Levodopa has been the cornerstone of Parkinson's disease pharmacotherapy since its introduction in the late 1960s. More than five decades of subsequent drug development have produced numerous alternatives and adjuncts, but none has matched its efficacy for motor symptom control. Understanding why levodopa works, why it requires carbidopa, and why it cannot be replaced by dopamine itself are not simply historical questions; they define the pharmacological logic that governs every prescribing decision in this chapter.
The fundamental pharmacological problem in Parkinson's disease (PD) is dopamine deficiency in the striatum, and the obvious therapeutic solution would appear to be dopamine replacement. Dopamine itself, however, cannot be administered systemically for this purpose because it does not cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Dopamine is a polar catecholamine that is efficiently excluded by the tight junctions and efflux transporters of the BBB. Even if it could penetrate the CNS, peripheral administration of dopamine at doses sufficient to raise central levels would produce catastrophic cardiovascular effects through stimulation of peripheral adrenergic and dopaminergic receptors.1 The solution to this problem, first recognized by Oleh Hornykiewicz and colleagues in the early 1960s and translated into clinical practice by Cotzias, was to administer the immediate biosynthetic precursor of dopamine, L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (levodopa, L-DOPA), which crosses the BBB via the large neutral amino acid transporter (LAT1) and is converted to dopamine inside the brain.
LAT1, encoded by the SLC7A5 gene, is expressed at high density on both the luminal and abluminal surfaces of brain capillary endothelial cells. It transports large neutral amino acids, including phenylalanine, tyrosine, tryptophan, leucine, isoleucine, valine, and methionine, in addition to levodopa. This shared transport mechanism has a direct clinical consequence: a high-protein meal substantially competes with levodopa for LAT1 transport, reducing CNS levodopa uptake and blunting the motor response. Patients with predictable meal-related motor deterioration are often advised to consume a low-protein diet during the day and to concentrate protein intake in the evening meal.2 The competition is with other large neutral amino acids, not with protein in general, but the practical dietary instruction is protein restriction during waking hours when motor control is most important.
Once inside the brain, levodopa is converted to dopamine by aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase (AADC, also called DOPA decarboxylase), the same enzyme responsible for the majority of peripheral levodopa loss. This central conversion occurs in the surviving dopaminergic terminals of the nigrostriatal system in early PD, and increasingly in non-dopaminergic neurons and glial cells as the disease advances and presynaptic terminal density falls. The consequence of this shift in conversion site is clinically significant and will be revisited in the discussion of motor complications. The dopamine synthesized centrally from levodopa acts on striatal D1 and D2 receptors in the same manner as endogenously released dopamine, restoring the balance between the direct and indirect pathways described in Module 01.1
Carbidopa is a structural analog of levodopa that inhibits peripheral AADC by competing with the pyridoxal phosphate cofactor. It does not cross the BBB in clinically relevant amounts because it cannot be transported by LAT1 at therapeutic doses. Without carbidopa, approximately 95% of an oral levodopa dose is converted to dopamine in the gut wall, liver, and peripheral tissues before it reaches the systemic circulation, and a further fraction is lost to COMT-mediated O-methylation to 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD) in the periphery.3 Only 1–3% of an uncombined oral levodopa dose reaches the brain. Carbidopa inhibits this peripheral decarboxylation, redirecting levodopa into the systemic circulation and thence to the brain. Standard carbidopa/levodopa formulations provide a carbidopa-to-levodopa ratio of 1:4 or 1:10. A daily carbidopa dose of 70–100 mg is generally sufficient to saturate peripheral AADC; doses below 70 mg/day are associated with persistent nausea because unsuppressed peripheral dopamine stimulates the area postrema, which lies outside the BBB.3
Dopamine cannot cross the blood-brain barrier. Levodopa crosses via the LAT1 transporter on brain capillary endothelium. Carbidopa blocks peripheral AADC, preventing premature conversion of levodopa to dopamine outside the CNS. This three-component logic (dopamine precursor + peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor + LAT1 transport) is the pharmacological foundation of all levodopa therapy.
