Prospective Validation of the NIAID/FAAN Criteria for Emergency Department Diagnosis of Anaphylaxis.

Caitlin E. Loprinzi Brauer,M. Motosue,James T. Li,John B. Hagan,M. Bellolio,Sangil Lee,R. Campbell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2016.06.003

2016-11-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Safety and Effectiveness of Rasagiline in Chinese Patients with Parkinson's Disease: A Prospective, Multicenter, Non-interventional Post-marketing Study.

Wen Su,Zhanhua Liang,Wei Mao,Ming Shao,Xingyue Hu,Yuncheng Wu,Wenshi Wei,Zhenguo Liu,Kezhong Zhang,Beisha Tang,Shuai Cao,Zhuolun Song,Haibo Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-023-01288-2

2023-01-01

Drug Safety

Abstract:INTRODUCTION:Rasagiline is indicated for treating idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) as monotherapy and adjunct therapy to levodopa in patients.OBJECTIVES:To assess the post-marketing safety and tolerability of rasagiline in Chinese PD patients, as well as its effectiveness in improving motor symptoms.METHODS:This prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, cohort study included PD patients administered rasagiline monotherapy or adjunct therapy to levodopa. The primary outcome was the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) according to MedDRA® (version 22.0), and the secondary outcomes were the Parkinson's Disease Unified Rating Scale (UPDRS) part III, Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and Clinical Global Impression-Global-Improvement (CGI-I), assessed at Weeks 4, 12, and 24.RESULTS:In total, 734 patients, 95 in the monotherapy subgroup and 639 in the adjunct therapy subgroup, were included in the safety population. The incidence rates of all ADRs were comparable between the monotherapy (15.8%) and adjunct therapy (13.6%) subgroups. The most common ADRs by system organ class were nervous system disorders (5.6%), gastrointestinal disorders (3.3%), psychiatric disorders (1.8%), vascular disorders (1.2%), and general disorders and administration site conditions (1.1%). Five (0.7%) participants experienced 5 serious ADRs. Improvements in UPDRS part III, CGI-S and CGI-I at Weeks 4, 12 and 24 from baseline were observed.CONCLUSIONS:Safety data in this study indicated no extra safety concerns. Rasagiline is generally safe and well tolerated in Chinese PD patients. The safety profile and tolerability were in line with the established safety profile. Moreover, rasagiline reduced the severity of PD motor symptoms, confirming findings by previous clinical trials.
Randomized Delayed‐Start Trial of Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease

B. Post,B. Bloem,T. van Laar,C. V. Verschuur,G. Tissingh,A. Munts,A. Lang,R. D. de Haan,R. D. de Bie,J. Boel,S. Suwijn,J. V. van Hilten,G. Deuschl,M. Dijkgraaf

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1809983

IF: 158.5

2019-01-24

New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND Levodopa is the main treatment for symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Determining whether levodopa also has a disease‐modifying effect could provide guidance as to when in the course of the disease the treatment with this drug should be initiated. METHODS In a multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, delayed‐start trial, we randomly assigned patients with early Parkinson's disease to receive levodopa (100 mg three times per day) in combination with carbidopa (25 mg three times per day) for 80 weeks (early‐start group) or placebo for 40 weeks followed by levodopa in combination with carbidopa for 40 weeks (delayed‐start group). The primary outcome was the between‐group difference in the mean change from baseline to week 80 in the total score on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS; scores range from 0 to 176, with higher scores signifying more severe disease). Secondary analyses included the progression of symptoms, as measured by the UPDRS score, between weeks 4 and 40 and the noninferiority of early initiation of treatment to delayed initiation between weeks 44 and 80, with a noninferiority margin of 0.055 points per week. RESULTS A total of 445 patients were randomly assigned: 222 to the early‐start group and 223 to the delayed‐start group. The mean (±SD) UPDRS score at baseline was 28.1±11.4 points in the early‐start group and 29.3±12.1 points in the delayed‐start group. The change in UPDRS score from baseline to week 80 was ‐1.0±13.1 points and ‐2.0±13.0 points, respectively (difference, 1.0 point; 95% confidence interval [CI], ‐1.5 to 3.5; P=0.44); this finding of no significant between‐group difference at week 80 implies that levodopa had no disease‐modifying effect. Between weeks 4 and 40, the rate of progression of symptoms, as measured in UPDRS points per week, was 0.04±0.23 in the early‐start group and 0.06±0.34 in the delayed‐start group (difference, ‐0.02; 95% CI, ‐0.07 to 0.03). The corresponding rates between weeks 44 and 80 were 0.10±0.25 and 0.03±0.28 (difference, 0.07; two‐sided 90% CI, 0.03 to 0.10); the difference in the rate of progression between weeks 44 and 80 did not meet the criterion for noninferiority of early receipt of levodopa to delayed receipt. The rates of dyskinesia and levodopa‐related fluctuations in motor response did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with early Parkinson's disease who were evaluated over the course of 80 weeks, treatment with levodopa in combination with carbidopa had no disease‐modifying effect. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and others; LEAP Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN30518857.)

