Author:
Adler Charles H.,Beach Thomas G.,Zhang Nan,Shill Holly A.,Driver-Dunckley Erika,Mehta Shyamal H.,Atri Alireza,Caviness John N.,Serrano Geidy,Shprecher David R.,Sue Lucia I.,Belden Christine M.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo update data for diagnostic accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of Parkinson disease (PD) using neuropathologic diagnosis as the gold standard.MethodsData 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.ResultsBased 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.ConclusionsThis 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 EvidenceThis 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%.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献