Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Lewy body diseases are common neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies, which lead to both motor and non-motor symptoms. They are neuropathologically characterized by loss of neuromelanized neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta and α-synuclein-immunopositive inclusions (Lewy bodies) in several types of neurons in the brain. A fraction of monogenic PD cases, however, represent a conundrum, as they can present with clinical Lewy body disease but do not have Lewy bodies upon neuropathological examination. For LRRK2, the presence or absence of Lewy bodies is not related to any specific mutation in the gene and different clinical presentation and neuropathology can be present even in the same family. Here, we present the first evidence of widespread α-synuclein accumulation detected with proximity ligation assay (PLA) using the MJFR14-6-4-2 antibody in six Lewy body-negative LRRK2 cases and compare the levels with five patients with neuropathologically verified Lewy body disease and six healthy controls. We show that non-inclusion aggregated α-synuclein in the form of particulate PLA signal is dominant in the LRRK2 cases, while both Lewy-like and particulate PLA signal is found in late-stage Lewy body disease. Furthermore, LRRK2 cases displayed prominent particulate PLA signal in pontocerebellar tracts and inferior olivary nuclei in the brainstem, which was not seen in idiopathic Lewy body disease cases. These results suggest that Lewy-body negative LRRK2-related PD is not associated with a lack of α-synuclein aggregation in neurons but rather a deficiency in the formation of inclusions.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.