Medicine
Dopamine agonists versus levodopa monotherapy in early Parkinson's disease for the potential risks of motor complications: A network meta-analysis

Qian Zhang,XiangTing Chen,FeiFei Chen,SiYuan Wen,ChangQing Zhou,Xiang-Ting Chen,Fei-Fei Chen,Si-Yuan Wen,Chang-Qing Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2023.175884

IF: 5.195

2023-06-29

European Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract:Background Compared with levodopa, dopamine agonists (DAs) as initial treatment are associated with lower incidences of motor complications in early Parkinson's disease (PD). There is no strong evidence that a given DA is more potent in lower incidences of motor complications than another. Objective We performed a network meta-analysis of levodopa versus DAs as monotherapy in early PD to access the risk of motor complications. Methods Databases were searched up to June 2022 for eligible RCTs. Levodopa and four DAs (pramipexole, ropinirole, bromocriptine and pergolide) were investigated. The incidences of motor complications and efficacy, tolerability and safety outcomes were analyzed. Results Nine RCTs (2112 patients) were included in the current study. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that levodopa ranked first in the incidence of dyskinesia (0.988), followed by pergolide, pramipexole, ropinirole, and bromocriptine (0.704, 0.408, 0.240, 0.160). Pramipexole was least prone to wearing-off (0.109) and on-off fluctuation (0.041). Levodopa performed best in improvements of UPDRS-II, UPDRS-III, and UPDRS-II + III (0.925, 0.952, 0.934). Bromocriptine ranked first in total withdrawals and withdrawals due to adverse events (0.736, 0.751). Four DAs showed different adverse events profiles. Conclusion In the two non-ergot DAs, ropinirole is associated with a lower risk of dyskinesia while pramipexole is associated with lower risks of wearing-off and on-off fluctuations. Our research may facilitate head-to-head research, larger sample sizes, long following-up time RCTs to confirm the findings of this network meta-analysis.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Neurotoxic effects of acrylamide on rat retinogeniculate fibres

H. Wild,J. Kulikowski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4328(84)90162-1

IF: 3.352

1984-09-01

Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract:
Comparison of the Effectiveness, Safety, and Costs of Anti-Parkinson Drugs: A Multiple-Center Retrospective Study

Wenting Li,Hua Zhang,Yuan Zhang,Ke Wang,Jiaojiao Hui,Zhanmiao Yi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cns.14531

2024-01-01

CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics

Abstract:Aims: This study aimed to systematically compare the effectiveness, safety, and costs of different anti-Parkinson drugs (APDs).Methods: This is a multi-center study that retrospectively analyzed the data of 8420 outpatients with PD from 2014 to 2019 across 30 tertiary hospitals in China. The effectiveness was evaluated by changes in total dosages of APDs, normalized by levodopa equivalent dose (LED) and presented as Delta LEDs; levodopa equivalent dose cost (LEDc) represented the daily cost of APDs; and newly added diagnostics were represented as APDs-related adverse events.Results: A total of 384 patients with eligible medical records for three consecutive years were enrolled. Patients treated with carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide had significantly lower mean Delta LEDs than other groups (p < 0.01), followed by pramipexole and selegiline. The piribedil group had the highest Delta LEDs, with mean differences of 112.56-355.04 mg compared to other groups (p < 0.01). Meanwhile, LEDc in the levodopa/benserazide, carbidopa/levodopa, and piribedil groups were significantly lower than those in pramipexole or selegiline groups ($0.088-0.135/day for levodopa/benserazide; $0.070-0.126/day for carbidopa/levodopa; $0.112-0.138/day for piribedil; $0.290-0.332/day for pramipexole; $0.229-0.544/day for selegiline; p < 0.01). Patients with piribedil had more adverse events, with an incidence rate of 35.7%, followed by levodopa/benserazide (25.6%), selegiline (23.5%), carbidopa/levodopa (23.3%), and pramipexole (16.4%). Pramipexole showed a lower incidence rate of adverse events than piribedil, including neuropsychiatric symptoms (p = 0.006), headache/dizziness (p = 0.016), and gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.031).Conclusions: Carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide might exhibit better clinical improvement with less medical cost, while piribedil presented less clinical improvement but a higher risk of headache/dizziness, gastrointestinal, and neuropsychiatric symptoms.
Differential effects of various treatment combinations on cardiovascular dysfunction in patients with Parkinson's disease

A Korchounov,K R Kessler,H I Schipper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0404.2003.00172.x

Abstract:Objectives: Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) frequently suffer from cardiovascular dysfunction, which may be enhanced to various extents by different antiparkinsonian drugs. Materials and methods: We analysed electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, cardiovascular reflexes (CVR) and orthostatic hypotension (OH) in 148 patients with idiopathic PD assigned to five different combination therapies of levodopa (LD) plus either bromocriptine (BRO), ropinirole (ROP), selegiline (SEL), anticholinergic (ACH) or amantadine (AMA) or to LD monotherapy before and after a 1-week washout of the add-on drug. Patients were matched for age and disease severity (Hoehn and Yahr stage 2-3). Rater-blinded cardiovascular testing was performed at baseline, and following a 1-week washout period of the add-on drugs. Results: We found that the incidence of cardiovascular dysfunction was generally higher in patients receiving a combination therapy compared with patients on LD monotherapy. ECG abnormalities were found in 40-52% of patients in combination therapy, but in only 20% of the patients receiving LD monotherapy. After discontinuation of BRO and SEL, there were significant improvements in ECG, OH and CVR. After washout of ACH and AMA, a significant improvement was found only in the CVR score. AMA and ROP were the add-on drugs with the least adverse cardiovascular effects. Conclusion: We conclude that pre-existing cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction should be investigated and taken into account when deciding which combination therapy to choose in the treatment of parkinsonian patients.
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Rasagiline or Pramipexole in the Treatment of Early Parkinson's Disease