Levodopa consistently produces greater motor benefit than any dopamine agonist across all stages of PD. The ELLDOPA trial demonstrated that levodopa at doses of 150, 300, and 600 mg/day produced dose-dependent motor improvement measured by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor subscale, with the 600 mg/day group showing the largest benefit.4 No dopamine agonist trial has matched the magnitude of motor improvement achieved with levodopa at equivalent stages. This superiority reflects levodopa's ability to generate dopamine that acts at both D1 and D2 receptors in physiological ratios, whereas agonists act predominantly at D2 and D3 receptors. The price of this superiority, particularly with long-term use, is the emergence of motor complications that are the subject of Section 5 and Module 03.
The pharmacokinetics of levodopa are central to understanding both its therapeutic behavior and its long-term complications. Levodopa is a drug whose pharmacokinetic profile is unusually sensitive to gastrointestinal physiology, dietary content, and competition from other amino acids, and whose short plasma half-life creates the pulsatile striatal stimulation that underlies motor complications. Every clinically relevant aspect of levodopa dosing strategy derives from its pharmacokinetic properties.
Oral levodopa is absorbed primarily in the proximal small intestine, specifically the duodenum and proximal jejunum, by the same LAT1 transporter responsible for its CNS uptake. Absorption is therefore dependent on gastric emptying rate: levodopa must first transit the stomach before it can be absorbed, and any delay in gastric emptying substantially reduces both the rate and completeness of absorption. Gastric emptying in PD is frequently impaired due to autonomic dysfunction, as described in Module 01, which contributes to erratic plasma levodopa levels even with fixed dosing.2 Medications that delay gastric emptying, including anticholinergic drugs and opioids, worsen this variability. Conversely, agents that accelerate gastric emptying, such as domperidone (a peripheral dopamine antagonist used as an antiemetic that does not cross the BBB), can improve levodopa absorption consistency. Domperidone is preferred over metoclopramide in PD precisely because metoclopramide crosses the BBB and blocks nigrostriatal D2 receptors, worsening motor function.5
Once absorbed, levodopa has a plasma half-life of approximately 1 to 1.5 hours with standard immediate-release formulations. This short half-life is the primary pharmacokinetic driver of motor fluctuations in advanced PD: as plasma and therefore striatal levodopa concentrations rise and fall with each dose, the patient experiences predictable cycles of good motor control during peak plasma levels followed by wearing-off as concentrations fall below the therapeutic threshold. The central effect is even more variable than the plasma level would suggest, because the relationship between plasma levodopa and brain dopamine is non-linear and depends on the density of surviving dopaminergic terminals available to convert levodopa, the rate of dopamine uptake into storage vesicles, and the sensitivity of postsynaptic receptors.6
The volume of distribution of levodopa is modest (approximately 0.9–1.6 L/kg), and plasma protein binding is low (approximately 10–30%), which means that protein binding interactions do not meaningfully alter its pharmacokinetics. The primary metabolic pathway is decarboxylation to dopamine by AADC, which in the presence of adequate carbidopa occurs predominantly in the CNS and to a lesser extent in peripheral non-neuronal AADC-expressing tissues. A secondary metabolic route is O-methylation by catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) to 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD). 3-OMD accumulates in plasma and CNS with chronic levodopa dosing and itself competes with levodopa for LAT1 transport, contributing to reduced and erratic CNS levodopa uptake over time.7 This is the mechanistic rationale for COMT inhibitor adjuncts: by blocking peripheral COMT, entacapone and related agents reduce 3-OMD accumulation and increase the proportion of each levodopa dose reaching the brain, effectively extending the duration of motor benefit per dose.
Renal elimination of levodopa and its metabolites (primarily homovanillic acid and 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid) is the major route of excretion, accounting for more than 70% of a dose within 24 hours. Levodopa does not require dose adjustment for renal impairment unless the impairment is severe, because the parent drug and its clinically active metabolite dopamine are cleared relatively rapidly and do not accumulate to toxic levels in renal failure. Hepatic metabolism is not the rate-limiting step in levodopa clearance, and hepatic impairment does not substantially alter its pharmacokinetics in clinical practice.7
Iron supplements: form chelation complexes with levodopa in the GI tract, reducing absorption by up to 50%; separate administration by at least 2 hours. High-protein meals: compete with levodopa for LAT1 transport at both the gut and BBB; advise consistent low-protein daytime meals. Metoclopramide: accelerates gastric emptying (improving absorption) but blocks CNS D2 receptors (worsening PD motor function); contraindicated. Domperidone: preferred antiemetic in PD because it does not cross the BBB. Antacids: may increase gastric pH and alter levodopa solubility; monitor for altered response. Nonselective MAO inhibitors: combined with levodopa, peripheral dopamine accumulation can precipitate hypertensive crisis; selective MAO-B inhibitors at therapeutic doses do not carry this risk.
