CNS Drugs

, Volume 17, Issue 7, pp 475–489 | Cite as

Levodopa-Induced Response Fluctuations in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease

Strategies for Management
  • Teus van LaarEmail author
Therapy in Practice


Fluctuations in response to levodopa in patients in the advanced stages of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease occur frequently and are a difficult problem to treat. Patients who are treated with levodopa have an additional 10% risk of experiencing response fluctuations with each year of treatment: 50% of patients have this problem after 5 years of receiving levodopa therapy and almost 100% of patients after 10 years.

The mechanisms by which response fluctuations occur are only partially understood and can be divided into three main types: (i) presynaptic neuronal degeneration leading to a lack of buffering of released levodopa, which is mainly related to wearing-off phenomena; (ii) postsynaptic changes in dopamine receptor sensitivity and number, partially caused by the presynaptic changes, which are clinically related to at-random response fluctuations; and (iii) pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic influences of exogenously administered dopaminergic agents.

Several oral and parenteral treatment strategies are recommended to manage response fluctuations, such as optimisation of dopamine receptor agonist therapy in combination with a reduction of the levodopa load; use of slow-release levodopa formulations; use of catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors; an increase of levodopa dose frequency; use of high-dose amantadine; and intermittent or continuous use of apomorphine and/or levodopa. Continuous stimulation of dopamine receptors with dopaminergic agents is one of the crucial basic steps in the treatment of patients at an advanced stage of Parkinson’s disease, and the preferential use of dopamine receptor agonists has proven to be successful in the prevention and treatment of response fluctuations.