Pauli Seppänen,Markus M. Forsberg,Miia Tiihonen,Heikki Laitinen,Selena Beal,David C. Dorman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/8448584

2024-01-17

Parkinson s Disease

Abstract:Background. Rasagiline or pramipexole monotherapy has been suggested for the management of early Parkinson's disease (PD). The aim of this research was to systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of rasagiline or pramipexole in early PD (defined as disease duration ≤5 years and Hoehn and Yahr stage of ≤3). Methods. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rasagiline or pramipexole for early PD published up to September 2021 were retrieved. Outcomes of interest included changes in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Parts II and III and the incidence of adverse events. Standardized mean difference (SMD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated, and heterogeneity was measured with the I2 test. Results. Nine rasagiline and eleven pramipexole RCTs were included. One post hoc analysis of one rasagiline study was included. Five studies for each drug were included in meta-analyses of the UPDRS scores. The rasagiline meta-analysis focused on patients receiving 1 mg/day. Rasagiline and pramipexole significantly improved UPDRS Part II and III scores when compared to placebo. Significant heterogeneity among the studies was present (I2 > 70%). Neither rasagiline nor pramipexole increased the relative risk for any adverse events, serious adverse events, or adverse events leading to withdrawal when compared with placebo. Conclusion. Applying a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to summarize the evidence, we found moderate confidence in the body of evidence for the efficacy of rasagiline or pramipexole in early PD, suggesting further well-designed, multicenter comparative RCTs remain needed.

clinical neurology
Fosfomycin Trometamol (3,000 mg) in Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis of Healthcare-Associated Infections after Endourological Interventions: A Narrative Review

F. Wagenlehner,P. M. Thomas,K. Naber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000355103

2013-09-13

Urologia Internationalis

Abstract:Introduction: Increasing antibiotic resistance also has an impact on perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP). This narrative review evaluates fosfomycin trometamol (FT) as PAP in endourological interventions. Materials and Methods: Nine clinical studies including 4 randomized comparative studies were analyzed. A total of 1,614 patients received FT as PAP for different endourological procedures and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy [ESWL; i.e. cystoscopy (n = 498), urodynamic studies (n = 39), ureteropyeloscopy (n = 10), urethrotomy (n = 20), lithotripsy (n = 15), transurethral resection of bladder tumors (n = 139), transurethral resection of the prostate (n = 843), ESWL (n = 20), ureterorenoendoscopic lithotripsy (n = 18), percutaneous nephrostomic lithotripsy (n = 12)]. Results: In 8 clinical studies, FT was shown to be effective in preventing healthcare-associated urinary tract infections (HAUTIs). One study showed no benefit. The usual dosage regimen was oral administration of 3 g of FT 3 h before and 24 h after the procedure. In 1 randomized comparative study investigating HAUTIs after diagnostic cystoscopy, it could also be shown that a single oral dose of 3 g of FT 3 h before cystoscopy was as effective as a double dose. Conclusion: According to the published results, for traumatic endourological interventions and surgical procedures, an oral dosage of 3 g of FT 3 h before and 24 h after the procedure and only 1 (prior) oral dosage for diagnostic procedures might be an alternative if PAP is indicated. Limitations of the studies are the low numbers of patients included for most indications.
Efficacy and Safety of Pramipexole Extended‐release in Parkinson's Disease: a Review Based on Meta‐analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

T. Shen,R. Ye,B. Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13303

2017-01-01

European Journal of Neurology

Abstract:Background and purposeWe performed a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pramipexole extended‐release (pramipexole ER) versus pramipexole immediate‐release (pramipexole IR) or placebo in Parkinson's disease.MethodsWe performed a systematic online search for clinical trials for pramipexole ER treatment up to 1 August 2016. We assessed differences in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores, percentage of ‘on’ time or ‘off’ time, withdrawals, adverse events (AEs) and life quality between pramipexole ER and pramipexole IR or placebo. Data analyses were performed by the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.3 software.ResultsSix randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with placebo, pramipexole ER achieved a significant improvement in the UPDRS Part II + III score [weighted mean difference, −4.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), −6.40 to −3.23], whereas no significant difference was found in the UPDRS Part III + III score between pramipexole ER and pramipexole IR groups (weighted mean difference, −0.26; 95% CI, −1.15 to 0.64). No differences were found in total AEs (relative risk, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.03), drug‐related AEs (relative risk, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.03) or the commonly reported AEs between pramipexole ER and pramipexole IR.ConclusionsPramipexole ER is as safe and effective as pramipexole IR in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Efficacy and safety of selegiline for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ke Wang,Ze-Hui Liu,Xin-Ya Li,Yan-Fei Li,Jia-Rui Li,Jiao-Jiao Hui,Jing-Xuan Li,Jun-Wen Zhou,Zhan-Miao Yi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1134472

