SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Deciphering the Impact of EPHA1-AS1 Gene Polymorphism on Social Cognition Deficits in Parkinson's Disease.

CNS Neurosci Ther · 2026-04-01

DOI: 10.1002/cns.70801PMID: 41891608

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

AimsEphrin type-A receptor 1 (EPHA1) has been identified as a potential contributor to the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease (PD). The complex interactions between PD symptoms and the EPHA1 protein warrant further exploration.MethodsA cohort of 509 participants, including 362 normal controls (NCs) and 147 PD patients, was included and genotyped for the ephrin type-A receptor 1-antisense 1 (EPHA1-AS1) gene. Overall and emotion-specific social cognition were assessed using the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test. The relationship between the EPHA1-AS1 gene, PD, and social cognition was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test, the Quade test, and moderation analysis.ResultsCompared to NCs, PD patients showed markedly poorer social cognition, especially in overall and negative emotions, regardless of genotype. The rs2966700 variant significantly affects the positive subscore among all participants (p = 0.006), with TT carriers performing better. Furthermore, PD was a significant moderator of the association between rs2966700 and the positive subscore (p = 0.001), with PD patients carrying the C allele performing worse.ConclusionsThis study offers new insights into the interaction between the EPHA1-AS1 gene and PD, thereby enhancing our understanding of its impact on social cognition, particularly in recognizing positive emotions in individuals with PD.

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.