SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Association between Fecal Bile Acids and Levodopa Response in Patients with Parkinson's Disease.

Microorganisms · 2024-07-15

DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms12071432PMID: 39065200

Open accessbrief-report; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Levodopa is the mainstay of treatments for Parkinson's disease (PD), but large heterogeneity exists in patient response. Increasing evidence implicates bile acids (BAs) involved in the pathogenesis of PD. Furthermore, BAs have also participated in drug bioavailability. However, the impact of BAs on levodopa response (LR) has not been investigated. This study evaluated the association between fecal BAs and LR. Levodopa challenge test (LCT) was conducted in 92 PD patients to assess LR. A total of 36 fecal BAs and plasma levodopa concentrations were detected using LC-MS/MS. The difference of BAs between subgroups with bottom and top 30% LR were analyzed and fecal samples from the two groups were collected for metagenomic shotgun analysis. No fecal BAs were significantly correlated with LR, except for chenodeoxycholic acid-3-β-D-glucuronide (CDCA-3-β-glucuronide, R = -0.228, p-value = 0.039). We found no significant difference in BAs between subgroups with bottom and top 30% LR. What is more, no significant changes in bacterial species composition related to bile acids metabolism or in the proportional representation of genes encoding known bile acids enzymes were observed between the groups. Overall, our data do not support an association between fecal BAs and levodopa response in PD patients. More precise macro-metabolomic approaches are needed to reveal the potential association between gut microbial interactions and the treatment effect of levodopa.

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.