IF: 4.8

2023-04-12

Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience

Abstract:Background: Drug efficacy generally varies with different durations. There is no systematic review analyzing the effect of selegiline for Parkinson's disease (PD) on different treatment duration. This study aims to analyze how the efficacy and safety of selegiline changes for PD over time. Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Database were systematically retrieved for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of selegiline for PD. The search period was from inception to January 18th, 2022. The efficacy outcomes were measured by the mean change from baseline in the total and sub Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Webster Rating Scale (WRS) scores. The safety outcomes were measured by the proportion of participants having any adverse events overall and that in different system organ classes. Results: Among the 3,786 studies obtained, 27 RCTs and 11 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies reported an outcome which was also reported in at least one other study, and were included in meta-analyses. Compared with placebo, selegiline was found with a stronger reduction of total UPDRS score with increasing treatment duration [mean difference and 95% CIs in 1 month: −3.56 (−6.67, −0.45); 3 months: −3.32 (−3.75, −2.89); 6 months: −7.46 (−12.60, −2.32); 12 months: −5.07 (−6.74, −3.41); 48 months: −8.78 (−13.75, −3.80); 60 months: −11.06 (−16.19, −5.94)]. A similar trend was also found from the point estimates in UPDRS I, II, III, HAMD and WRS score. The results of observational studies on efficacy were not entirely consistent. As for safety, compared with placebo, selegiline had higher risk of incurring any adverse events [rate: 54.7% vs. 62.1%; odd ratio and 95% CIs: 1.58 (1.02, 2.44)], with the excess adverse events mainly manifested as neuropsychiatric disorders [26.7% vs. 31.6%; 1.36 (1.06, 1.75)] and no significant change over time. The statistically difference in overall adverse event between selegiline and active controls was not found. Conclusion: Selegiline was effective in improving total UPDRS score with increasing treatment duration, and had a higher risk of incurring adverse events, especially the adverse events in the neuropsychiatric system. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: PROSPERO CRD42021233145.

neurosciences,geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Piribedil and bromocriptine in Parkinson's disease: a single-blind crossover study

E K Tan,P Ratnagopal,S Y Han,M C Wong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0404.2003.02104.x

Abstract:Introduction: Clinicians switch from one dopamine agonist to another for various reasons. However, each change may inadvertently result in certain potential risks such as decreased medication efficacy or new side-effects. Objective: We evaluated the tolerability of a switch of bromocriptine to piribedil using two conversion ratios as a primary outcome measure, with motor function as a secondary outcome measure, in patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: Twenty consecutive patients with mild to moderate PD (Hoehn and Yahr, stage II-III) on treatment with stable doses of bromocriptine and levodopa were randomized to two groups of 10 patients each, to receive piribedil based on 1:5 or 1:10 conversion ratios. Blinded evaluations were performed: 1) United Parkinson's Diseased Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores both in 'on' and 'off', 2) Open-ended interviews for adverse events, 3) Epworth Sleepiness Scale, 4) Purdue Pegboard assessment during 'on' and 'off', 5) Hand-arm movement test during 'on' and 'off', and 6) Walking test during 'on' and 'off'. Results: Major adverse events included 'sleep attacks' in one patient and minor side-effects included giddiness, nausea, hallucinations, sleepiness and lethargy. However, these were mild and 19 (95%) of the 20 patients completed the study. There was a significant improvement in both the UPDRS 'off' total and motor scores at 1 month compared with baseline for the group on 1:10 ratio. The walking times during the 'off' state at 1 and 2 months were significantly better compared with baseline in the 1:5 group. There were otherwise no significant differences in the rating tests during both 'off' and 'on' states before and after the bromocriptine switch. Conclusions: We demonstrated that patients with mild to moderate PD who were on relatively low doses of bromocriptine can be safely switched to piribedil based on a conversion ratio of either 1:5 or 1:10. However, the higher conversion ratio has to be carried out with caution in patients with daytime somnolence.
Medicine and the arts. The practice: Commentary on Excerpts From The Letters of Anton Chekhov, Letters of Anton Chekhov, and Doctor Chekhov: A Study in Literature and Medicine.

J. Coulehan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ACM.0000472659.66119.1e

2015-10-01

Abstract:
Corrigendum to “the Efficacy and Safety of Ropinirole Prolonged Release Tablets As Adjunctive Therapy in Chinese Subjects with Advanced Parkinson’s Disease: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study” [parkinsonism and Related Disorders 19 (2013) 1022–1026]

Zhenxin Zhang,Jian Wang,Xiaoying Zhang,Shengdi Chen,Zhenfu Wang,Baorong Zhang,Chun‐Feng Liu,Qing Qu,Yan Cheng,Jie Li,Haijun Cao,Meiling Cai,Rongxuan Zhu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2014.03.025

