treatment-naïve PD patients and can be used to accurately diagnose PD and prodromal PD. This suggests that urine and CSF DDC could be a promising diagnostic and prognostic marker with utility in both clinical care and translational research.

Evaluating neurocognitive outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors: A comparative study of performance-based and reported measures.

AIMS: To (1) describe the prevalence of cognitive dysfunctions using performance-based and reported measures, and (2) explore the correlations between selected performance-based, patient-reported, and observer-reported neurocognitive outcome measures three months after hospital discharge in a population of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors. METHODS: Data from 193 OHCA survivors was derived from the Danish multicenter REVIVAL cohort study. At three months, four subtests of the performance-based Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) (Trail making, Color-word interference, Verbal fluency, and Figure design), the patient-reported Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function - Adult (BRIEF-A), and the observer-reported 16-item Short Form (SF) Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline after Cardiac Arrest (SF-16 IQCODE-CA) were collected. Spearman's rank coefficient correlation analysis was performed to examine correlations between D-KEFS, BRIEF-A, and SF-16 IQCODE-CA. RESULTS: Overall, 21% of survivors exhibited impairment in executive functioning using the D-KEFS subtest Color-word interference, while only 9% self-reported executive impairment (BRIEF-A) and 7% of relatives reported cognitive decline (SF-16 IQCODE-CA) in survivors at three months post-arrest. All correlations between D-KEFS, BRIEF-A and SF-16 IQCODE-CA were negligible to low. CONCLUSION: The results of this REVIVAL substudy suggest that although the performance-based and reported measures did not correlate, dual neurocognitive screening tools containing both a self-reported and an informant-reported version may have the potential to detect executive discrepancies in the return to everyday life and guide targeted neurorehabilitation after OHCA.

Brain network changes and cognitive function after cardiac arrest.

Survival rates after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest have improved over the past two decades. Despite this progress, long-term cognitive impairment remains prevalent even in those with early recovery of consciousness after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; however, little is known about the determinants and underlying mechanisms. We utilized the REcovery after cardiac arrest surVIVAL cohort of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors who fully regained consciousness to correlate cognition measurements with brain network changes using resting-state functional MRI and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment at hospital discharge and a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment at three-month follow-up. About half of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors displayed cognitive impairments at discharge, and in most, cognitive deficits persisted at three-month follow-up, particularly in the executive and visuospatial functions. Compared to healthy controls, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors exhibited increased connectivity between resting-state networks, particularly involving the frontoparietal network. The increased connectivity between the frontoparietal and visual networks was associated with less favourable cognitive outcomes (ß = 14.0, P = 0.01), while higher education seemed to confer some cognitive protection (ß = -2.06, P = 0.03). In sum, the data highlight the importance of subtle cognitive impairment, also in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors who are eligible for home discharge, and the potential of functional MRI to identify alterations in brain networks correlating with cognitive outcomes.

Brain Health After COVID-19, Pneumonia, Myocardial Infarction, or Critical Illness.

Importance: Brain health is most likely compromised after hospitalization for COVID-19; however, long-term prospective investigations with matched control cohorts and face-to-face assessments are lacking. Objective: To assess whether long-term cognitive, psychiatric, or neurological complications among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 differ from those among patients hospitalized for other medical conditions of similar severity and from healthy controls. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study with matched controls was conducted at 2 academic hospitals in Copenhagen, Denmark. The case cohort comprised patients with COVID-19 hospitalized between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Control cohorts consisted of patients hospitalized for pneumonia, myocardial infarction, or non-COVID-19 intensive care-requiring illness between March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, and healthy age- and sex-matched individuals. The follow-up period was 18 months; participants were evaluated between November 1, 2021, and February 28, 2023. Exposures: Hospitalization for COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall cognition, assessed by the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Secondary outcomes were executive function, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and neurological deficits. Results: The study included 345 participants, including 120 patients with COVID-19 (mean [SD] age, 60.8 [14.4] years; 70 men [58.3%]), 125 hospitalized controls (mean [SD] age, 66.0 [12.0] years; 73 men [58.4%]), and 100 healthy controls (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [15.3] years; 46 men [46.0%]). Patients with COVID-19 had worse cognitive status than healthy controls (estimated mean SCIP score, 59.0 [95% CI, 56.9-61.2] vs 68.8 [95% CI, 66.2-71.5]; estimated mean MoCA score, 26.5 [95% CI, 26.0-27.0] vs 28.2 [95% CI, 27.8-28.6]), but not hospitalized controls (mean SCIP score, 61.6 [95% CI, 59.1-64.1]; mean MoCA score, 27.2 [95% CI, 26.8-27.7]). Patients with COVID-19 also performed worse than healthy controls during all other psychiatric and neurological assessments. However, except for executive dysfunction (Trail Making Test Part B; relative mean difference, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.01-1.31]), the brain health of patients with COVID-19 was not more impaired than among hospitalized control patients. These results remained consistent across various sensitivity analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective cohort study suggests that post-COVID-19 brain health was impaired but, overall, no more than the brain health of patients from 3 non-COVID-19 cohorts of comparable disease severity. Long-term associations with brain health might not be specific to COVID-19 but associated with overall illness severity and hospitalization. This information is important for putting understandable concerns about brain health after COVID-19 into perspective.