SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Case Report: Deep brain stimulation in SYNJ1-related early-onset parkinsonism.

Front Med (Lausanne) · 2026-07-13

DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2026.1895449PMID: 42517031

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

BackgroundDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is established for levodopa-responsive Parkinson's disease (PD), but the outcomes of DBS in rare genetic early-onset parkinsonism remain incompletely defined. While its efficacy is documented in monogenic forms of parkinsonism (e.g., LRRK2, Parkin, PINK1, and SNCA), clinical data regarding the safety and efficacy of DBS in carriers of the SYNJ1 mutation remain scarce.Case presentationWe report two patients with SYNJ1-related early-onset parkinsonism treated with bilateral DBS and place their outcomes in a single-center gene-listed EOPD DBS cohort. Case 1 carried a novel homozygous SYNJ1 c.1969A > G (p. Thr657Ala) missense variant and 46, XY disorder of sex development; GPi-DBS enabled the levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) reduction from 775 to 300 mg/day, with improved dyskinesia and sleep, although motor fluctuations and neuropsychiatric symptoms persisted. Case 2 carried a SYNJ1 c.1627 + 13 T > A intronic variant; subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) reduced the LEDD from 955 to 605 mg/day and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III) score from 51 to 32 at 1.5-year follow-up. In the contextual cohort, the median LEDD reduction after DBS was 35.2%. These observations support DBS as a feasible symptomatic strategy in selected genetic early-onset Parkinson's disease (EOPD) while emphasizing genotype-specific uncertainty.ConclusionThese cases illustrate heterogeneous clinical responses to DBS in patients with early-onset parkinsonism carrying SYNJ1 variants. DBS may provide symptomatic benefit in carefully selected patients, but the small sample size and variant-level uncertainty preclude conclusions regarding genotype-specific efficacy.

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.