The short plasma half-life of levodopa and its erratic absorption make it a natural candidate for reformulation, and the history of levodopa pharmacology has accordingly produced a wide range of delivery technologies. Understanding the pharmacokinetic rationale for each formulation, and the clinical evidence supporting or limiting its use, is essential for the prescribing clinician managing a patient across the full trajectory of PD.
Standard immediate-release carbidopa/levodopa (IR-CD/LD), available as 25/100 mg and 10/100 mg tablets (carbidopa/levodopa ratio), remains the most widely prescribed formulation and the reference standard against which all alternatives are measured. It produces peak plasma levodopa concentrations within 30–60 minutes of ingestion, with considerable inter- and intra-individual variability depending on gastric emptying rate and dietary protein content. The Tmax is delayed to 1–2 hours if taken with food, which also reduces peak concentration. The standard clinical instruction to take levodopa 30–45 minutes before meals or 1 hour after food is based on maximizing the rate and completeness of absorption, though this recommendation must be balanced against the nausea that empty-stomach dosing can produce in some patients.3
Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (CR-CD/LD), available as 50/200 mg tablets, was designed to extend the dosing interval and reduce plasma levodopa fluctuations by using a polymer matrix that retards drug release. CR-CD/LD has a longer Tmax (approximately 2–3 hours) and a lower and more sustained peak, but its bioavailability is approximately 70–75% of the IR formulation. This reduced bioavailability is clinically significant: patients switching from IR to CR formulations require approximately a 25–30% increase in levodopa dose to maintain equivalent motor control. The extended Tmax also means that CR tablets produce a slower onset of motor effect, which can be problematic for managing morning akinesia. The clinical trial evidence for CR-CD/LD in reducing motor fluctuations is modest; the CR formulation does not consistently delay the onset of wearing-off compared with IR dosing when total daily levodopa exposure is controlled.8 CR-CD/LD is useful in specific clinical contexts, particularly for managing nocturnal symptoms and reducing the frequency of nighttime dosing.
Orally disintegrating tablets (ODT) of carbidopa/levodopa are absorbed at the same rate as IR tablets, as disintegration in the mouth does not bypass gastric emptying. They offer a practical advantage for patients with swallowing difficulties but do not alter the pharmacokinetic profile. Extended-release capsules (carbidopa/levodopa ER, marketed as Rytary in the United States), which contain beads with different release kinetics within a single capsule, produce a more sustained plasma levodopa profile than IR tablets with higher and more prolonged blood levels than standard CR tablets. Clinical trials demonstrated reduced off time compared with IR-CD/LD in patients with established motor fluctuations, with the caveat that dose conversion from IR to ER formulations requires careful titration because of the substantially different bioavailability profiles.9
Inhaled levodopa powder (Inbrija) provides a non-oral route of administration for treatment of off episodes. The inhaled route bypasses gastric absorption entirely, delivering levodopa directly to the pulmonary circulation and producing plasma levels within 10–15 minutes of inhalation. It is approved as an intermittent rescue treatment for off periods in patients already on a stable oral levodopa regimen, not as a replacement for oral dosing. The clinical trial that supported its approval demonstrated a reduction in UPDRS motor score compared with placebo approximately 30 minutes after inhalation during an off period.10 Its role is specifically for acute off episodes when oral dosing is insufficient or unpredictable, such as morning akinesia before the first oral dose takes effect.