2014-01-01

Abstract:The authors regret that errors have been found in Tables 1 and 2 and its corresponding paragraph within the text. The correct information is shown below, and the authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. 3.2. Primary and secondary efficacy outcomes Hours of total awake time spent “off” were significantly decreased in the ropinirole PR group compared with placebo group (Table 2; Supplemental Figure 1). Hours of “on” time, “on” time without troublesome dyskinesia, were significantly increased, whereas the percent “off” time were significantly decreased for ropinirole PR compared with placebo (Table 2). For primary efficacy variables, similar results were observed for the PP population.Table 1Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of subjects with Parkinson's disease (Safety population).aUnless noted otherwise, values are expressed as mean SD; PD: Parkinson's disease.Number of subjectsRopinirole PR (n = 175)Placebo (n = 170)Total (n = 345)Age (years)64.1 (9.0)63.6 (10.5)63.9 (9.7)Female, n (%)59 (33.7)65 (38.2)124 (35.9)Height (cm); mean [range]165.4 [145.0–183.0]165.1 [143.0–187.0]165.2 [143.0–187.0]Weight (kg); mean [range]63.9 [43.5–94.0]63.1 [40.0–97.0]63.5 [40.0–97.0]Duration of PD, months92.1 (59.9)95.7 (48.3)93.9 (54.4)Duration of L-dopa, months68.8 (49.2)69.7 (41.7)69.2 (45.6)L-dopa dose (mg/day)506.6 (290.9)539.8 (426.2)522.9 (363.6)Subjects with any concomitant medicines except for L-dopa during treatment period, n (%)153 (87.4)157 (92.4)31 (89.9)Amantadine hydrochloride71 (40.6)68 (40.0)139 (40.3)Selegiline hydrochloride31 (17.7)34 (20.0)65 (18.8)Trihexyphenidyl hydrochloride38 (21.7)24 (14.1)62 (18.0)Entacapone26 (14.9)27 (15.9)53 (15.4)a Unless noted otherwise, values are expressed as mean SD; PD: Parkinson's disease. Open table in a new tab Table 2Mean (SD) change from baseline in awake time spent “off”, awake time spent “on” and total awake time spent “on” without troublesome dyskinesia, UPDRS motor and ADL scores, HAMD-17 and PDSS scales and PDQ-39 domain scores at week 24 last observation carried forward (intention-to-treat population).BaselineWeek 24Change from BaselineAdjusted treatment difference 95% CIp-ValueRopinirole PR (N = 175)Placebo (N = 169)Ropinirole PR (N = 175)Placebo (N = 169)Ropinirole PR (N = 175)Placebo (N = 169)Total awake time spent ‘off’aA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement (h)7.0 (2.89)7.0 (2.90)4.9 (3.05)6.6 (3.25)−2.1 (2.58)−0.4 (2.47)−1.76 (−2.27, −1.26)<0.001Percent awake time spent ‘off’’aA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement45.4 (17.19)45.6 (17.03)31.9 (19.44)43.9 (20.17)−13.5 (15.62)−1.8 (15.88)−11.92 (−15.14, −8.70)<0.001Total awake time spent ‘on’bAn increase from baseline indicates an improvement. (h)8.4 (2.79)8.3 (2.71)10.4 (2.99)8.4 (3.05)1.9 (2.44)0.1 (2.48)1.90 (1.40, 2.40)<0.001Total awake time spent ‘on’ without troublesome dyskinesiabAn increase from baseline indicates an improvement. (h)7.9 (2.99)7.8 (2.90)9.6 (3.29)8.0 (3.28)1.7 (2.81)0.3 (2.56)1.49 (0.94, 2.03)<0.001UPDRS motoraA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement28.8 (13.35)29.3 (12.39)22.6 (12.17)28.6 (13.39)−6.3 (10.08)−0.7 (9.03)−5.66 (−7.53, −3.79)<0.001UPDRS ADLaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement12.3 (5.81)13.2 (6.23)10.2 (5.16)13.1 (6.11)−2.2 (3.93)−0.2 (3.64)−2.25 (−2.99, −1.51)<0.001HAMD-17aA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement6.4 (4.76)7.9 (5.36)4.8 (4.30)7.3 (5.35)−1.6 (4.38)−0.6 (4.33)−1.66 (−2.48, −0.83)<0.001PDSS scale107.1 (23.25)103.3 (27.2)107.4 (24.52)102.1 (26.91)0.5 (21.22)−1.7 (20.57)3.26 (−0.94, 7.47)0.128PDQ-39 subscalecRopinirole PR n = 170 and placebo n = 160.MobilityaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement33.9 (22.99)38.8 (24.64)28.4 (22.92)41.0 (25.38)−5.7 (18.10)2.5 (17.30)−9.34 (−12.87, −5.81)<0.001Activities of daily livingaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement32.2 (22.47)33.8 (22.40)26.1 (21.65)33.2 (24.54)−5.9 (18.20)0.3 (18.95)−6.09 (−9.69, −2.49)<0.001Emotional well-beingaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement22.0 (19.90)27.0 (20.65)17.3 (17.28)26.0 (20.44)−4.8 (17.37)−0.8 (15.30)−5.82 (−8.94, −2.70)<0.001StigmaaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement20.9 (22.19)24.5 (24.47)15.9 (20.17)23.6 (24.36)−5.1 (18.01)−1.1 (18.17)−5.25 (−8.79, −1.71)0.004Social supportdRopinirole PR n = 167 and placebo n = 157; UPDSR motor 0–108, 0 = normal/no symptoms, UPDRS ADL, 0–52, 0 = normal no symptoms; PDSS, 15 scales, 0 = symptom severe and always experienced to 10 = symptom free, cumulative score for the PDSS is 150 (subject is free of all symptoms); PDQ-39 scale = 0–100 for each domain and ranged from 0 to 100, where 0 represents no problems and 100 represents the number of problems; UPDRS: Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale; ADL: Assisted Daily living; HAMD-17: Hamilton Depression rating Scale-17; PDSS:7.6 (15.64)10.0 (16.90)7.1 (14.23)9.4 (17.13)−0.4 (14.63)−0.7 (15.21)−0.96 (−3.81, 1.89)0.507Cognitive impairment30.8 (18.45)31.4 (19.72)29.9 (17.40)31.0 (20.29)−1.1 (14.36)−0.8 (13.28)−0.48 (−3.23, 2.27)0.731CommunicationsaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement16.8 (17.29)19.0 (20.93)15.8 (17.66)21.7 (21.44)−1.1 (12.28)2.6 (17.21)−4.29 (−7.31, −1.27)0.006Bodily discomfortaA decrease from baseline indicates an improvement30.3 (24.24)32.1 (23.29)27.0 (21.36)32.0 (22.47)–3.5 (19.16)0.7 (19.15)4.45 (−8.03, −0.87)0.015CI: confidence interval.a A decrease from baseline indicates an improvementb An increase from baseline indicates an improvement.c Ropinirole PR n = 170 and placebo n = 160.d Ropinirole PR n = 167 and placebo n = 157; UPDSR motor 0–108, 0 = normal/no symptoms, UPDRS ADL, 0–52, 0 = normal no symptoms; PDSS, 15 scales, 0 = symptom severe and always experienced to 10 = symptom free, cumulative score for the PDSS is 150 (subject is free of all symptoms); PDQ-39 scale = 0–100 for each domain and ranged from 0 to 100, where 0 represents no problems and 100 represents the number of problems; UPDRS: Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale; ADL: Assisted Daily living; HAMD-17: Hamilton Depression rating Scale-17; PDSS: Open table in a new tab CI: confidence interval. The efficacy and safety of ropinirole prolonged release tablets as adjunctive therapy in Chinese subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studyParkinsonism & Related DisordersVol. 19Issue 11PreviewThe first evaluation of the efficacy and safety of ropinirole prolonged release (PR) as an adjunct to L-dopa in Chinese patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) not optimally controlled with L-dopa. Full-Text PDF
A single centre prospective study of three device-assisted therapies for Parkinson’s disease

