Reyes Nikolai Gil D, Pajo Azalea Tenerife, Saranza Gerard, Höglinger Günther U, Lang Anthony E
Edmond J. Safra Program in Parkinson's Disease, the Rossy Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Centre, and the Morton and Gloria Shulman Movement Disorders Clinic, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Institute of Medical Science, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2025 Sep 4. doi: 10.1007/s00702-025-03013-y.
Parkinson's disease (PD) is increasingly recognized as a heterogeneous neurodegenerative entity with diverse clinical presentations, genetic contributors, and neuropathological features. Central to its pathogenesis is misfolded and aggregated α-synuclein, which collectively form Lewy pathology. Recent advances in biomarker and genetic research have enabled biologically grounded models of PD classification, diagnosis and staging. This review summarizes key principles, differences, and ongoing challenges of two emerging research frameworks: the SynNeurGe criteria and the Neuronal α-Synuclein Disease Integrated Staging System (NSD-ISS)-the former proposed a biologically based classification, while the latter proposed a more restrictive biological definition and staging schema. SynNeurGe incorporates synucleinopathy (S), neurodegeneration (N), genetic risk (G) and clinical status (C) to classify etiologic subtypes across the disease spectrum, emphasizing clinical heterogeneity and multifaceted underlying biological processes. In contrast, the NSD-ISS defines "neuronal α-synuclein disease" (NSD) based on specific molecular (S) and dopaminergic dysfunction (D) markers and a single genetic anchor (SNCA) (G), and maps disease progression across seven clinical stages. While both aim to improve early detection and to advance PD research, they differ in scope, operational definitions, implementation principles, and intended applications. Prevailing challenges include current limitations in mechanistic insights, biomarker standardization and accessibility, underrepresentation of genetic diversity, and ethical considerations around disease labeling and risk disclosure, particularly in asymptomatic cases. These frameworks represent a pivotal shift toward biologically based concepts of PD and related disorders, with future success contingent on continued refinement, validation, and equitable implementation.
帕金森病(PD)越来越被认为是一种具有多种临床表现、遗传因素和神经病理学特征的异质性神经退行性疾病。其发病机制的核心是错误折叠并聚集的α-突触核蛋白,它们共同形成路易氏病理特征。生物标志物和基因研究的最新进展使得基于生物学的帕金森病分类、诊断和分期模型成为可能。本综述总结了两个新兴研究框架的关键原则、差异和持续存在的挑战:突触核蛋白神经遗传学标准(SynNeurGe标准)和神经元α-突触核蛋白病综合分期系统(NSD-ISS)——前者提出了基于生物学的分类方法,而后者提出了更具限制性的生物学定义和分期方案。SynNeurGe标准纳入了突触核蛋白病(S)、神经退行性变(N)、遗传风险(G)和临床状态(C),以对疾病谱中的病因亚型进行分类,强调临床异质性和多方面的潜在生物学过程。相比之下,NSD-ISS基于特定的分子(S)和多巴胺能功能障碍(D)标志物以及单一的遗传锚定因素(SNCA)(G)来定义“神经元α-突触核蛋白病”(NSD),并将疾病进展映射到七个临床阶段。虽然两者都旨在改善早期检测并推进帕金森病研究,但它们在范围、操作定义、实施原则和预期应用方面存在差异。当前面临的挑战包括对发病机制认识的局限性、生物标志物的标准化和可及性、遗传多样性代表性不足,以及围绕疾病标记和风险披露的伦理考量,尤其是在无症状病例中。这些框架代表了向基于生物学的帕金森病及相关疾病概念的关键转变,未来的成功取决于持续的完善、验证和公平实施。