Double‐blind study of the actively transported levodopa prodrug XP21279 in Parkinson's disease

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of XP21279‐carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease who experience motor fluctuations compared with immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa tablets. XP21279 is a levodopa prodrug that is actively absorbed by high‐capacity nutrient transporters expressed throughout the gastrointestinal tract and then rapidly converted to levodopa by carboxylesterases. XP21279‐carbidopa sustained‐release bilayer tablets were developed to overcome pharmacokinetic limitations of levodopa by providing more continuous exposure. Patients with motor fluctuations who required carbidopa‐levodopa four or five times daily were optimized for 2 weeks each on carbidopa‐levodopa four or five times daily and XP21279‐carbidopa three times daily in a randomized sequence. Next, they received each optimized treatment for 2 weeks in a double‐blind/double‐dummy, randomized sequence. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline in daily off time at the end of each double‐blind treatment period. All patients at 2 sites underwent pharmacokinetic analyses. Twenty‐eight of 35 enrolled patients completed both double‐blind treatments. The mean total daily off time was reduced from baseline by a mean (± standard error) of 2.7 hours (± 0.48 hours) for immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa and 3.0 hours (± 0.57 hours) for XP21279‐carbidopa (P = 0.49). Among 11 patients who completed pharmacokinetic sampling on each optimized treatment, the percentage deviation from the mean levodopa concentration was lower (P < 0.05) for XP21279‐carbidopa than carbidopa‐levodopa. Both treatments had a similar incidence of new or worsening dyskinesias. XP21279‐carbidopa administered three times daily produced a reduction in off time similar to that of carbidopa‐levodopa administered four or five times daily, and the difference was not statistically significant. XP21279‐carbidopa significantly reduced variability in levodopa concentrations compared with carbidopa‐levodopa. © 2013 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society     

A Double‐Blind,Randomized, Placebo and Active‐Controlled Study of Nebicapone for the Treatment of Motor Fluctuations in Parkinson's Disease

To determine the efficacy, safety and tolerability of nebicapone, a new catechol‐O‐methyltransferase inhibitor for the treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease (PD), we conducted a multicenter, randomized, 8‐week double‐blind, placebo‐ and active‐controlled, parallel‐group study comparing nebicapone 50 mg, 100 mg, or 150 mg, entacapone 200 mg (active control) or placebo administered concomitantly with levodopa/carbidopa or levodopa/benserazide. Two hundred and fifty‐two PD patients with motor fluctuations treated with levodopa/carbidopa or levodopa/benserazide (4–8 daily doses) were enrolled and 250 patients were eligible for intention‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis on the basis of having at least one efficacy assessment. The primary endpoint was 8‐week change from baseline in absolute “Off” time duration noted in self‐scoring diaries. At 8 weeks of treatment the mean daily “Off” time decreased significantly compared to placebo for nebicapone 150 mg (?106 min; 95%CI: ?192; ?21) and entacapone 200 mg (?81 min; 95%CI: ?142; ?19). The decrease in “Off” time with nebicapone 50 mg or 100 mg did not reach statistical significance. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were reported by 32% to 49% of patients in any treatment group, with no observed dose relationship in the nebicapone groups. Clinically relevant elevations in aspartate transaminase (AST) and/or alanine transaminase (ALT) were observed in 4 of 46 patients with the nebicapone 150 mg dose. The results of this study show that nebicapone 150 mg is efficacious for the treatment of motor fluctuations in PD patients. However, the risk of increasing liver transaminases and its clinically relevance deserves further evaluation.     