Hugo Morales-Briceño,Ainhi D. Ha,Han-Lin Chiang,Yicheng Tai,Florence C. F. Chang,David S. Tsui,Jane Griffith,Donna Galea,Samuel D. Kim,Belinda Cruse,Neil Mahant,Victor S. C. Fung

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41531-023-00525-w

2023-06-29

Abstract:Abstract Comparative studies assessing outcomes with the three device-assisted therapies could help to individualise treatment for patients living with Parkinson’s disease. We designed a single-centre non-randomised prospective observational study assessing the quality of life (QoL), motor and non-motor outcomes at 6 and 12-months in patients treated with subcutaneous apomorphine continuous 16-hours infusion (APO), levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) or subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS). In this study, 66 patients were included (13 APO; 19 LCIG; 34 STN-DBS). At baseline, cognitive, non-motor and motor scores were significantly less severe in the STN-DBS group, whereas the LCIG group had a longer disease duration and higher non-motor scores. In the APO group, there were no statistically significant changes in non-motor, motor and QoL scales. The LCIG group had significant changes in QoL and motor scales that were significant after multiple comparison analysis at 6 and 12-months. The STN-DBS group showed improvement in QoL scores and non-motor and motor scores at 6 and 12-months after multiple comparison analysis. In this real-life prospective study, device-assisted therapies showed differences in their effects on QoL and motor and non-motor function at 12-months. However, there were also differences in baseline characteristics of the patient groups that were not based on pre-determined selection criteria. Differences in characteristics of patients offered and/or treatment with different device-assisted therapies may reflect within-centre biases that may, in turn, influence perceptions of treatment efficacy or outcomes. Treatment centres should be aware of this potential confounder when assessing and offering device-assisted treatment options to their patients and potential baseline differences need to be taken into consideration when comparing the results of non-randomised studies.

neurosciences
Improvement by Medication Less than Expected in Parkinson's Disease: Blinded Evaluation of Levodopa Response

Mette Niemann Johansen,Anna Handberg,Mohamed El Haddouchi,Josefine Grundtvig,Steen Rusborg Jensen,Lisette Salvesen,Annemette Løkkegaard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/2649578

