SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Genetic Variability of the Vitamin D Receptor Affects Susceptibility to Parkinson's Disease and Dopaminergic Treatment Adverse Events.

Front Aging Neurosci · 2022-04-19

DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.853277PMID: 35517045

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Vitamin D is a lipid-soluble molecule and an important transcriptional regulator in many tissues and organs, including the brain. Its role has been demonstrated also in Parkinson's disease (PD) pathogenesis. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) is responsible for the initiation of vitamin D signaling cascade. The aim of this study was to assess the associations of VDR genetic variability with PD risk and different PD-related phenotypes. We genotyped 231 well characterized PD patients and 161 healthy blood donors for six VDR single nucleotide polymorphisms, namely rs739837, rs4516035, rs11568820, rs731236, rs2228570, and rs1544410. We observed that VDR rs2228570 is associated with PD risk (p VDR genotypes with adverse events of dopaminergic treatment. VDR rs1544410 (GG vs. GA + AA: p = 0.005; GG vs. GA: p = 0.009) was associated with the occurrence of visual hallucinations and VDR rs739837 (TT vs. GG: p = 0.036), rs731236 (TT vs. TC + CC: p = 0.011; TT vs. TC: p = 0.028; TT vs. CC: p = 0.035), and rs1544410 (GG vs. GA: p = 0.014) with the occurrence of orthostatic hypotension. We believe that the reported study may support personalized approach to PD treatment, especially in terms of monitoring vitamin D level and vitamin D supplementation in patients with high risk VDR genotypes.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.