Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundLevodopa is the most used and effective medication for motor symptoms of Parkinson disease (PD), its long-term use is associated with the appearance of levodopa-induced dyskinesia (LID). Uric acid (UA) is believed to play an important neuroprotective role in PD.ObjectiveTo investigate if serum UA levels are related with the presence of LIDs in PD patients. Also, we investigated the associations among UA levels and clinical features of PD.MethodsWe enrolled 81 PD patients (dyskinesia = 48; no dyskinesia = 33) in the present study. A blood sample was collected to evaluate serum UA levels, clinical evaluation included the following instruments: Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II), MDS-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Hoehn and Yahr (HY), and the sub-item 4.1 of MDS-UPDRS IV (score ≥ 1). Additional relevant clinical information was obtained by a clinical questionnaire.ResultsSerum UA levels were lower in the dyskinesia group when compared with the no dyskinesia group. The same result was found in the UA levels of both men and women. The multivariate analysis showed lower uric acid levels were significantly associated with having dyskinesia (odds ratio [OR] = 0.424; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.221-0.746; p = 0.005). Additional analysis verified that serum UA levels are inversely correlated with depressive symptoms, disease duration, MDS-UPDRS IV and time spent with dyskinesia. A positive correlation was found with age at onset of PD symptoms.ConclusionsThe present study provides a possible role of serum UA levels in LID present in PD patients.
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.