Levodopa MPTP Bromocriptine Dopamine Agonist Apomorphine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The author has not received any funding for the preparation of this manuscript. There are no conflicts of interest that could be relevant to the contents of this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Morrish PK, Sawle GV, Brooks DJ. The rate of progression of Parkinson’s disease: a longitudinal [18F]DOPA PET study. In: Battistin L, Scarlato G, Caraceni T, et al., editors. Advances in neurology. Vol. 69. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996: 427–31Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leenders KL. Pathophysiology of movement disorders studied using PET. J Neural Transm Suppl 1997; 50: 39–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hughes AJ, Daniel SE, Kilford L, et al. Accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease: a clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992; 55: 181–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marsden CD, Parkes JD. Success and problems of long-term levodopa therapy in Parkinson’s disease. Lancet 1977; I: 345–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Block G, Liss C, Reines S, et al. Comparison of immediate-release and controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa in PD: a multicenter 5-year study. Eur Neurol 1997; 37: 23–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Golbe LI. Young-onset Parkinson’s disease: a clinical review. Neurology 1991; 41: 168–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schrag A, Quinn N. Dyskinesias and motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease: a community based study. Brain 2000; 123: 2297–305PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fahn S. Fluctuations of disability in Parkinson’s disease: pathophysiological aspects. In: Marsden CD, Fahn S, editors. Movement disorders. London: Butterworth Scientific, 1982: 123–45Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nutt JG, Holford NH. The response to levodopa in Parkinson’s disease: imposing pharmacological law and order. Ann Neurol 1996; 39: 561–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Melamed E, Bitton V, Zelig O. Delayed onset of response to single doses of L-dopa therapy. Clin Neuropharmacol 1986; 9: 182–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Melamed E, Bitton V, Zelig O. Episodic unresponsiveness to single doses of L-dopa in parkinsonian fluctuators. Neurology 1986; 36: 100–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marsden CD, Parkes JD, Quinn N. Fluctuations of disability in Parkinson’s disease: clinical aspects. In: Marsden CD, Fahn S, editors. Movement disorders. London: Butterworth Scientific, 1982: 96–122Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lees AJ, Shaw KM, Stern GM. Off-period dystonia and on-period choreoathetosis in levodopa-treated Parkinson’s disease [letter]. Lancet 1977; II: 1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muenter MD, Sharpless NS, Tyce GM, et al. Patterns of dystonia in response to L-dopa therapy for Parkinson’s disease. Mayo Clin Proc 1977; 52: 163–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melamed E. Early-morning dystonia: a late side effect of long-term levodopa therapy in Parkinson’s disease. Arch Neurol 1979; 36: 308–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nausieda PA, Weiner WJ, Klawans HL. Dystonic foot response of parkinsonism. Arch Neurol 1980; 37: 132–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Curtis L, Lees AJ, Stern GM, et al. Effect of L-dopa on course of Parkinson’s disease. Lancet 1984; II: 211–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Poewe WH, Lees AJ, Stern GM. Dystonia in Parkinson’s disease: clinical and pharmacological features. Ann Neurol 1988; 23: 73–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nutt JG, Woodward WR, Carter JH, et al. Influence of fluctuations of plasma large neutral amino acids with normal diets on the clinical response to levodopa. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1989; 52: 481–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Baruzzi A, Cantin M, Riva R. Influence of meal ingestion time on pharmacokinetics of orally-administered levodopa in parkinsonian patients. Clin Neuropharmacol 1987; 10: 527–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carter JH, Nutt JH, Woodward WR. Amount and distribution of dietary protein affects clinical response to levodopa in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1990; 39: 401–4Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kurth MC, Tetrad LW, Irwin I, et al. Oral levodopa/carbidopa solution versus tablets in Parkinson’s patients with severe fluctuations: a pilot study. Neurology 1993; 43: 1036–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fabbrini G, Juncos J, Mouradian MM, et al. Levodopa pharmacokinetic mechanisms and motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol 1987; 21: 370–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fabbrini G, Mouradian MM, Juncos JL, et al. Motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease: central pathophysiological mechanisms. Pt I. Ann Neurol 1988; 24: 366–71Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mouradian MM, Juncos JL, Fabbrini G, et al. Motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease: central and pathophysiological mechanisms. Pt II. Ann Neurol 1988; 24: 372–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Leenders KL, Palmer AJ, Quinn N, et al. Brain dopamine metabolism in patients with Parkinson’s disease measured with PET. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1986; 49: 853–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bravi D, Mouradian MM, Roberts JW, et al. Wearing-off fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease: contribution of postsynaptic mechanisms. Ann Neurol 1994; 36: 27–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kostic V, Przedborski S, Flaster E, et al. Early development of levodopa-induced dyskinesias and response fluctuations in young-onset Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1991; 41: 202–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Horstink MWIM, Zijlmans JCM, Pasman JW, et al. Which risk factors predict the levodopa response in fluctuating Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol 1990; 27: 537–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    De Jong GJ, Meerwaldt JD, Schmitz PIM. Factors that influence the occurrence of response variations in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol 1987; 22: 4–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Roos RAC, Vredevoogd CB, Van der Velde EA. Response fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1990; 40: 1344–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Montastrac JL, Rascol O, Senard JM, et al. A randomised controlled study comparing bromocriptine to which levodopa was later added, with levodopa alone in previously untreated patients with Parkinson’s disease: a five year follow-up. