The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Task Force on Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Review of Treatments for Parkinson's Disease (PD) was first published in 2002 and was updated in 2005 to cover clinical trial data up to January 2004 with the focus on motor symptoms of PD. In this revised version the MDS task force decided it was necessary to extend the review to non-motor symptoms. The objective of this work was to update previous EBM reviews on treatments for PD with a focus on non-motor symptoms. Level-I (randomized controlled trial, RCT) reports of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for the non-motor symptoms of PD, published as full articles in English between January 2002 and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion and ranking followed the original program outline and adhered to EBM methodology. For efficacy conclusions, treatments were designated: efficacious, likely efficacious, unlikely efficacious, non-efficacious, or insufficient evidence. Safety data were catalogued and reviewed. Based on the combined efficacy and safety assessment, Implications for clinical practice were determined using the following designations: clinically useful, possibly useful, investigational, unlikely useful, and not useful. Fifty-four new studies qualified for efficacy review while several other studies covered safety issues. Updated and new efficacy conclusions were made for all indications. The treatments that are efficacious for the management of the different non-motor symptoms are as follows: pramipexole for the treatment of depressive symptoms, clozapine for the treatment of psychosis, rivastigmine for the treatment of dementia, and botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) and BTX-B as well as glycopyrrolate for the treatment of sialorrhea. The practical implications for these treatments, except for glycopyrrolate, are that they are clinically useful. Since there is insufficient evidence of glycopyrrolate for the treatment of sialorrhea exceeding 1 week, the practice implication is that it is possibly useful. The treatments that are likely efficacious for the management of the different non-motor symptoms are as follows: the tricyclic antidepressants nortriptyline and desipramine for the treatment of depression or depressive symptoms and macrogol for the treatment of constipation. The practice implications for these treatments are possibly useful. For most of the other interventions there is insufficient evidence to make adequate conclusions on their efficacy. This includes the tricyclic antidepressant amitriptyline, all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) reviewed (paroxetine, citalopram, sertraline, and fluoxetine), the newer antidepressants atomoxetine and nefazodone, pergolide, Ω-3 fatty acids as well as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of depression or depressive symptoms; methylphenidate and modafinil for the treatment of fatigue; amantadine for the treatment of pathological gambling; donepezil, galantamine, and memantine for the treatment of dementia; ...
The options for treating PD symptoms continues to expand. These recommendations allow the treating physician to determine which intervention to recommend to an individual patient. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
SummaryBackgroundMultiple system atrophy (MSA) is a fatal and still poorly understood degenerative movement disorder that is characterised by autonomic failure, cerebellar ataxia, and parkinsonism in various combinations. Here we present the final analysis of a prospective multicentre study by the European MSA Study Group to investigate the natural history of MSA.MethodsPatients with a clinical diagnosis of MSA were recruited and followed up clinically for 2 years. Vital status was ascertained 2 years after study completion. Disease progression was assessed using the unified MSA rating scale (UMSARS), a disease-specific questionnaire that enables the semiquantitative rating of autonomic and motor impairment in patients with MSA. Additional rating methods were applied to grade global disease severity, autonomic symptoms, and quality of life. Survival was calculated using a Kaplan-Meier analysis and predictors were identified in a Cox regression model. Group differences were analysed by parametric tests and non-parametric tests as appropriate. Sample size estimates were calculated using a paired two-group t test.Findings141 patients with moderately severe disease fulfilled the consensus criteria for MSA. Mean age at symptom onset was 56·2 (SD 8·4) years. Median survival from symptom onset as determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis was 9·8 years (95% CI 8·1–11·4). The parkinsonian variant of MSA (hazard ratio [HR] 2·08, 95% CI 1·09–3·97; p=0·026) and incomplete bladder emptying (HR 2·10, 1·02–4·30; p=0·044) predicted shorter survival. 24-month progression rates of UMSARS activities of daily living, motor examination, and total scores were 49% (9·4 [SD 5·9]), 74% (12·9 [8·5]), and 57% (21·9 [11·9]), respectively, relative to baseline scores. Autonomic symptom scores progressed throughout the follow-up. Shorter symptom duration at baseline (OR 0·68, 0·5–0·9; p=0·006) and absent levodopa response (OR 3·4, 1·1–10·2; p=0·03) predicted rapid UMSARS progression. Sample size estimation showed that an interventional trial with 258 patients (129 per group) would be able to detect a 30% effect size in 1-year UMSARS motor examination decline rates at 80% power.InterpretationOur prospective dataset provides new insights into the evolution of MSA based on a follow-up period that exceeds that of previous studies. It also represents a useful resource for patient counselling and planning of multicentre trials.FundingFifth Framework Programme of the European Union, the Oesterreichische Nationalbank, and the Austrian Science Fund.
The objective was to update previous evidence-based medicine reviews of treatments for motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease published between 2002 and 2005. Level I (randomized, controlled trial) reports of pharmacological, surgical, and nonpharmacological interventions for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease between January 2004 (2001 for nonpharmacological) and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion, clinical indications, ranking, efficacy conclusions, safety, and implications for clinical practice followed the original program outline and adhered to evidence-based medicine methodology. Sixty-eight new studies qualified for review. Piribedil, pramipexole, pramipexole extended release, ropinirole, rotigotine, cabergoline, and pergolide were all efficacious as symptomatic monotherapy; ropinirole prolonged release was likely efficacious. All were efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct except pramipexole extended release, for which there is insufficient evidence. For prevention/delay of motor fluctuations, pramipexole and cabergoline were efficacious, and for prevention/delay of dyskinesia, pramipexole, ropinirole, ropinirole prolonged release, and cabergoline were all efficacious, whereas pergolide was likely efficacious. Duodenal infusion of levodopa was likely efficacious in the treatment of motor complications, but the practice implication is investigational. Entacapone was nonefficacious as a symptomatic adjunct to levodopa in nonfluctuating patients and nonefficacious in the prevention/delay of motor complications. Rasagiline conclusions were revised to efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct, and as treatment for motor fluctuations. Clozapine was efficacious in dyskinesia, but because of safety issues, the practice implication is possibly useful. Bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation, bilateral globus pallidus stimulation, and unilateral pallidotomy were updated to efficacious for motor complications. Physical therapy was revised to likely efficacious as symptomatic adjunct therapy. This evidence-based medicine review updates the field and highlights gaps for research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.