OBJECTIVE: To develop a diagnostic model based on plasma-derived extracellular vesicle (EV) subpopulations in Parkinson disease (PD) and atypical parkinsonism (AP), we applied an innovative flow cytometric multiplex bead-based platform. METHODS: Plasma-derived EVs were isolated from PD, matched healthy controls, multiple system atrophy (MSA), and AP with tauopathies (AP-Tau). The expression levels of 37 EV surface markers were measured by flow cytometry and correlated with clinical scales. A diagnostic model based on EV surface markers expression was built via supervised machine learning algorithms and validated in an external cohort. RESULTS: Distinctive pools of EV surface markers related to inflammatory and immune cells stratified patients according to the clinical diagnosis. PD and MSA displayed a greater pool of overexpressed immune markers, suggesting a different immune dysregulation in PD and MSA vs AP-Tau. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of a compound EV marker showed optimal diagnostic performance for PD (area under the curve [AUC] 0.908; sensitivity 96.3%, specificity 78.9%) and MSA (AUC 0.974; sensitivity 100%, specificity 94.7%) and good accuracy for AP-Tau (AUC 0.718; sensitivity 77.8%, specificity 89.5%). A diagnostic model based on EV marker expression correctly classified 88.9% of patients with reliable diagnostic performance after internal and external validations. CONCLUSIONS: Immune profiling of plasmatic EVs represents a crucial step toward the identification of biomarkers of disease for PD and AP.
Immune profiling of plasma-derived extracellular vesicles identifies Parkinson disease
Burrello J.;
2020-01-01
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a diagnostic model based on plasma-derived extracellular vesicle (EV) subpopulations in Parkinson disease (PD) and atypical parkinsonism (AP), we applied an innovative flow cytometric multiplex bead-based platform. METHODS: Plasma-derived EVs were isolated from PD, matched healthy controls, multiple system atrophy (MSA), and AP with tauopathies (AP-Tau). The expression levels of 37 EV surface markers were measured by flow cytometry and correlated with clinical scales. A diagnostic model based on EV surface markers expression was built via supervised machine learning algorithms and validated in an external cohort. RESULTS: Distinctive pools of EV surface markers related to inflammatory and immune cells stratified patients according to the clinical diagnosis. PD and MSA displayed a greater pool of overexpressed immune markers, suggesting a different immune dysregulation in PD and MSA vs AP-Tau. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of a compound EV marker showed optimal diagnostic performance for PD (area under the curve [AUC] 0.908; sensitivity 96.3%, specificity 78.9%) and MSA (AUC 0.974; sensitivity 100%, specificity 94.7%) and good accuracy for AP-Tau (AUC 0.718; sensitivity 77.8%, specificity 89.5%). A diagnostic model based on EV marker expression correctly classified 88.9% of patients with reliable diagnostic performance after internal and external validations. CONCLUSIONS: Immune profiling of plasmatic EVs represents a crucial step toward the identification of biomarkers of disease for PD and AP.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
2020 - EV & JB - EM-PD - NNINI.pdf
Accesso aperto
Descrizione: Manoscritto originale
Tipo di file:
PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione
2.04 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.04 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.