Abstract:Background/Aims: A network meta-analysis is used to compare the efficacy of ropinirole, rasagiline, rotigotine, entacapone, apomorphine, pramipexole, sumanirole, bromocriptine, piribedil and levodopa, with placebo as a control, for non-motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Methods: PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched from their establishment dates up to January 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of the above ten drugs on the non-motor symptoms of PD.… Show more
“…Although traditional meta-analyses have been previously published, and network meta-analyses have compared drugs, little attention has been paid to the treatment of motor fluctuation that occurs in PD patients with a focus on comparing a limited group of classes or individual therapies (Stowe et al, 2011;Ren et al, 2014;Thorlund et al, 2014;Zhuo et al, 2017;Li et al, 2018;Mills et al, 2018;Zhao et al, 2019). In contrast to previous meta-analyses, the current analysis is the first network meta-analysis, and it integrates the broad basis of published evidence regarding randomized controlled trials to determine the efficacy and safety of drugs being used as adjuvant treatments with L-dopa for motor fluctuations in PD patients and allows a comprehensive evaluation of several categories of drugs under one overall analysis.…”
Section: Strengths and Comparisons With Other Studiesmentioning
Background: Movement fluctuations are the main complication of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients receiving long-term levodopa (L-dopa) treatment. We compared and ranked the efficacy and safety of dopamine agonists (DAs) with regard to motor fluctuations by using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to quantify information from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Methods and Findings: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis, and only RCTs comparing DAs for advanced PD were included. Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for relevant studies published until January 2021. Two reviewers independently extracted individual study data and evaluated studies for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Network meta-analyses using a Bayesian framework were used to calculate the related parameters. The pre-specified primary and secondary outcomes were efficacy (“ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia, “OFF” time, “ON” time, “UPDRS-III,” and “UPDRS-II”) and safety [treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) and other adverse events] of DAs. The results are presented as the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve. A total of 20 RCTs assessing 6,560 patients were included. The general DA effects were ranked from high to low with respect to the amount of “ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia as follows: apomorphine (SUCRA = 97.08%), pramipexole_IR (probability = 79.00%), and ropinirole_PR (SUCRA = 63.92%). The general safety of DAs was ranked from high to low with respect to TEAE as follows: placebo (SUCRA = 74.49%), pramipexole_ER (SUCRA = 63.6%), sumanirole (SUCRA = 54.07%), and rotigotine (SUCRA = 53.84%).Conclusions: This network meta-analysis shows that apomorphine increased “ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia and decreased “OF” time for advanced PD patients. The addition of pramipexole, ropinirole, or rotigotine to levodopa treatment in advanced PD patients with motor fluctuations increased “ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia, improved the UPDRS III scores, and ultimately ameliorated the UPDRS II scores, thereby maximizing its benefit. This NMA of pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine represents an effective treatment option and has an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced PD.
“…Although traditional meta-analyses have been previously published, and network meta-analyses have compared drugs, little attention has been paid to the treatment of motor fluctuation that occurs in PD patients with a focus on comparing a limited group of classes or individual therapies (Stowe et al, 2011;Ren et al, 2014;Thorlund et al, 2014;Zhuo et al, 2017;Li et al, 2018;Mills et al, 2018;Zhao et al, 2019). In contrast to previous meta-analyses, the current analysis is the first network meta-analysis, and it integrates the broad basis of published evidence regarding randomized controlled trials to determine the efficacy and safety of drugs being used as adjuvant treatments with L-dopa for motor fluctuations in PD patients and allows a comprehensive evaluation of several categories of drugs under one overall analysis.…”
Section: Strengths and Comparisons With Other Studiesmentioning
Background: Movement fluctuations are the main complication of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients receiving long-term levodopa (L-dopa) treatment. We compared and ranked the efficacy and safety of dopamine agonists (DAs) with regard to motor fluctuations by using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to quantify information from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Methods and Findings: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis, and only RCTs comparing DAs for advanced PD were included. Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for relevant studies published until January 2021. Two reviewers independently extracted individual study data and evaluated studies for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Network meta-analyses using a Bayesian framework were used to calculate the related parameters. The pre-specified primary and secondary outcomes were efficacy (“ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia, “OFF” time, “ON” time, “UPDRS-III,” and “UPDRS-II”) and safety [treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) and other adverse events] of DAs. The results are presented as the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve. A total of 20 RCTs assessing 6,560 patients were included. The general DA effects were ranked from high to low with respect to the amount of “ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia as follows: apomorphine (SUCRA = 97.08%), pramipexole_IR (probability = 79.00%), and ropinirole_PR (SUCRA = 63.92%). The general safety of DAs was ranked from high to low with respect to TEAE as follows: placebo (SUCRA = 74.49%), pramipexole_ER (SUCRA = 63.6%), sumanirole (SUCRA = 54.07%), and rotigotine (SUCRA = 53.84%).Conclusions: This network meta-analysis shows that apomorphine increased “ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia and decreased “OF” time for advanced PD patients. The addition of pramipexole, ropinirole, or rotigotine to levodopa treatment in advanced PD patients with motor fluctuations increased “ON” time without troublesome dyskinesia, improved the UPDRS III scores, and ultimately ameliorated the UPDRS II scores, thereby maximizing its benefit. This NMA of pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine represents an effective treatment option and has an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced PD.
