↓ Skip to main content

Dopamine D2 receptor gene variants and response to rasagiline in early Parkinson's disease: a pharmacogenetic study.

Overview of attention for article published in Brain, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
17 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dopamine D2 receptor gene variants and response to rasagiline in early Parkinson's disease: a pharmacogenetic study.
Published in
Brain, May 2016
DOI 10.1093/brain/aww109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mario Masellis, Shannon Collinson, Natalie Freeman, Maria Tampakeras, Joseph Levy, Amir Tchelet, Eli Eyal, Elijahu Berkovich, Rom E Eliaz, Victor Abler, Iris Grossman, Cheryl Fitzer-Attas, Arun Tiwari, Michael R Hayden, James L Kennedy, Anthony E Lang, Jo Knight

Abstract

The treatment of early Parkinson's disease with dopaminergic agents remains the mainstay of symptomatic therapy for this incurable neurodegenerative disorder. However, clinical responses to dopaminergic drugs vary substantially from person to person due to individual-, drug- and disease-related factors that may in part be genetically determined. Using clinical data and DNA samples ascertained through the largest placebo-controlled clinical trial of the monoamine oxidase B inhibitor, rasagiline (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00256204), we examined how polymorphisms in candidate genes associate with the clinical response to rasagiline in early Parkinson's disease. Variants in genes that express proteins involved in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rasagiline, and genes previously associated with the risk to develop Parkinson's disease were genotyped. The LifeTechnologies OpenArray NT genotyping platform and polymerase chain reaction-based methods were used to analyse 204 single nucleotide polymorphisms and five variable number tandem repeats from 30 candidate genes in 692 available DNA samples from this clinical trial. The peak symptomatic response to rasagiline, the rate of symptom progression, and their relation to genetic variation were examined controlling for placebo effects using general linear and mixed effects models, respectively. Single nucleotide polymorphisms, rs2283265 and rs1076560, in the dopamine D2 receptor gene (DRD2) were found to be significantly associated with a favourable peak response to rasagiline at 12 weeks in early Parkinson's disease after controlling for multiple testing. From a linear regression, the betas were 2.5 and 2.38, respectively, with false discovery rate-corrected P-values of 0.032. These polymorphisms were in high linkage disequilibrium with each other (r(2) = 0.96) meaning that the same clinical response signal was identified by each of them. No polymorphisms were associated with slowing the rate of worsening in Parkinson symptoms from Weeks 12 to 36 after correction for multiple testing. This is the largest and most comprehensive pharmacogenetics study to date examining clinical response to an anti-parkinsonian drug and the first to be conducted in patients with early stage Parkinson's disease receiving monotherapy. The results indicate a clinically meaningful benefit to rasagiline in terms of the magnitude of improvement in parkinsonian symptoms for those with the favourable response genotypes. Future work is needed to elucidate the specific mechanisms through which these DRD2 variants operate in modulating the function of the nigrostriatal dopaminergic system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Master 14 11%
Other 11 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Other 27 21%
Unknown 31 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 19%
Neuroscience 16 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 10%
Psychology 8 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 37 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 August 2016.
All research outputs
#1,378,027
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Brain
#1,456
of 7,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,498
of 331,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain
#19
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.