Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Abstract Background Heterozygous GBA mutations represent the most common genetic risk factor for Parkinson’s disease (PD) and can be associated with a more aggressive phenotype and an increased risk of cognitive impairment. Although subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) provides sustained motor benefit, concerns remain regarding its cognitive safety in GBA1-associated PD (GBA1-PD). Objective To investigate the influence of heterozygous GBA1 variants on cognitive outcomes after one year of bilateral STN-DBS in PD. Methods In this subanalysis of a prospective cohort study (NCT03982953), participants underwent comprehensive preoperative and one-year follow-up assessments including clinical, detailed neuropsychological, imaging, and biomarker measures. Genetic testing included GBA sequencing. Propensity score matching was performed to compare GBA1-PD with non-carrier PD (nc-PD) patients according to baseline age, overall cognition and disease severity. Results Of 57 patients receiving STN-DBS, six had heterozygous GBA variants and were matched to six nc-PD patients. Both groups maintained significant motor improvement after one year and neither group showed an overall cognitive decline. At the domain level, GBA1-PD patients performed worse in visual and working memory at baseline and in visual memory and strategy at follow-up. None of the GBA1-PD patients developed postoperative delirium. Conclusions GBA1 variants were not associated with a worse global cognitive outcome one year after STN-DBS. In line with a growing body of evidence, our data suggests that the presence of a GBA1 variant in PD patients is not a strong predictor of the cognitive outcome one year after STN-DBS, irrespective of its severity.
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.