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57: 1034–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vermeulen RJ, Drukarch B, Sahadat MCR, et al. The selective dopamine D1 receptor agonist SKF 81297, stimulates motor behavior of MPTP-lesioned monkeys. Eur J Pharmacol 1993; 235: 143–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vermeulen RJ, Drukarch B, Sahadat MCR, et al. The dopamine D1 agonist SKF 81297 and the dopamine D2 agonist LY 171555 act synergistically to stimulate motor behavior of l-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine-lesioned parkinsonian rhesus monkeys. Mov Disorder 1994; 9: 664–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Grondin R, Bédard PJ, Britton DR, et al. Potential therapeutic use of the selective dopamine D1 receptor agonist, A-86929: an acute study in parkinsonian levodopa-primed monkeys. Neurology 1997; 49: 412–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Goetz CG, Koller WC, Poewe W, et al. Management of Parkinson’s disease: an evidence-based review. Levodopa. Mov Disord 2002; 17Suppl. 4: S23–37Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Goetz CG, Koller WC, Poewe W, et al. Management of Parkinson’s disease: an evidence-based review. DA agonists — non-ergot derivatives: apomorphine. Mov Disord 2002; 17Suppl. 4: S83–9Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lledo A. Dopamine agonists: the treatment for Parkinson’s disease in the XXI century? Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2001; 7: 51–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bedard PJ, Di Paolo T, Falardeau P, et al. Chronic treatment with L-dopa, but not bromocriptine, induces dyskinesia in MPTP-parkinsonian monkeys. Brain Res 1986; 379: 294–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pearce RK, Banerji T, Jenner P, et al. De novo administration of ropinirole and bromocriptine induces less dyskinesia than L-dopa in the MPTP-treated marmoset. Mov Disord 1998; 13: 234–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Obeso JA, Rodriguez-Oroz MC, Rodriguez M, et al. Pathophysiology of the basal ganglia in Parkinson’s disease. Trends Neurosci 2000; 23Suppl. 10: S8–S19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Marsden CD. Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57: 672–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wolters EC, Tissingh G, Bergmans PLM, et al. Dopamine agonists in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1995; 45Suppl. 3: S28–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Uitti RJ, Ahlskog JE. Comparative review of dopamine receptor agonists in Parkinson’s disease. CNS Drugs 1996; 5(5): 369–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Stocchi F, Nordera G, Marsden CD. Strategies for treating patients with Parkinson’s disease with disastrous fluctuations and dyskinesias. Clin Neuropharmacol 1997; 20(2): 95–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Olanow CW, Watts RL, Koller WC. An algorithm for the management of Parkinson’s disease (2001): treatment guidelines. Neurology 2001; 56Suppl. 5: S1–S88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kulisevsky J, Lopez-Villegas D, Garcia-Sanchez C, et al. A six-month study of pergolide and L-dopa in de novo Parkinson’s disease patients. Clin Neuropharmacol 1998; 21: 358–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Watts RL. The role of dopamine agonists in early Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1997; 49(1 Suppl. 1): S34–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Clarke CE. Dopamine agonist therapy in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Neurology Rev Int 1998; 2: 1–5Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Boas J, Worm-Petersen J, Dupont J, et al. The levodopa dose-sparing capacity of pergolide compared to that of bromocriptine in an open-label, cross-over study. Eur J Neurol 1996; 3: 44–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Olanow CW, Fahn S, Muenter M, et al. A multicenter double-blind placebo-controlled trial of pergolide as an adjunct to Sinemet in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 1994; 9(1): 40–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    LeWitt PA, Ward CD, Larsen TA, et al. Comparison of pergolide and bromocriptine therapy in parkinsonism. Neurology 1983; 33(8): 1009–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pezzoli G, Martignoni E, Pacchetti C, et al. Pergolide compared with bromocriptine in Parkinson’s disease: a multicenter, crossover, controlled study. Mov Disord 1994; 9(4): 431–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Comparisons of therapeutic effects of levodopa, levodopa and selegiline, and bromocriptine in patients with early, mild Parkinson’s disease: three year interim report: Parkinson’s Disease Research Group in the United Kingdom. BMJ 1993; 307(6902): 469–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Hely MA, Morris JG, Reid WG, et al. The Sydney Multicentre Study of Parkinson’s disease: a randomised, prospective five year study comparing low dose bromocriptine with low dose levodopa-carbidopa. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57(8): 903–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rascol O, Brooks DJ, Korczyn AD, et al. A five-year study of the incidence of dyskinesia in patients with early Parkinson’s disease who were treated with ropinirole or levodopa: 056 Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1484–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Barone P, Bravi D, Bermejo-Pareja F, et al. Pergolide monotherapy in the treatment of early PD: a randomized, controlled study: Pergolide Monotherapy Study Group. Neurology 1999: 53: 573–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Parkinson Study Group G. Pramipexole vs levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 284: 1931–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rinne UK, Bracco F, Chouza C, et al. Early treatment of Parkinson’s disease with cabergoline delays the onset of motor complications: results of a double-blind levodopa controlled trial. Drugs 1998; 55Suppl. 