2024-02-22

Parkinson s Disease

Abstract:Background. The latest Movement Disorder Society (MDS) diagnostic criteria require a good and sustained response to medication to get a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease, PD. Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate levodopa response in a group of patients with probable PD, diagnosed by movement disorder specialists. Methods. An acute levodopa challenge test (LDCT) was performed after pausing the dopaminergic medication for 6 half-times. The motor part of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale was performed in the OFF-state and after LDCT (ON). A good effect was defined as >30% improvement. A video-protocol was used to secure standardized motor examination with blinded assessments of the UPDRS-III OFF and ON. An age-matched group of control subjects (CS) was included but did not go through LDCT. All participants were evaluated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI). Results. In the statistical analysis, 37 patients were included. Twenty-one patients showed an improvement ≤30%, while 16 patients showed an improvement >30%. LDCT showed an overall mean improvement of 27.3% of motor UPDRS. In 43.2%, there was a discrepancy between the effect seen with the LDCT and the patients' self-perceived medicine evaluation. Patients with PD had a significantly lower MoCA score and more depressive symptoms compared to CS. Conclusions. We showed an acute effect of levodopa using LDCT that was around 30% improvement. While it lends support to the use of this limit in the MDS diagnostic criteria, an acute effect of less than 30% should be considered acceptable in some patients. Our study highlights a discrepancy in the objective measure of medicine effect on motor symptoms and the patient's subjective evaluation.

clinical neurology
Cutaneous Oncology and Immunomodulator Therapy : From Warts to Skin Cancers

James,M.,Spencer,Q.,D. Rosso,Douglas,W.,Kress

Abstract:
Patterns of Daily Motor-Symptom Control with Carbidopa/Levodopa Enteral Suspension Versus Oral Carbidopa/Levodopa Therapy in Advanced Parkinson’s Disease: Clinical Trial Post Hoc Analyses

Rajesh Pahwa,Jason Aldred,Niodita Gupta,Emi Terasawa,Viviana Garcia-Horton,David R. Steffen,Prasanna L. Kandukuri,Vivek S. Chaudhari,Yash J. Jalundhwala,Yanjun Bao,Pavnit Kukreja,Stuart H. Isaacson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-022-00332-0

2022-02-22

Neurology and Therapy

Abstract:IntroductionA clinical trial in advanced Parkinson’s disease (APD) has established the superiority of carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (CLES) in reducing total patient “off” time (OFF) and increasing total “on” time without troublesome dyskinesia (ON-woTD) over orally administered immediate-release carbidopa/levodopa tablets (IR–CL). However, temporal patterns of these improvements throughout the waking day have not been examined. In this analysis, time to ON-woTD after waking and patterns of motor-symptom control throughout the waking day were compared between CLES and IR–CL.MethodsPost hoc analyses of APD patient-diary data from the phase 3 randomized controlled trial were used to compare changes in time to ON-woTD after waking, motor-symptom control throughout the waking day, occurrence of extreme fluctuations between OFF and “on” with troublesome dyskinesia, and motor-state transitions with CLES versus IR–CL from baseline to week 12.ResultsThe sample included 33 CLES-treated and 30 IR–CL-treated patients. Among the CLES group, the percentage of patient days achieving ON-woTD within 30 min of waking was three times higher at week 12 versus baseline (33% vs. 11%, p = 0.0043); no significant change occurred with IR–CL. When the waking day was divided into four 4-h periods, CLES versus IR–CL treatment produced significantly greater reductions in OFF during three periods, and two periods had increased ON-woTD. Fewer CLES-treated patients had extreme fluctuations at week 12 (3% vs. 23%, p = 0.0224) compared to IR–CL-treated patients. From baseline to week 12, CLES-treated patients had greater reductions in the average number of motor-state transitions compared to IR–CL-treated patients (− 1.6, p = 0.0295).ConclusionCLES-treated patients experienced a more rapid onset of ON-woTD after waking and greater consistency of ON-woTD throughout their waking day than IR–CL-treated patients.

clinical neurology
D-1 and D-2 agonists in Parkinson's disease

A N Lieberman,M Goldstein,G Gopinathan,A Neophytides

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0317167100037938

Abstract:We have evaluated 5 DA agonists-bromocriptine, lergotrile, lisuride, pergolide, and mesulergine in studies encompassing 278 patients with advanced PD. In most of our patients the DA agonist was added to levodopa. Most of our patients were no longer satisfactorily responding to levodopa. Previous attempts at managing these patients by changing the dose of levodopa (increasing or decreasing it), the treatment schedule, or the ratio of levodopa to carbidopa or by temporarily discontinuing levodopa [drug holiday] were unsuccessful. The majority of our patients had diurnal fluctuations in performance, either "wearing off" or "on-off" phenomena. The addition of a DA agonist resulted in a decrease in parkinsonian disability in most patients and a decrease in the severity of the diurnal fluctuations in performance. Improvement in many patients was maintained for at least 2 years. Adverse effects included mental changes, dyskinesias, orthostatic hypotension, and nausea. All of the adverse effects were reversible when the agonist was decreased or discontinued. As a group the agonists behaved similarly but individual patients often responded better to one agonist than another. The main role of agonists is in combination with levodopa in the treatment of patients with early PD who have not yet developed dyskinesias or diurnal fluctuations in performance.
Levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone versus levodopa/dopa-decarboxyiase inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: systematic review, meta-analysis, and economic evaluation.

