Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a complex and progressive neurodegenerative disease, characterized by resting tremor, rigidity, slowness of movement, and postural instability. Furthermore, PD is associated with a wide spectrum of non-motor symptoms that add to overall disability. In recent years, some investigations, from basic science to clinical applications, have focused on the role of vitamin D in PD, often with controversial findings. Vitamin D has widespread effects on several biological processes in the central nervous system, including neurotransmission in dopaminergic neural circuits. Various studies have recorded lower levels of vitamin D in PD patients than in healthy controls. Low vitamin D status has also been correlated with the risk for PD and motor severity, whereas less is known about the effects vitamin D has on cognitive function and other non-motor symptoms. This review aims to better characterize the correlation between vitamin D and PD, clarify the role of vitamin D in PD prevention and treatment, and discuss avenues for future research in this field.

Introduction: Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) is an effective treatment in patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD) with consolidated evidence of clinical efficacy. However, only few studies have assessed long-term safety, causes of discontinuation, mortality, and relative predictors. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 79 PD patients treated with LCIG between 2005 and 2020 in two Italian Neurological Centers, recording all adverse events (AEs), including weight loss (WL). Kaplan–Meier curve was used to estimate the time to discontinuation and survival. Cox proportional hazard model was employed to identify predictors of discontinuation and mortality, while Pearson’s correlation was used to analyze predictors of WL. Results: The average follow-up was 47.7 ± 40.5 months and the median survival from disease onset was 25 years. There were three cases of polyradiculoneuropathy Guillain–Barre syndrome-like, all occurred in the early years of LCIG treatment. Twenty-five patients died (32%), 18 on LCIG (including one suicide) and seven after discontinuation. The mean WL was 3.62 ± 7.5 kg, which correlated with levodopa dose at baseline (p = 0.002), levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) baseline (p = 0.017) and off-duration (p = 0.0014), but not dyskinesia. Peristomal complications emerged as a negative predictor of discontinuation (p = 0.008). Conclusions: LCIG has a relatively satisfactory long-term safety profile and efficacy and a relatively low rate of discontinuation. Peristomal complications may represent a predictor of longer duration of therapy. According to the mortality analysis, LCIG patients show a long lifespan. Delaying the initiation of LCIG does not affect the sustainability of LCIG therapy.

The main genetic risk factors for Parkinson's disease (PD) are presently represented by variants in GBA1 gene encoding for the β‐glucocerebrosidase (GCase). Searching for a peripheral biomarker that can be used for selecting and monitoring patients in clinical trials targeting GBA1 ‐associated PD ( GBA1 ‐PD) is a current challenge. We previously demonstrated that α‐synuclein oligomers expressed as proximity ligation assay (PLA) score in synaptic terminals of skin biopsy are a reliable biomarker for distinguishing idiopathic PD (iPD) from healthy controls (HC). This cross‐sectional study investigates an unexplored cohort of GBA1 ‐PD ( n = 27) compared to 28 HC, and 36 iPD cases to (i) analyze α‐synuclein oligomers and quantify them throughout PLA score, (ii) investigate GCase expression in brain and synaptic terminals targeting the sweat gland, (iii) unravel indicators that could differentiate patients with specific GBA1 mutations. PLA score discriminates GBA1 ‐PD from HC with sensitivity = 88.9% (95% CI 70.84–97.65), specificity = 88.5% (95% CI 69.85–97.55), and PPV = 88.9% (95% CI 73.24–95.90), AUC value = 0.927 (95% CI 0.859–0.996). No difference was found between GBA1 ‐PD patients and iPD, suggesting a common pathological pathway based on α‐synuclein oligomers. GCase score did not differ in GBA1 ‐PD, iPD, and HC in the synaptic terminals, whereas a positive correlation was found between PLA score and GCase score. Moreover, a significant increase in synaptic density was observed in GBA1 ‐PD compared to iPD and HC ( P < 0.0001). Employing ROC curve to discriminate GBA1 ‐PD from iPD, we found an AUC value for synaptic density = 0.855 (95% CI 0.749–0.961) with sensitivity = 85.2% (95% CI 66.27%–95.81%), specificity = 77.1% (95% CI 59.86%–89.58%), and PPV = 74.19% (60.53%–84.35%). The highest synaptic density values were observed in p.N409S patients. This work points out to the value of both PLA score and synaptic density in distinguishing GBA1 ‐PD from iPD and to their potential to stratify and monitor patients in the context of new pathway‐specific therapeutic options.

The online version of the article contains an error during publication. The second video where the patient is seated on a wheelchair with pink t-shirt is supplementary video 1: Pre-DBS neurological examination. The first video with the patient seated on a chair is supplementary video 2: Post-DBS neurological examination.