Carbidopa/levodopa intestinal gel (Duopa in the US, Duodopa in Europe) is a viscous gel formulation delivered via a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy-jejunal (PEG-J) tube directly into the proximal jejunum, bypassing gastric emptying and providing continuous levodopa delivery over 16 hours. This approach converts the pulsatile oral pharmacokinetics of levodopa into near-continuous systemic exposure, substantially reducing off time in patients with advanced PD and severe motor fluctuations refractory to oral optimization. The LCIG clinical program demonstrated reductions in off time of approximately 4 hours per day compared with optimized oral therapy in the pivotal randomized controlled trial.11 Device-related complications, including tube displacement, peritonitis, and neuropathy attributed to the carbidopa component at high doses, limit its use to specialized centers, but it represents the most pharmacokinetically rational approach to continuous levodopa delivery short of intravenous administration.
The decision to start levodopa, the initial dose and titration schedule, and the management of its early adverse effects are the practical core of PD pharmacotherapy. The prescribing context is almost always that of an elderly patient with multiple potential drug interactions, autonomic vulnerability, and cognitive considerations that constrain the pace and degree of levodopa optimization. These considerations determine the approach to initiation and the choice of starting formulation.
The question of when to initiate levodopa in newly diagnosed PD has been shaped by concern, based on in vitro and some in vivo animal data, that dopamine itself might be toxic to surviving dopaminergic neurons through oxidative metabolism of dopamine quinones, and that early high-dose levodopa might therefore accelerate neurodegeneration. The ELLDOPA trial, the definitive clinical study addressing this question, randomized 361 patients with early PD to carbidopa/levodopa at 37.5/150, 75/300, or 150/600 mg/day for 40 weeks, then a 2-week washout before final assessment. At 42 weeks, motor scores were better in the levodopa groups than in placebo, with washout not fully eliminating the benefit, which the investigators interpreted as consistent with either a mild neuroprotective effect or prolonged pharmacological effect.4 There was no clinical evidence of accelerated neurodegeneration at any dose tested. Current consensus, reflected in the American Academy of Neurology and Movement Disorder Society guidelines, is that levodopa should be initiated when motor symptoms are functionally impairing to the patient, without deferral based on neuroprotection concerns that remain unproven in humans.
A practical consideration that does influence the timing of levodopa initiation is patient age and disease characteristics. In younger patients (under approximately 60 years at diagnosis), some clinicians prefer to initiate a dopamine agonist rather than levodopa as first-line therapy, with the rationale that agonists carry a lower risk of inducing motor fluctuations and dyskinesias over the longer treatment duration that younger patients face. This practice is not supported by evidence that agonist-first strategies delay dyskinesia onset when total levodopa exposure over years is similar; rather, the lower dyskinesia risk reflects the lower intrinsic propensity of agonists to induce sensitization compared with levodopa at equivalent motor control. In older patients (over approximately 70 years), where cognitive side effects of dopamine agonists are more concerning and the disease course is shorter, levodopa initiation is typically preferred from the outset.12
The standard starting regimen is carbidopa/levodopa 25/100 mg three times daily, taken 30–45 minutes before meals when tolerated. This provides 300 mg levodopa per day with sufficient carbidopa (75 mg) to suppress most peripheral conversion. If nausea limits initiation on an empty stomach, tablets may initially be taken with a small low-protein snack. Dose escalation follows a start-low, go-slow principle: doses are increased by 25/100 mg increments every 3–7 days as needed for motor control, guided by patient-reported functional improvement and assessment of peak-dose and wearing-off phenomena. In practice, most patients with early-to-moderate PD achieve adequate motor control at 300–900 mg levodopa daily in three to four divided doses, though dose requirements increase as disease advances and striatal dopaminergic terminal density falls.3
Nausea is the most common early adverse effect of levodopa, occurring in approximately 20–30% of patients initiating therapy, and is mediated by dopamine stimulation of the area postrema. It is substantially reduced by carbidopa doses of 70 mg or more per day, by gradual dose escalation, and by taking levodopa with food when necessary. Orthostatic hypotension, mediated by peripheral dopamine-induced vasodilation and augmented by the underlying autonomic dysfunction of PD, affects a clinically significant minority of patients and should be sought by lying-to-standing blood pressure measurement at each medication adjustment. Neuropsychiatric effects of levodopa, including vivid dreams, hallucinations, and impulse control behaviors, are more common in patients with longer disease duration and pre-existing cognitive impairment, and in those on concomitant dopamine agonists. Pyridoxine (vitamin B6) in doses above approximately 5 mg/day can accelerate peripheral levodopa decarboxylation by providing cofactor substrate for AADC, reducing the therapeutic response; this interaction does not apply when carbidopa is co-administered, as peripheral AADC is already inhibited.
Drug holidays, the deliberate abrupt withdrawal of levodopa for days at a time in an attempt to reset motor complications, were once employed in clinical practice. They have been abandoned because abrupt levodopa discontinuation risks a neuroleptic malignant syndrome-like state of severe rigidity, hyperthermia, and autonomic instability that can be life-threatening, particularly in patients on high doses. Levodopa should never be abruptly withdrawn. Even when switching formulations or adding adjuncts, the baseline levodopa regimen should be maintained until the new approach is established.
Motor complications are the defining challenge of long-term levodopa therapy and the primary driver of treatment complexity in advancing PD. They arise from the interaction between the pharmacokinetic limitations of oral levodopa delivery and the progressive loss of the presynaptic buffering capacity that normally smooths dopaminergic neurotransmission. Understanding their pathophysiology is the prerequisite for understanding the pharmacological strategies available to manage them.
In early PD, when a substantial number of nigrostriatal terminals survive, the pharmacological effect of each levodopa dose is relatively stable and prolonged. Surviving terminals take up levodopa, convert it to dopamine, store the dopamine in vesicles, and release it in a regulated fashion that buffers the pulsatile input from intermittent oral dosing. This presynaptic storage and regulated release capacity is the physiological equivalent of a pharmacokinetic reservoir that smooths the peaks and troughs of oral levodopa absorption. As the disease advances and terminal density falls, this buffering capacity is progressively lost. Levodopa converted in non-dopaminergic cells cannot be stored in synaptic vesicles and is instead released diffusely and non-synaptically, making the concentration of dopamine available to postsynaptic receptors increasingly dependent on the instantaneous plasma levodopa level.6 The result is that small fluctuations in plasma levodopa, which were inconsequential in early disease, now produce large fluctuations in motor function.
Wearing-off is the predictable return of PD motor symptoms toward the end of each levodopa dosing interval, before the next dose is due. It is defined by its relationship to dose timing: symptoms worsen in a predictable pattern that the patient can generally anticipate. In early wearing-off, symptoms return in the last 30–60 minutes before the next dose; as it progresses, the effective duration of each dose shortens further. The wearing-off threshold refers to the plasma levodopa concentration below which motor benefit is lost, and clinical wearing-off correlates closely with plasma levodopa falling below this threshold.13 The threshold itself varies between patients and within a patient over time as receptor sensitivity changes. The practical management of wearing-off involves shortening the dosing interval, adding a COMT inhibitor to extend levodopa plasma half-life, adding a MAO-B inhibitor to reduce central dopamine catabolism, or switching to a controlled-release or extended-release formulation, each of which is discussed in subsequent modules.
On-off fluctuations represent a more severe and less predictable form of motor fluctuation than wearing-off. True on-off phenomena are characterized by sudden, unpredictable transitions between a mobile on state and an immobile off state that do not correspond reliably to dose timing or plasma levodopa levels. The mechanism of this unpredictability is complex and not fully resolved; contributing factors include erratic gastric emptying causing variable absorption, competition from dietary amino acids at LAT1, altered receptor sensitivity causing varying response thresholds, and possibly central oscillatory phenomena within the basal ganglia circuitry that have become sensitized by years of pulsatile dopaminergic stimulation.6 Off episodes can be sudden and disabling, with the patient transitioning from functional ambulation to freezing and severe rigidity within minutes. The management of on-off fluctuations is more challenging than wearing-off management and often requires advanced therapies such as apomorphine rescue injections, intestinal gel infusion, or deep brain stimulation.
Levodopa-induced dyskinesia (LID) refers to involuntary movements, most commonly choreiform in character, that occur during the on state when plasma levodopa is near its peak. Peak-dose dyskinesia, the most common form, appears when plasma and striatal dopamine concentrations are highest and reflects maladaptive plasticity at the level of striatal medium spiny neurons induced by years of pulsatile non-physiological dopaminergic stimulation. The molecular basis involves upregulation of deltaFosB, changes in AMPA and NMDA receptor expression and phosphorylation, and altered direct pathway MSN excitability.14 The prevalence of LID increases with disease duration and cumulative levodopa exposure: approximately 30% of patients have dyskinesia after 3 years of treatment, rising to over 50% at 5 years and approaching 90% at 10 years in most series.15 The management of established dyskinesias, including the role of amantadine, dose reduction strategies, and advanced delivery options, is the subject of Module 03.
The WOQ-19 (Wearing-Off Questionnaire) identifies wearing-off by asking about recurrence of motor and non-motor symptoms before scheduled doses. Non-motor wearing-off symptoms — including anxiety, sweating, cognitive slowing, and pain — often precede the motor wearing-off and may go unrecognized if only motor fluctuations are queried. A patient who reports predictable afternoon anxiety or pain shortly before a scheduled levodopa dose may be experiencing non-motor wearing-off amenable to the same dose-optimization strategies as motor wearing-off.
Hornykiewicz O. Dopamine (3-hydroxytyramine) and brain function. Pharmacol Rev. 1966;18(2):925–964.
Nutt JG, Woodward WR, Hammerstad JP, Carter JH, Anderson JL. The on-off phenomenon in Parkinson's disease: relation to levodopa absorption and transport. N Engl J Med. 1984;310(8):483–488.
doi:10.1056/NEJM198402233100802Olanow CW, Stocchi F, Lang AE, eds. Parkinson's Disease: Non-Motor and Non-Dopaminergic Features. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011. Chapter 14: Levodopa pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.
Fahn S, Oakes D, Shoulson I, et al. Levodopa and the progression of Parkinson's disease. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(24):2498–2508.
doi:10.1056/NEJMoa033447Seppi K, Ray Chaudhuri K, Coelho M, et al. Update on treatments for nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson's disease: an evidence-based medicine review. Mov Disord. 2019;34(2):180–198.
doi:10.1002/mds.27602Nutt JG. Levodopa-induced dyskinesia: review, observations, and speculations. Neurology. 1990;40(2):340–345.
doi:10.1212/WNL.40.2.340Nutt JG, Fellman JH. Pharmacokinetics of levodopa. Clin Neuropharmacol. 1984;7(1):35–49.
doi:10.1097/00002826-198403000-00002Block G, Liss C, Reines S, Irr J, Nibbelink D. Comparison of immediate-release and controlled release carbidopa/levodopa in Parkinson's disease: a multicenter 5-year study. Eur Neurol. 1997;37(1):23–27.
doi:10.1159/000117399Hauser RA, Ellenbogen AL, Metman LV, et al. Crossover comparison of IPX066 and a standard levodopa formulation in advanced Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord. 2011;26(12):2246–2252.
doi:10.1002/mds.23861LeWitt PA, Hauser RA, Pahwa R, et al. Safety and efficacy of CVT-301 (levodopa inhalation powder) on motor function during off periods in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(2):145–154.
doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30405-8Olanow CW, Kieburtz K, Odin P, et al. Continuous intrajejunal infusion of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: a randomised, controlled, double-blind, double-dummy study. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13(2):141–149.
doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70293-XKatzenschlager R, Head J, Schrag A, Ben-Shlomo Y, Evans A, Lees AJ. Fourteen-year final report of the randomized PDRG-UK trial comparing three initial treatments in Parkinson's disease. Neurology. 2008;71(7):474–480.
doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000310812.43352.66Stocchi F, Vacca L, Ruggieri S, Olanow CW. Intermittent vs continuous levodopa administration in patients with advanced Parkinson disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study. Arch Neurol. 2005;62(6):905–910.
doi:10.1001/archneur.62.6.905Cenci MA. Dopamine dysregulation of movement control in L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia. Trends Neurosci. 2007;30(5):236–243.
doi:10.1016/j.tins.2007.03.005Ahlskog JE, Muenter MD. Frequency of levodopa-related dyskinesias and motor fluctuations as estimated from the cumulative literature. Mov Disord. 2001;16(3):448–458.
doi:10.1002/mds.1090