Zhan-Miao Yi,Ting-Ting Qiu,Yuan Zhang,Na Liu,Suo-Di Zhai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S163190

2018-01-01

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management

Abstract:Aims: To review the evidence for efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (LCE) compared with levodopa/dopa-decarboxyiase inhibitor (DDCI) for Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases WangFang Data, Chinese Sci-tech Journals Database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched for randomized controlled trials with "levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone" as keywords. The search period was from inception to August 2017. We conducted meta-analyses to synthesize the evidence quantitatively. Results: A total of 5,693 records were obtained. We included seven randomized controlled trials and one cost-effectiveness study after the screening process. Compared with levodopa-DDCI, LCE improved patient Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) II score (mean difference [MD] -1.17, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.71), UPDRS III score (MD -1.55, 95% CI -2.29 to -0.81), and Schwab and England daily activity rating (MD 2.05, 95% CI 0.85-3.26). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events (AEs) or discontinuation due to AEs in patients with LCE, and the risk of total AEs was higher in the LCE group (risk ratio [RR] 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.70). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of LCE was 3,105 pound per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained in the UK. Conclusion: LCE can improve PD patients' motor symptoms and daily living functioning when compared with levodopa/DDCI.
Effects and Safety of Monoamine Oxidase-B Inhibitors for Early Parkinson's Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis

Yaping Wang,Zhiyun Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000541315

2024-09-14

Abstract:Introduction: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects and safety of monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors (MAO-B inhibitors) for early Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: All studies that assessed the efficacy of MAO-B inhibitors in patients with early PD were searched. Publications were screened, and data were extracted according to predefined criteria. Rev Man 5.4 and Stata 14.0 software were used for statistical analysis. Outcomes assessed included change of Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) total score, UPDRS part II score, UPDRS part III score, and the incidence of adverse events. Results: Thirty trials were identified and included in this meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, rasagiline, selegiline, safinamide, and zonisamide were significantly more effective, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.64 to -0.18), SMD = -0.38 (95% CI = -0.51 to -0.24), SMD = -0.37 (95% CI = -0.54 to -0.21), and SMD = -0.31 (95% CI = -0.57 to -0.05) on the UPDRS III score change, respectively. The surface under the cumulative ranking results showed that rasagiline ranked first in improving UPDRS II and UPDRS III, respectively. For safety outcomes, safinamide combination with dopaminergic treatment had lower risk of incurring any adverse events (risk ratio = 0.1, 95% CI = 0.01-0.2), and no statistical difference in incidence of adverse events was observed among other MAO-B inhibitor regimes and placebo. Conclusion: Rasagiline, selegiline, safinamide, and zonisamide were effective compared to placebo in the treatment of early PD, but rasagiline was the most effective drug. As for safety, safinamide combination with dopaminergic treatment had lower risk of incurring any adverse events.

Prospective Validation of the NIAID/FAAN Criteria for Emergency Department Diagnosis of Anaphylaxis.

Safety and Effectiveness of Rasagiline in Chinese Patients with Parkinson's Disease: A Prospective, Multicenter, Non-interventional Post-marketing Study.

Randomized Delayed‐Start Trial of Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease

Dopamine agonists versus levodopa monotherapy in early Parkinson's disease for the potential risks of motor complications: A network meta-analysis

Neurotoxic effects of acrylamide on rat retinogeniculate fibres

Comparison of the Effectiveness, Safety, and Costs of Anti-Parkinson Drugs: A Multiple-Center Retrospective Study

Differential effects of various treatment combinations on cardiovascular dysfunction in patients with Parkinson's disease

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Rasagiline or Pramipexole in the Treatment of Early Parkinson's Disease

Fosfomycin Trometamol (3,000 mg) in Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis of Healthcare-Associated Infections after Endourological Interventions: A Narrative Review

Efficacy and Safety of Pramipexole Extended‐release in Parkinson's Disease: a Review Based on Meta‐analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Efficacy and safety of selegiline for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Piribedil and bromocriptine in Parkinson's disease: a single-blind crossover study

Medicine and the arts. The practice: Commentary on Excerpts From The Letters of Anton Chekhov, Letters of Anton Chekhov, and Doctor Chekhov: A Study in Literature and Medicine.

Corrigendum to “the Efficacy and Safety of Ropinirole Prolonged Release Tablets As Adjunctive Therapy in Chinese Subjects with Advanced Parkinson’s Disease: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study” [parkinsonism and Related Disorders 19 (2013) 1022–1026]

A single centre prospective study of three device-assisted therapies for Parkinson’s disease

Improvement by Medication Less than Expected in Parkinson's Disease: Blinded Evaluation of Levodopa Response

Cutaneous Oncology and Immunomodulator Therapy : From Warts to Skin Cancers

Patterns of Daily Motor-Symptom Control with Carbidopa/Levodopa Enteral Suspension Versus Oral Carbidopa/Levodopa Therapy in Advanced Parkinson’s Disease: Clinical Trial Post Hoc Analyses

D-1 and D-2 agonists in Parkinson's disease

Levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone versus levodopa/dopa-decarboxyiase inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: systematic review, meta-analysis, and economic evaluation.

Effects and Safety of Monoamine Oxidase-B Inhibitors for Early Parkinson's Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis