Neurology and therapy · 2025
Foslevodopa/Foscarbidopa in Younger Patients Earlier Within Advanced Parkinson's Disease: Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Antonini Angelo, Bergmans Bruno, Kern Drew S, Gandor Florin, Nishikawa Noriko, Standaert David G, Fritz Bjoern, Gupta Resmi, Nozaki Toshiki, Shah Megha B, Bergmann Lars, Kimber Thomas
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We evaluated continuous subcutaneously administered foslevodopa/foscarbidopa (LDp/CDp) in younger patients earlier within advanced Parkinson's disease (aPD).
METHODS: This phase 3 trial included patients aged ≥ 30 years with levodopa-responsive PD, Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥ 24, and levodopa equivalent dose ≥ 400 mg/day. Patients were considered by the investigator as inadequately controlled on current oral/transdermal therapy and experienced ≥ 2.5 h/day "Off" time, with recognizable "On"/"Off" states. Patients were randomized (1:1) to LDp/CDp plus placebo capsules or orally administered immediate-release levodopa/carbidopa plus placebo infusion. This post hoc exploratory analysis focused on younger patients (≤ 65 years) earlier within aPD (Hoehn and Yahr stage ≤ 2 ["On" state], ≤ 5 years since motor fluctuations started). Outcomes included change from baseline (CFB) to week 12 in "Off" and "On" time, Movement Disorder Society Unified PD Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) II, 39-item PD Questionnaire (PDQ-39), and PD Sleep Scale-2 (PDSS-2).
RESULTS: Twenty-six patients met subgroup criteria (LDp/CDp, n = 13; orally administered levodopa/carbidopa, n = 13). Despite small sample sizes, at week 12, LDp/CDp was associated with significantly greater improvements in "Off" time (mean [SD] CFB - 3.7 [3.1] vs - 1.6 [2.9] h; P = 0.0011), "On" time without troublesome dyskinesia (+ 3.9 [3.3] vs + 1.4 [3.8] h; P = 0.0011), and PDSS-2 (- 6.4 [4.6] vs - 1.8 [3.1]; P = 0.0220) vs orally administered levodopa/carbidopa. Mean (SD) CFB to week 12 (LDp/CDp vs orally administered levodopa/carbidopa) was + 4.2 (2.8) vs + 1.9 (4.6) h for "On" time without dyskinesia (P = 0.0878), - 3.0 (6.4) vs - 0.9 (3.5) for MDS-UPDRS II (P = 0.3539), and - 9.9 (7.4) vs - 1.9 (9.4) for PDQ-39 (P = 0.0534). For most assessments, treatment differences were numerically larger in the subgroup vs the overall population. Safety findings were consistent with the overall population.
CONCLUSIONS: LDp/CDp was associated with significantly greater improvements in motor function and sleep vs orally administered levodopa/carbidopa in younger patients earlier within aPD whose symptoms were inadequately controlled by oral/transdermal therapies. Larger real-world studies are needed to confirm findings.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04380142.
METHODS: This phase 3 trial included patients aged ≥ 30 years with levodopa-responsive PD, Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥ 24, and levodopa equivalent dose ≥ 400 mg/day. Patients were considered by the investigator as inadequately controlled on current oral/transdermal therapy and experienced ≥ 2.5 h/day "Off" time, with recognizable "On"/"Off" states. Patients were randomized (1:1) to LDp/CDp plus placebo capsules or orally administered immediate-release levodopa/carbidopa plus placebo infusion. This post hoc exploratory analysis focused on younger patients (≤ 65 years) earlier within aPD (Hoehn and Yahr stage ≤ 2 ["On" state], ≤ 5 years since motor fluctuations started). Outcomes included change from baseline (CFB) to week 12 in "Off" and "On" time, Movement Disorder Society Unified PD Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) II, 39-item PD Questionnaire (PDQ-39), and PD Sleep Scale-2 (PDSS-2).
RESULTS: Twenty-six patients met subgroup criteria (LDp/CDp, n = 13; orally administered levodopa/carbidopa, n = 13). Despite small sample sizes, at week 12, LDp/CDp was associated with significantly greater improvements in "Off" time (mean [SD] CFB - 3.7 [3.1] vs - 1.6 [2.9] h; P = 0.0011), "On" time without troublesome dyskinesia (+ 3.9 [3.3] vs + 1.4 [3.8] h; P = 0.0011), and PDSS-2 (- 6.4 [4.6] vs - 1.8 [3.1]; P = 0.0220) vs orally administered levodopa/carbidopa. Mean (SD) CFB to week 12 (LDp/CDp vs orally administered levodopa/carbidopa) was + 4.2 (2.8) vs + 1.9 (4.6) h for "On" time without dyskinesia (P = 0.0878), - 3.0 (6.4) vs - 0.9 (3.5) for MDS-UPDRS II (P = 0.3539), and - 9.9 (7.4) vs - 1.9 (9.4) for PDQ-39 (P = 0.0534). For most assessments, treatment differences were numerically larger in the subgroup vs the overall population. Safety findings were consistent with the overall population.
CONCLUSIONS: LDp/CDp was associated with significantly greater improvements in motor function and sleep vs orally administered levodopa/carbidopa in younger patients earlier within aPD whose symptoms were inadequately controlled by oral/transdermal therapies. Larger real-world studies are needed to confirm findings.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04380142.