Background Sexual health is influenced by a complex interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors, all of which can be impacted by Parkinson's disease (PD). Female sexual dysfunction includes reduced sexual desire and/or arousal, pain during sexual activity, or difficulty achieving orgasm. Despite its impact on quality of life, sexual health in women with PD remains poorly understood. Objective To investigate the impact of motor, non-motor, and social PD aspects on sexual health of women with PD. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study with 100 women with PD (Hoehn and Yahr stages 1–3) who reported an active sex life in the last six months. Data were collected via remote interviews and included demographic and clinical features, cognitive capacity, motor and non-motor experiences, fatigue, self-esteem, sleep disorders, couple relationship quality, depressive symptoms, and sexual health assessments using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and Sexual Quotient-Female (SQ-F). Multiple regression models were used to identify predictors of FSFI and SQ-F scores. Results Results indicated that while several motor, non-motor, and social factors correlated with sexual health, only couple relationship quality and sleep quality significantly predicted both short-term (FSFI) and long-term (SQ-F) sexual health. No significant associations were observed with age, disease onset, postmenopausal status, or daily medication dosage. Conclusions The present study's evidence identifies multiple key areas, such as couple's relationship quality and sleep quality that could be targeted for intervention to improve sexual health in women with PD.
Incidence of Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech and Primary Progressive Aphasia in Olmsted County, MN, 2011–2022
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical progression of the brain‐/body‐first categories within Lewy body disease (LBD): Parkinson's disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and PD dementia.MethodsWe used of the Rochester Epidemiology Project to establish a population‐based cohort of clinically diagnosed LBD. We used two definitions for differentiating between brain‐ and body‐first LBD: a previously hypothesized body‐first presentation in patients with rapid eye movement sleep behavior onset before motor symptoms onset; and an expanded definition of body‐first LBD when a patient had at least 2 premotor symptoms between constipation, erectile dysfunction, rapid eye movement sleep behavior, anosmia, or neurogenic bladder.ResultsBrain‐first patients were more likely to be diagnosed with PD (RR = 1.43, p = 0.003), whereas body‐first patients were more likely to be diagnosed with DLB (RR = 3.15, p < 0.001). Under the expanded definition, there was no difference in LBD diagnosis between brain‐first and body‐first patients (PD: RR = 1.03, p = 0.10; DLB: RR = 0.88, p = 0.58) There were no patterns between brain‐ or body‐first presentation, PD dementia under either definition (original: p = 0.09, expanded: p = 0.97), and no significant difference in motor symptoms between brain‐first and body‐first.InterpretationOur findings do not support the dichotomous classification of body‐first and brain‐first LBD with the currently proposed definition. Biological exposures resulting in PD and DLB are unlikely to converge on a binary classification of top‐down or bottom‐up synuclein pathology. ANN NEUROL 2024;96:551–559
Longitudinal Free‐Water Changes in Dementia with Lewy Bodies
ObjectiveThis study was undertaken to assess cross‐sectional and longitudinal [18F]‐flortaucipir positron emission tomography (PET) uptake in pathologically confirmed frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and to compare FTLD to cases with high and low levels of Alzheimer disease (AD) neuropathologic changes (ADNC).MethodsOne hundred forty‐three participants who had completed at least one flortaucipir PET and had autopsy‐confirmed FTLD (n = 52) or high (n = 58) or low ADNC (n = 33) based on Braak neurofibrillary tangle stages 0–IV versus V–VI were included. Flortaucipir standard uptake value ratios (SUVRs) were calculated for 9 regions of interest (ROIs): an FTLD meta‐ROI, midbrain, globus pallidum, an AD meta‐ROI, entorhinal, inferior temporal, orbitofrontal, precentral, and medial parietal. Linear mixed effects models were used to compare mean baseline SUVRs and annual rate of change in SUVR by group. Sensitivity and specificity to distinguish FTLD from high and low ADNC were calculated.ResultsBaseline uptake in the FTLD meta‐ROI, midbrain, and globus pallidus was greater in FTLD than high and low ADNC. No region showed a greater rate of flortaucipir accumulation in FTLD. Baseline uptake in the AD‐related regions and orbitofrontal and precentral cortices was greater in high ADNC, and all showed greater rates of accumulation compared to FTLD. Baseline differences were superior to longitudinal rates in differentiating FTLD from high and low ADNC. A simple baseline metric of midbrain/inferior temporal ratio of flortaucipir uptake provided good to excellent differentiation between FTLD and high and low ADNC (sensitivities/specificities = 94%/95% and 71%/70%).InterpretationThere are cross‐sectional and longitudinal differences in flortaucipir uptake between FTLD and high and low ADNC. However, optimum differentiation between FTLD and ADNC was achieved with baseline uptake rather than longitudinal rates. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:1016–1029
Age Cutoff for Early‐Onset Parkinson's Disease: Recommendations from the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Task Force on Early Onset Parkinson's Disease
ABSTRACT Background Early‐onset Parkinson's disease (EOPD)/young‐onset Parkinson's disease (YOPD) is defined as Parkinson's disease (PD) with an age at onset (AAO) after age 21 years but before the usual AAO for PD. Consensus is lacking, and the reported maximal age for EOPD/YOPD has varied from 40 to 60 years, leading to a lack of uniformity in published studies and difficulty in harmonization of data. EOPD and YOPD have both been used in the literature, somewhat interchangeably. Objective To define the nomenclature and AAO cutoff for EOPD/YOPD. Methods An extensive review of the literature and task force meetings were conducted. Conclusions were reached by consensus. Results First, the literature has seen a shift from the use of YOPD toward EOPD. This seems motivated by an attempt to avoid age‐related stigmatization of patients. Second, in defining EOPD, 56% of the countries use 50 or 51 years as the cutoff age. Third, the majority of international genetic studies in PD use an age cutoff of younger than 50 years to define EOPD. Fourth, many studies suggest that changes in the estrogen level can affect the predisposition to develop PD, making the average age at menopause of 50 years an important factor to consider when defining EOPD. Fifth, considering the differential impact of the AAO of PD on professional and social life, using 50 years as the upper cutoff for the definition of EOPD seems reasonable. Conclusions This task force recommends the use of EOPD rather than YOPD. It defines EOPD as PD with AAO after 21 years but before 50 years.
Longitudinal Tau Positron Emission Tomography in Dementia with Lewy Bodies