MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415719656 · doi:10.37349/ent.2025.1004119

Gene therapy for Parkinson’s disease: a new frontier in neurodegenerative diseases

2025· article· en· W4415719656 on OpenAlexaff
Abraham Olufemi Asuku, Gbonjubola Oyinlola Ogungbangbe, Grace Ayobami Fajemidagba

Bibliographic record

VenueExploration of Neuroprotective Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic enhancementDiseaseNeurotrophic factorsClinical trialDopaminergicAdeno-associated virusParkinson's diseaseSubstantia nigraGene delivery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a devastating neurodegenerative condition characterized primarily by the degeneration of the dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra, causing motor dysfunction and many non-motor symptoms. Available pharmacological treatments and therapies provide symptomatic relief but do not halt the progression of PD. Gene therapy has been recognized as a valuable therapeutic frontier, providing the possibility of disease modification by targeting the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms of PD. The parts of the methodology used for gene therapy entail the delivery of genetic material into particular regions of the brain with the aid of viral vectors to improve the synthesis of dopamine, maintain the integrity of neurons, or control pathological pathways. Recent clinical trials have shown promising efficacy and safety profiles for many gene therapy methods, consisting of those targeting enzymes in the biosynthesis of dopamine [e.g., L-amino acid decarboxylase (AADC)], synuclein alpha pathology, and neurotrophic factors [e.g., growth-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF)]. However, in spite of these developments, there are limitations in vector delivery and prolonged expression of genes, as well as patient-specific responses. This review highlights the present landscape of gene therapy in PD, discussing the latest successes, ongoing clinical trials, and future perspectives that could shape therapeutic paradigms for PD.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExploration of Neuroprotective TherapySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207