SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Effect of subcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa therapy on non-motor symptoms in advanced PD patients.

J Neurol · 2026-06-08

DOI: 10.1007/s00415-026-13890-2PMID: 42260239

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

BackgroundSubcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa (LDp/CDp) infusion is approved for treating motor fluctuations and dyskinesias in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (aPD). However, efficacy data on non-motor symptoms (NMS) are limited.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effects of LDp/CDp treatment on NMS in patients with aPD.DesignRetrospective analysis of efficacy of LDp/CDp on NMS after 3 week therapy in a Parkinson's day-clinic setting and further 6 weeks of outpatient treatment.MethodsTwenty-one patients with aPD were assessed at baseline (T0), after 3 weeks (T1), and after 9 weeks (T2). Assessments included broader NMS according to MDS-UPDRS Part I and NMS questionnaire (NMSQ) and in more detail sleep (PDSS-2) and depression (BDI-2).ResultsMean MDS-UPDRS I total score significantly improved by 27% at T1 and 34% at T2 (3.90 and 4.85 points, respectively), which has to be considered clinically relevant (threshold -2.64 points). Relevant improvement accounted for 62% of patients at T1 and 57% at T2. MDS-UPDRS part IB score also improved significantly at both timepoints by approximately 30%. The greatest benefits were observed in sleep disturbances, pain, and constipation. NMSQ score improved by 21% at T1 and 27% at T2, particularly within the gastrointestinal domain. PDSS-2 score improved by 27% at T1, and Beck Depression Inventory 2 score by 37% at T1; both showed numerical but non-significant trends at T2. Psychotic symptoms occurred as adverse effects in 4 of 21 patients (19%).ConclusionIn this exploratory retrospective cohort, LDp/CDp therapy improved clinically relevant NMS, though confirmation in larger controlled studies is needed.

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.