BACKGROUND: Motor progression in Parkinson's disease (PD) is highly heterogeneous, limiting prognosis and the efficiency of clinical trials that require accurate risk stratification. Traditional modeling approaches assume a single average trajectory and fail to capture meaningful divergence, whereas the biological determinants of trajectory-defined subtypes remain unclear. Multivariate proteomic biomarkers may improve early identification of rapid progressors. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (1) delineate distinct motor progression subtypes in early PD using longitudinal Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) III scores and (2) identify cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) proteomic signatures that discriminate rapid from slow progressors. METHODS: We analyzed 5-year longitudinal data from 396 Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) participants with early PD. Motor progression trajectories were derived using latent class trajectory modeling (LCTM) of repeated MDS-UPDRS III scores. CSF proteomics from 78 Olink samples were used for biomarker discovery, with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO)-based feature selection followed by multivariable logistic regression. Validation was performed in 184 SOMAscan-profiled samples. RESULTS: LCTM identified distinct motor progression subtypes in early PD. Differential CSF protein expression across these trajectories highlighted candidate markers of rapid decline. A seven-protein signature (CCL27, CXCL9, NEFL, SERPINE1, GH1, TYMP, KLK1) exhibited good discriminative performance for distinguishing rapid from slow progressors (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.908). In an independent cohort, the combined model showed consistent directional effects and achieved the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.796). CONCLUSIONS: Integrating trajectory modeling with CSF proteomics identified a concise seven-protein signature associated with early PD progression, which showed reproducible patterns across two PPMI cohorts. This approach may support improved risk stratification in PD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: