We are grateful for the responses of Kresojevi c et al 1 analyzing Serbian cohorts and Thaler et al 2 analyzing Israeli cohorts that further expand the literature describing sex differences in Parkinson's disease (PD) associated with leucine-rich repeat kinase 2 (LRRK2) and glucocerebrosidase (GBA) variants. These two studies provide international data consistent with our and others' reports of a similar sex frequency in GBA PD and idiopathic PD with overall 60 men:40 women compared to no sex differences in frequency of LRRK2 G2019S PD. 2,3 We read with interest that, consistent with our report, 3 Kresojevi c et al 1 found an increased frequency of carriers of a severe GBA variant in women and a higher frequency of risk variants in men. However, this was not statistically significant at their sample size and would require a larger sample to demonstrate a statistically significant effect. In contrast, the report from Thaler et al 2 showed opposite sex-specific frequencies. These interesting discrepancies underline the pressing need, highlighted by both groups and a core conclusion of our paper, to further evaluate in larger ongoing studies sex dimorphisms in genotypic-phenotypic associations and to continue to report additional cases in a diversity of studies and ethnicities worldwide to better understand sex differences in PD. The limitation of our study due to sample size was also acknowledged in our paper. 3 We suggest that all studies should include not only the number of cases of men and women, but pay careful attention to phenotype, as GBA variants contribute to both PD and dementia with Lewy bodies, therefore, case ascertainment and categorization differences may affect sex distributions and explain convergent and divergent findings. Attention to sex will enable us to more accurately identify the role of additional modifiers and biological differences, not only in the penetrance, but also in the expression of PD.We are also grateful for Kresojevi c et al 1 for highlighting the need to sequence the GBA gene as well as separately reporting sex associated with specific GBA variants. This is important as variants may not only be undergoing reclassification, but be categorized and combined differently across studies. Iterating the sex associated with each variant will improve our ability to combine data across studies for pooled and meta-analyses. Finally, although all data reported in the text narrative in our study were correct, we would like to highlight an error in Table 1 where cell totals were transposed. This has now been corrected in an erratum and is also noted. 3,4 Acknowledgments: The authors are grateful to the study participants who graciously donated their time and energy for this study.