“…Li et al conducted a network meta-analysis comparing ten drugs used in the treatment of non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease [6]. They included trials involving drugs from different drug classes (ropinirole, rasagiline, rotigotine, entacapone, apomorphine, pramipexole, sumarinole, bromocriptine, piribedil and levodopa).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They included trials involving drugs from different drug classes (ropinirole, rasagiline, rotigotine, entacapone, apomorphine, pramipexole, sumarinole, bromocriptine, piribedil and levodopa). They found that among the drugs included in their analysis, apomorphine appeared to be the most efficacious [6].…”
Purpose To investigate the comparative effectiveness of dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase type-B (MAO-B) inhibitors available for treatment of Parkinson's disease. Methods We performed a systematic literature search identifying randomized controlled trials investigating 4 dopamine agonists (cabergoline, pramipexole, ropinirole, rotigotine) and 3 MAO-B inhibitors (selegiline, rasagiline, safinamide) for Parkinson's disease. We extracted and pooled data from included clinical trials in a joint model allowing both direct and indirect comparison of the seven drugs. We considered dopamine agonists and MAO-B inhibitors given as monotherapy or in combination with levodopa. Selected endpoints were change in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score, serious adverse events and withdrawals. We estimated the relative effectiveness of each dopamine agonist and MAO-B inhibitor versus comparator drug. Results Altogether, 79 publications were included in the analysis. We found all the investigated drugs to be effective compared with placebo when given as monotherapy except safinamide. When considering combination treatment, the estimated relative
“…All sessions were capped at 90 min to help ensure that each of the DA drugs would be active for the duration of the experiment. Dihydrexidine has been shown to have a relatively short half‐life of 1–2 hr (Taylor et al., ; Blanchet et al., ; For review also see: Mailman, Huang, & Nichols, ; Salmi, Isacson, & Kull, ), while sumanirole has been shown to be effective for 3–8 hr depending on the species and delivery method (Barone, Lamb, Ellis, & Clarke, ; Li et al., ; McCall et al., ).…”
Dopamine (DA) plays a critical role in cognition, motivation and information processing. DA action has been shown to both improve and/or impair cognition across different receptor types, species, subjects and tasks. This complex relationship has been described as an inverted U‐shaped function and may be due to the differential effects of DA receptor activation in the striatum and prefrontal cortex. We have investigated the effects of selective DA agonists on cognitive performance in healthy monkeys using a touch screen running tasks from the CAmbridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). One of two DA agonist drugs or placebo was administered prior to each daily CANTAB session: Dihydrexidine hydrochloride (selective D1 agonist, 0.4–0.9 mg/kg), or sumanirole maleate (selective D2 agonist 0.05–0.3 mg/kg). Three CANTAB tasks were tested: (a) “self‐ordered sequential search task” which tested spatial working memory, (b) “reversal learning task,” which tested association learning, cognitive flexibility and attention and (c) “visually guided reaching task,” which tested reaction time and accuracy. At high dosages, the D2 agonist improved spatial working memory performance, while impairing reversal learning and slowing reach response latency. No consistent cognitive effects were observed with the D1 agonist across the dosages tested. A significant decrease in trial completion rate was observed at the higher dosages of both the D1 and D2 agonists which were consistent with decreased motivation. These results are consistent with task‐specific effects of a D2 agonist as well as dose specific insensitivities of a D1 agonist on cognitive and motor behaviors in a healthy monkey.
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.