No abstract

Subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (Apo) and intrajejunal levodopa infusion (IJLI) are two treatment options for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) and refractory motor complications, with varying cost of treatment. There are no multicenter studies comparing the effects of the two strategies. This open-label, prospective, observational, 6-month, multicenter study compared 43 patients on Apo (48.8% males, age 62.3 ± 10.6 years; disease duration: 14 ± 4.4 years; median H & Y stage 3; interquartile range [IQR]: 3-4) and 44 on IJLI (56.8% males, age 62.7 ± 9.1 years; disease duration: 16.1 ± 6.7 years; median H & Y stage 4; IQR, 3-4). Cohen's effect sizes (≥0.8 considered as large) were "large" with both therapies with respect to total motor, nonmotor, and quality-of-life scores. The Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) with Apo showed moderate improvement, whereas sleep/fatigue, gastrointestinal, urinary, and sexual dimensions of the NMSS showed significantly higher improvement with IJLI. Seventy-five percent on IJLI improved in their quality-of-life and nonmotor symptoms (NMS), whereas in the Apo group, a similar proportion improved in quality of life, but 40% in NMS. Adverse effects included peritonitis with IJLI and skin nodules on Apo. Based on this open-label, nonrandomized, comparative study, we report that, in advanced Parkinson's patients, both IJLI and Apo infusion therapy appear to provide a robust improvement in motor symptoms, motor complications, quality-of-life, and some NMS. Controlled, randomized studies are required.

A BS TRACT: Objective: Real-life observational report of clinical efficacy of bilateral subthalamic stimulation (STN-DBS), apomorphine (APO), and intrajejunal levodopa infusion (IJLI) on quality of life, motor, and nonmotor symptoms (NMS) in Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, international, reallife cohort observation study of 173 PD patients undergoing STN-DBS (n = 101), IJLI (n = 33), or APO (n = 39) were followed-up using PDQuestionnaire-8, NMSScale (NMSS), Unified PD Rating Scale (UPDRS)-III, UPDRS-IV, and levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) before and 6 months after intervention. Outcome changes were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed-rank or paired t test when parametric tests were applicable. Multiple comparisons were corrected (multiple treatments/scales). Effect strengths were quantified with relative changes, effect size, and number needed to treat. Analyses were computed before and after propensity score matching, balancing demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: In all groups, PDQuestionnaire-8, UPDRS-IV, and NMSS total scores improved significantly at follow-up. ---Levodopa equivalent daily dose was significantly reduced after STN-DBS. Explorative NMSS domain analyses resulted in distinct profiles: STN-DBS improved urinary/ sexual functions, mood/cognition, sleep/fatigue, and the miscellaneous domain. IJLI improved the 3 latter domains and gastrointestinal symptoms. APO improved mood/ cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/ memory, and the miscellaneous domain. Overall, STN-DBS and IJLI seemed favorable for NMSS total score, and APO favorable for neuropsychological/neuropsychiatric NMS and PDQuestionnaire-8 outcome.Conclusions: This is the first comparison of quality of life, nonmotor. and motor outcomes in PD patients undergoing STN-DBS, IJLI, and APO in a real-life cohort. Distinct effect profiles were identified for each treatment option. Our results highlight the importance of holistic nonmotor and motor symptoms assessments to personalize treatment choices.

Background There are currently no standard diagnostic criteria for characterizing advanced Parkinson’s disease (APD) in clinical practice, a critical component in determining ongoing clinical care and therapeutic strategies, including transitioning to device-aided treatment. The goal of this analysis was to determine the proportion of APD vs. non-advanced PD (non-APD) patients attending specialist PD clinics and to demonstrate the clinical burden of APD. Methods OBSERVE-PD, a cross-sectional, international, observational study, was conducted with 2615 PD patients at 128 movement disorder centers in 18 countries. Motor and non-motor symptoms, activities of daily living, and quality-of-life end points were assessed. The correlation between physician’s global assessment of advanced PD and the advanced PD criteria from a consensus of an international group of experts (Delphi criteria for APD) were evaluated. Results According to physician’s judgment, 51% of patients were considered to have APD. There was a moderate correlation between physician’s judgment and Delphi criteria for APD (K = 0.430; 95% CI 0.406–0.473). Activities of daily living, motor symptom severity, dyskinesia duration/disability, “Off” time duration, non-motor symptoms, and quality-of-life scores were worse among APD vs. non-APD patients ( p < 0.0001 for all). APD patients (assessed by physicians) had higher disease burden by motor and non-motor symptoms compared with non-APD patients and a negative impact on activities of daily living and quality of life. Conclusions These findings aid in identifying standard APD classification parameters for use in practicing physicians. Improvements in identification of APD patients may be particularly relevant for optimizing treatment strategies including transitioning to device-aided treatment. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12883-019-1276-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the real-world dose utilization of Dysport and BOTOX for cervical dystonia and blepharospasm. Six investigational sites (five countries) were identified. Investigators abstracted utilization data for patients who received Dysport before switching to BOTOX or BOTOX before switching to Dysport. Patients were identified during scheduled clinic visits and selected if they met study criteria, which included treatment for at least 2 consecutive years (at least 1 year with Dysport or BOTOX, then switched and maintained on BOTOX or Dysport for at least another year). A total of 114 patients were included in the assessment. Ratios of mean dose for Dysport to BOTOX ranged from a low of 2:1 to a high of 11:1. Thirty-one percent of patients fell into the Dysport-to-BOTOX ratio grouping of 5:1 to less than 6:1; 30% of patients had a mean ratio of Dysport to BOTOX of 4:1 to less than 5:1; and only 21% of all patients evaluated fell into the Dysport-to-BOTOX ratio grouping of 3:1 to less than 4:1. Results are consistent with United Kingdom labeling for botulinum toxins stating that units of different serotype A toxins are not interchangeable and simple dose-conversion factors are not applicable.

Motor aspects of Parkinson’s disease, such as fluctuations and dyskinesia, can be reliably evaluated using a variety of “wearable” technologies, but practical guidance on objective measurement (OM) and the optimum use of these devices is lacking. Therefore, as a first step, a panel of movement disorder specialists met to provide guidance on how OM could be assessed and incorporated into clinical guidelines. A key aspect of the incorporation of OM into the management of Parkinson’s disease (PD) is defining cutoff values that separate “controlled” from “uncontrolled” symptoms that can be modified by therapy and that relate to an outcome that is relevant to the person with PD (such as quality of life). Defining cutoffs by consensus, which can be subsequently tested and refined, is the first step to optimizing OM in the management of PD. OM should be used by all clinicians that treat people with PD but the least experienced may find the most value, but this requires guidance from experts to allow non-experts to apply guidelines. While evidence is gained for devices that produce OM, expert opinion is needed to supplement the evidence base.

The prevalence of both Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD) is increasing with the aging of the population. Studies from the last several years have shown that people with diabetes have an increased risk for dementia and cognitive impairment. Therefore, the authors of this consensus review tried to elaborate on the role of diabetes, especially diabetes type 2 (T2DM) in both AD and VaD. Based on the clinical and experimental work of scientists from 18 countries participating in the International Congress on Vascular Disorders and on literature search using PUBMED, it can be concluded that T2DM is a risk factor for both, AD and VaD, based on a pathology of glucose utilization. This pathology is the consequence of a disturbance of insulin-related mechanisms leading to brain insulin resistance. Although the underlying pathological mechanisms for AD and VaD are different in many aspects, the contribution of T2DM and insulin resistant brain state (IRBS) to cerebrovascular disturbances in both disorders

No abstract