Synaptic inputs onto small bistratified (blue‐ON/yellow‐OFF) ganglion cells in marmoset retina

The inner plexiform layer of the retina contains functional subdivisions, which segregate ON and OFF type light responses. Here, we studied quantitatively the ON and OFF synaptic input to small bistratified (blue‐ON/yellow‐OFF) ganglion cells in marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). Small bistratified cells display an extensive inner dendritic tier that receives blue‐ON input from short‐wavelength‐sensitive (S) cones via blue cone bipolar cells. The outer dendritic tier is sparse and is thought to receive yellow‐OFF input from medium (M)‐ and long (L)‐wavelength‐sensitive cones via OFF diffuse bipolar cells. In total, 14 small bistratified cells from different eccentricities were analyzed. The cells were retrogradely labeled from the koniocellular layers of the lateral geniculate nucleus and subsequently photofilled. Retinal preparations were processed with antibodies against the C‐terminal binding protein 2, the AMPA receptor subunit GluR4, and/or gephyrin to identify bipolar and/or amacrine input. The results show that the synaptic input is evenly distributed across the dendritic tree, with a density similar to that reported previously for other ganglion cell types. The population of cells showed a consistent pattern, where bipolar input to the inner tier is about fourfold greater than bipolar input to the outer tier. This structural asymmetry of bipolar input may help to balance the weight of cone signals from the sparse S cone array against inputs from the much denser M/L cone array. J. Comp. Neurol. 517:655–669, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Pharmacokinetics of etilevodopa compared to levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: an open-label, randomized, crossover study

"Dose failures" and "delayed on" phenomena following an intake of levodopa dose in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) with motor fluctuations may be caused by stagnation of poorly soluble levodopa in the atonic stomach. Etilevodopa is a unique, highly soluble prodrug of levodopa. When ingested, etilevodopa is more readily dissolved in the stomach than levodopa. It passes unchanged through the stomach to the duodenum, where it is rapidly hydrolyzed by local esterases and rapidly absorbed as levodopa. To compare the pharmacokinetics of three different modes of etilevodopa/carbidopa administration with standard levodopa/carbidopa tablets in fluctuating PD patients, 29 patients with PD and response fluctuations were enrolled in an open-label, randomized, four-way crossover study of single doses of 4 treatments: swallowed etilevodopa/carbidopa tablets, etilevodopa/carbidopa tablets dissolved in water, etilevodopa oral solution with carbidopa tablets, and standard levodopa/carbidopa tablets. To measure the maximal concentration (Cmax), time to Cmax (tmax), and area under the curve (AUC) of plasma levodopa, etilevodopa, and carbidopa, blood samples were drawn before drug administration and at intervals up to 240 minutes thereafter. Plasma levodopa tmax was significantly shorter with all three modes of administration of etilevodopa (mean of about 30 minutes) than with levodopa treatment (mean of 54 minutes). During the first 45 minutes after drug ingestion, plasma levodopa AUC was significantly greater after etilevodopa administration than after levodopa administration. Levodopa AUC for 0 to 1 hour and 0 to 2 hours were also significantly greater following administration of etilevodopa/carbidopa swallowed tablets than following administration of levodopa/carbidopa tablets. Mean levodopa Cmax was in the range 2.3 to 2.7 microg/mL for all treatments. Levodopa Cmax was significantly greater following treatment with etilevodopa swallowed tablets than with levodopa tablets. Etilevodopa/carbidopa was well tolerated, with a safety profile comparable to that of levodopa/carbidopa. The shorter levodopa tmax observed with etilevodopa potentially translates to a shorter time to "on". Clinical trials with etilevodopa/carbidopa tablets should be carried out in PD patients with response fluctuations such as "delayed on" and "dose failures".     

Outpatient titration of carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (Duopa)

Carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (CLES; Duopa) is a suspension or gel formulation of carbidopa/levodopa that is approved by the USA Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease patients with motor fluctuations. CLES is delivered at a constant rate continuously throughout the day into the jejunum through an infusion pump via a PEG-J tube implanted surgically. The efficacy of CLES was established in the USA based on a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active controlled, parallel group and 12-week study, in which mean daily OFF time was reduced by 4.0 h, compared to 1.9 h with oral immediate release carbidopa/levodopa. The CLES hardware consists of a cassette containing the drug, a pump to deliver the drug and tubing to connect the PEG-J to the pump. It is critical to understand the appropriate conversion of the carbidopa/levodopa daily dosages to the CLES dosage and how to program the pump and titrate CLES to achieve the most effective dose. We describe one methodology for patient selection, outpatient titration and pump programming.     

