SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The Future of Targeted Gene-Based Treatment Strategies and Biomarkers in Parkinson's Disease.

Biomolecules · 2020-06-16

DOI: 10.3390/biom10060912PMID: 32560161

Open accessHistorical Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; review-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Biomarkers and disease-modifying therapies are both urgent unmet medical needs in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD) and must be developed concurrently because of their interdependent relationship: biomarkers for the early detection of disease (i.e., prior to overt neurodegeneration) are necessary in order for patients to receive maximal therapeutic benefit and vice versa; disease-modifying therapies must become available for patients whose potential for disease diagnosis and prognosis can be predicted with biomarkers. This review provides an overview of the milestones achieved to date in the therapeutic strategy development of disease-modifying therapies and biomarkers for PD, with a focus on the most common and advanced genetically linked targets alpha-synuclein (SNCA), leucine-rich repeat kinase-2 (LRRK2) and glucocerebrosidase (GBA1). Furthermore, we discuss the convergence of the different pathways and the importance of patient stratification and how these advances may apply more broadly to idiopathic PD. The heterogeneity of PD poses a challenge for therapeutic and biomarker development, however, the one gene- one target approach has brought us closer than ever before to an unprecedented number of clinical trials and biomarker advancements.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.