Skip Navigation


Brain Advance Access originally published online on August 22, 2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
126/12/2648    most recent
awg270v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kumar, A.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, C. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kumar, A.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, C. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Brain, Vol. 126, No. 12, 2648-2655, December 2003
© 2003 Guarantors of Brain
doi: 10.1093/brain/awg270

[11C]DTBZ-PET correlates of levodopa responses in asymmetric Parkinson’s disease

Ajit Kumar1, Sharanpal Mann1, Vesna Sossi2,3, Thomas J. Ruth3, A. Jon Stoessl1, Michael Schulzer1 and Chong S. Lee1

1 Pacific Parkinson’s Research Centre, Vancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre, 2 Departments of Physics and Astronomy and 3 TRIUMF, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Correspondence to: Dr Chong S. Lee, Pacific Parkinson’s Research Centre, M36, Purdy Pavilion, UBC Hospital, 2221 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2B5 Canada E-mail: cslee{at}interchange.ubc.ca

Levodopa effectively improves motor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease. However, the beneficial effects of levodopa often erode over time with the emergence of response fluctuations. Although these response changes have been recognized from the early levodopa era, their mechanisms remain poorly understood. We investigated the role of dopamine (DA) terminal loss in the development of motor fluctuations by employing PET with [11C](±)dihydrotetrabenazine ([11C]DTBZ) as an in vivo marker for DA nerve terminals. Levodopa response was characterized by analysing the time–response curve to a single dose of levodopa with a finger-tapping test. PET scans were performed in 11 patients with asymmetric Parkinson’s disease (age: 61.12 ± 7.97 years; duration of Parkinson’s disease: 10.55 ± 4.53 years; mean ± SD). Each patient performed finger-tapping tests for up to 5 h after taking a therapeutic dose of levodopa. Results showed significantly lower [11C]DTBZ binding potential (BP; Bmax/Kd) and baseline tapping rates on the more affected putamen and corresponding body side, respectively, than on the other (P = 0.003 for the former, P = 0.013 for the latter). Among the variables describing the time–response curve, the duration and early decay time were significantly shorter on the more affected side (P = 0.051 and P = 0.021, respectively). Latency to the onset and latency to 50% Emax (the magnitude of the levodopa response) were significantly longer on the more-affected side (P = 0.013 and P = 0.004, respectively). Emax was not significantly different between the two sides. The asymmetry (difference from the more affected to less affected side) of [11C]DTBZ BP in the putamen showed a highly significant correlation with the corresponding asymmetry of the estimated EC50 (levodopa concentration producing 50% of the maximal response; P = 0.022; r = –0.727), a marginally significant correlation with that of latency to the onset (P = 0.065; r = –0.583) and no significant correlation with that of the magnitude, duration or early decay time. This pattern of changes in levodopa response from the less affected to more affected side was similar to that from stable to fluctuating responders except for the latency to onset. These findings suggest a pathogenetic role for DA terminal loss in the development of motor fluctuations. However, the absence of a significant correlation between the early decay of levodopa response and DA terminal density suggests that DA terminal loss alone cannot account for the development of motor fluctuations. Therefore, our study suggests that both levodopa treatment and DA terminal loss contribute to the pathogenesis of motor fluctuations.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NeurologyHome page
R. J. Uitti, Y. Baba, N. R. Whaley, Z. K. Wszolek, and J. D. Putzke
Parkinson disease: Handedness predicts asymmetry
Neurology, June 14, 2005; 64(11): 1925 - 1930.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BrainHome page
G. Linazasoro and K. L. Leenders
PET studies and physiopathology of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease
Brain, August 1, 2004; 127(8): E15 - E15.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BrainHome page
C. S. Lee and A. Kumar
Reply to: PET studies and physiopathology of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease
Brain, August 1, 2004; 127(8): E16 - E16.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.