NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Background The RAB32 p.Ser71Arg variant is a novel cause of monogenic Parkinson’s disease (PD), for which detailed phenotypic information is currently scarce. Objectives To clinically and biologically characterize individuals with PARK- RAB32 to gain insights into genotype-phenotype relationships, disease severity, and underlying pathology. Methods We conducted a literature review following the MDSGene database protocol, alongside detailed phenotyping of 11 PARK- RAB32 patients and one prodromal individual from the Rostock International PD (ROPAD) study. In addition to comprehensive scale-based assessments, including olfactory testing, we obtained neuroimaging data and various biomaterials, and performed α-synuclein seeding assays (SAA) in cerebrospinal fluid in a subset. Results 83 patients (74 from the literature) were included in the analysis. The median age at onset was 54 (IQR: 46-61) years. Typical Parkinsonism with a favorable dopaminergic response was observed in all patients. In our cohort, the mean MDS-UPDRS III score was 38.5±21.8 points. Autonomic symptoms were present in all individuals, and 10/11 patients had hyposmia. Several non-motor symptoms were reported for the first time in PARK- RAB32 . Misfolded α-synuclein was identified in 2/2 patients, but not in the prodromal individual. 123I-FP-CIT imaging was available for eight patients, revealing neurodegeneration in all of them. Conclusion While PARK- RAB32 is clinically and likely pathologically similar to idiopathic PD, our study underscores the importance of carefully assessing non-motor symptoms in this newly described form of PD. According to SynNeurGe criteria, PARK- RAB32 is classified as S + (evidence of synucleinopathy), N + (neurodegeneration supported by imaging data), and G F + (presence of a genetic variant).
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.