SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Case Report: Where is the boundary between autosomal recessive early-onset Parkinson's disease and dystonia-parkinsonism: a case of PLA2G6-associated neurodegeneration.

Front Hum Neurosci · 2026-05-04

DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2026.1772073PMID: 42158583

Open accessJournal Article; Case Reports; case-reportOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundMutations in the PLA2G6 gene cause a spectrum of neurodegenerative disorders, with autosomal recessive early-onset Parkinson's disease (AREP) and dystonia-parkinsonism (DP) representing the two primary subtypes of adult-onset PLA2G6-associated neurodegeneration (PLAN).Case presentationWe report a Chinese female patient with parkinsonism caused by compound heterozygous mutations in the PLA2G6 gene. Both variants she carried-c.313G > T (p. D105Y) and c.23 T > A (p. V8D)-are novel and have not been previously reported. The patient presented with prominent parkinsonism in the upper body that responded well to dopaminergic therapy, while the lower limbs exhibited combined dystonia and a scissoring gait with poor response to dopaminergic medication. Based on the distinctive features of our case and literature review, we suggest that the traditional AREP/DP dichotomy may not fully capture the phenotypic complexity observed in PLA2G6-associated parkinsonism.ConclusionThis case highlights the clinical heterogeneity of PLAN and expands its genotypic spectrum with two novel mutations, suggesting that PLA2G6-related disorders may present with overlapping features of AREP and DP within the same individual.

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.