1: S23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Poewe WH, Lees AJ, Stern GM. Treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease with an oral sustained-release preparation of L-dopa: clinical and pharmacokinetic observations. Clin Neuropharmacol 1986; 9: 430–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Coleman RJ. Current drug therapy for Parkinson’s disease. Drugs Aging 1992; 2(2): 112–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Goetz CG, Koller WC, Poewe W, et al. Management of Parkinson’s disease: an evidence-based review. MAO-B inhibitors for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 2002; 17Suppl. 4: S38–44Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kurth MC, Adler CH, Hilaire MS, et al. Tolcapone improves motor function and reduces levodopa requirement in patients with Parkinson’s disease experiencing motor fluctuations. Neurology 1997; 48: 81–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Parkinson Study Group. Entacapone improves motor fluctuations in levodopa-treated Parkinson’s disease patients. Ann Neurol 1997; 42: 747–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rinne UK, Larsen JP, Siden A, et al. Entacapone enhances the response to levodopa in parkinsonian patients with motor fluctuations. Neurology 1998; 51: 1309–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ruottinen HM, Rinne UK. Entacapone prolongs levodopa response in a one month double blind study in parkinsonian patients with levodopa related fluctuations. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996; 60: 36–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Nutt JG. Effects of COMT inhibition on the pharmacokinetics of L-dopa. Adv Neurol 1996; 69: 493–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lyytinen J, Kaakkola S, Ahtila S, et al. Simultaneous MAO-B and COMT inhibition in L-dopa treated patients with Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 1997; 12: 497–505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lees AJ. Dopamine agonists in Parkinson’s disease: a look at apomorphine. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 1993; 7: 121–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Colosimo C, Merello M, Albanese A. Clinical usefulness of apomorphine in movement disorders. Clin Neuropharmacol 1994; 17: 243–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    van Laar T, Jansen ENH, Essink AWG, et al. Intranasal apomorphine in parkinsonian on-off fluctuations. Arch Neurol 1992; 49: 482–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Dewey RB, Maraganore DM, Ahlskog JE. A double-blind placebo-controlled study of intranasal apomorphine spray as a rescue agent for off-states in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 1998; 13: 782–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Merello M, Pikielny R, Cammarota A, et al. Comparison of subcutaneous apomorphine versus dispersible Madopar latency and effect duration in Parkinson’s disease patients: a double-blind single-dose study. Clin Neuropharmacol 1997; 20: 165–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Nutt JG, Carter JH, Lea ES, et al. Motor fluctuations during continuous levodopa infusions in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 1997; 12: 285–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Melamed E, Zoldan J, Galili-Mosberg R, et al. Current management of motor fluctuations in patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease treated chronically with levodopa. J Neural Transm Suppl 1999; 56: 173–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Djaldetti R, Melamed E. Levodopa ethylester: a novel rescue therapy for response fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol 1996; 39: 401–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gancher GT, Nutt JG, Woodward WR. Time course of tolerance to apomorphine in Parkinsonism. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1992; 52: 504–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Neef C, van Laar T. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships of apomorphine in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Clin Pharmacokinet 1999; 37: 257–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stocchi F, Farina C, Nordera G, et al. Implantable venous access system for apomorphine infusion in complicated Parkinson’s disease [letter]. Mov Disord 1999; 14: 358PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Verhagen Metman L, Van den Munckhof P, Klaassen AAG, et al. Effects of supra-threshold levodopa doses on dyskinesias in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1997; 49: 711–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Papa SM, Chase TN. Levodopa-induced dyskinesias improved by a glutamate antagonist in Parkinsonian monkeys. Ann Neurol 1996; 39: 574–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Verhagen Metman L, Del Dotto P, Van den Munckhof P, et al. Amantadine as treatment for dyskinesias and motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1998; 50: 1323–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Metman LV, Del Dotto P, LePoole K, et al. Amantadine for levodopa-induced dyskinesias: a 1-year follow-up study. Arch Neurol 1999; 56: 1383–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Uitti Rj, Rajput AH, Ahlskog JE, et al. Amantadine treatment is an independent predictor of survival in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1996; 46: 1551–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Bennett JP, Elke R, Landow RN, et al. Suppression of dyskinesias in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1993; 43: 1551–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Trosch RM, Friedman JH, Lannon MC, et al. Clozapine use in Parkinson’s disease: a retrospective analysis of a large multicentered clinical experience. Mov Disord 1998; 13: 377–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Durif F, Vidailhet M, Assal F, et al. Low-dose clozapine improves dyskinesias in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1997; 48: 658–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Deuschl G, Krack P, Volkmann J. Deep brain stimulation for movement disorders. Mov Disord 2002; 7Suppl. 3: S1–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Chase TN. The significance of continuous dopaminergic stimulation in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Drugs 1998; 55Suppl. 1: 1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurologyGroningen University HospitalcGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations