Key Points Question Does the outcome of subthalamic deep brain stimulation vary among common monogenic forms of Parkinson disease? Findings In this systematic review and meta-analysis involving 518 patients from 17 published studies, treatment with subthalamic deep brain stimulation for patients with Parkinson disease with LRRK2 , GBA , or PRKN gene mutation yielded similar motor outcomes but different changes in dopaminergic doses, activities of daily living, motor complications, and cognitive functions. Meaning Genetic screening for LRRK2, GBA, and PRKN mutations in patients with Parkinson disease who are candidates for subthalamic deep brain stimulation may serve to inform outcomes.

Objective This study was undertaken to compare the rate of change in cognition between glucocerebrosidase (GBA) mutation carriers and noncarriers with and without subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN‐DBS) in Parkinson disease. Methods Clinical and genetic data from 12 datasets were examined. Global cognition was assessed using the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS). Subjects were examined for mutations in GBA and categorized as GBA carriers with or without DBS (GBA+DBS+, GBA+DBS‐), and noncarriers with or without DBS (GBA‐DBS+, GBA‐DBS‐). GBA mutation carriers were subcategorized according to mutation severity (risk variant, mild, severe). Linear mixed modeling was used to compare rate of change in MDRS scores over time among the groups according to GBA and DBS status and then according to GBA severity and DBS status. Results Data were available for 366 subjects (58 GBA+DBS+, 82 GBA+DBS‐, 98 GBA‐DBS+, and 128 GBA‐DBS‐ subjects), who were longitudinally followed (range = 36–60 months after surgery). Using the MDRS, GBA+DBS+ subjects declined on average 2.02 points/yr more than GBA‐DBS‐ subjects (95% confidence interval [CI] = −2.35 to −1.69), 1.71 points/yr more than GBA+DBS‐ subjects (95% CI = −2.14 to −1.28), and 1.49 points/yr more than GBA‐DBS+ subjects (95% CI = −1.80 to −1.18). Interpretation Although not randomized, this composite analysis suggests that the combined effects of GBA mutations and STN‐DBS negatively impact cognition. We advise that DBS candidates be screened for GBA mutations as part of the presurgical decision‐making process. We advise that GBA mutation carriers be counseled regarding potential risks associated with STN‐DBS so that alternative options may be considered. ANN NEUROL 2022;91:424–435

There is a critical need for careful and independent validation of reported symptomatic efficacy and dopaminergic biomarker changes induced by nilotinib in Parkinson disease (PD).OBJECTIVES To assess safety and tolerability of nilotinib in participants with moderately advanced PD. Secondary and exploratory objectives were to assess its affect on PD disability, pharmacokinetics, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) penetration, and biomarkers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis was a 6-month, multicenter, randomized parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Recruitment was from November 20, 2017, to December 28, 2018, and follow-up ended on September 9, 2019. The study was conducted at 25 US sites. The study approached 173 patients, of whom 48 declined, 125 were screened, and 76 who received a stable regimen of PD medications were enrolled (39% screen failure).INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, 150-mg nilotinib, or 300-mg nilotinib once daily orally for 6 months, followed by 2-month off-drug evaluation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcomes were safety and tolerability. The tolerability end point was defined as the ability to complete the study while receiving the assigned dose. An active arm was considered tolerable if the percentage of participants meeting the tolerability end point for that group was not significantly lower than the percentage observed in the placebo group. Secondary outcomes included change in PD disability (Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [MDS-UPDRS], Part II OFF/ON). Exploratory outcomes included serum and CSF pharmacokinetic profile, and CSF dopaminergic biomarkers.RESULTS At baseline, mean (SD) participants' age was 64.6 (7.5) years, 52 were male (68%), mean (SD) disease duration was 9.9 years (4.7), MDS-UPDRS Part 1-3 OFF score was 66.4 (19.3), ON score was 48.4 (16.2), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was 27.1 (2.2). The number of participants who completed the study receiving the assigned dose were 21 (84%), 19 (76%), and 20 (77%) in the placebo, 150-mg, and 300-mg arms, respectively. Both active doses had acceptable safety profile. The most common reasons for drug suspension were asymptomatic, dose-dependent elevations of amylase, and/or lipase. Nilotinib, 150 mg and 300 mg, exhibited worse MDS-UPDRS-3 ON scores compared with placebo, achieving significance for nilotinib, 300 mg, at month 1 (P < .01). There was no difference in the change of MDS-UPDRS-3 OFF from baseline to 6 months between groups (P = .17). Cerebrospinal fluid/serum ratio of nilotinib concentration was 0.2% to 0.3%. There was no evidence of treatment-related alteration of dopamine metabolites in the CSF.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE While we demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability of nilotinib in our cohort, the low CSF exposure and lack of biomarkers effect combined with the efficacy data trending in the negative direction indicate that nilotinib should not be further tested in PD.