Efficacy,safety and tolerability of rasagiline as adjunctive therapy in elderly patients with Parkinson’s disease

Background: Rasagiline, an MAO‐B inhibitor, is indicated for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease (PD). In this post hoc analysis, the efficacy, safety and tolerability of rasagiline as an adjunct to levodopa were compared with placebo in elderly (≥70 years) and younger (<70 years) patients with PD. Methods: Data were pooled from the Parkinson’s Rasagiline: Efficacy and Safety on the Treatment of ‘OFF’ and Lasting effect in Adjunct therapy with Rasagiline Given Once daily randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trials with the primary efficacy end‐point being the reduction from baseline in daily OFF time. Secondary efficacy end‐points included scores for Clinical Global Improvement (CGI)‐Examiner during ON time, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS)‐ADL during OFF time, UPDRS‐Motor during ON time and total daily ON time with and without troublesome dyskinesia. Tolerability was evaluated from adverse events (AEs) in the two age groups. Results: Rasagiline decreased daily OFF time versus placebo (P < 0.01) and improved CGI‐Examiner score (P = 0.001) and UPDRS‐Motor ON score (P < 0.05). Changes in UPDRS‐ADL OFF score and total daily ON time without dyskinesia also favoured rasagiline but were not significant. Between‐group comparisons (≥70 vs. <70 years) showed that efficacy was unaffected by age for all end‐points (P > 0.1), and rasagiline was well tolerated amongst both groups of patients with a comparable incidence of total and dopaminergic AEs (P > 0.1). Conclusions: Adjunct rasagiline is efficacious and well tolerated in elderly non‐demented patients (≥70 years) with moderate to advanced PD. Confirmation of the efficacy and safety of rasagiline in the elderly patient subgroup is especially relevant because of the increasing number of elderly patients with PD.     

A 12-month,dose-level blinded safety and efficacy study of levodopa inhalation powder (CVT-301, Inbrija) in patients with Parkinson's disease

IntroductionCVT-301 (Inbrija®) is a levodopa inhalation powder for on-demand treatment of OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease patients treated with carbidopa/levodopa. Safety and efficacy results of a 12-month, dose-level blinded extension study of a phase 3 trial (SPAN℠-PD) of CVT-301 are presented.MethodsPatients were receiving oral carbidopa/levodopa and adjunctive CVT-301 treatment, blinded to dose (60 mg or 84 mg, N = 325). Study visits occurred every 3 months. Pulmonary function was assessed by spirometry. Other safety assessments included dyskinesia and adverse events (AEs). Secondary objectives of the study included maintenance of improvement assessments for occurrence of an ON state during the 60-min post-dose period, change in total daily OFF time, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC).ResultsMost frequent AEs (≥5%) were cough (15.4%), fall (13.1%), upper respiratory tract infection (7.1%), and dyskinesia (5.1%). Severe AEs (>1 event) were cough (1.9%) and dyskinesia (0.6%). Twelve-month mean changes from baseline for FEV₁, FVC, and DL_CO were −0.092 L, −0.097 L, and −0.922 mL/min/mmHg, respectively. At 12 months, 73.0% of patients on 84 mg achieved an ON state within 60 min. Total daily OFF time was reduced by 0.55 h (month 1) and 0.88 h (month 12) for the 84 mg dose. Percentage of patients self-reported as improved by PGIC was 65.5–91.9% over 12 months.ConclusionCVT-301 was generally well-tolerated. Twelve-month decline in pulmonary function was consistent with a prior PD control group. Exploratory efficacy results showed CVT-301 maintained improvement at achieving ON states in patients experiencing OFF episodes, decreasing daily OFF time, and maintaining improvement in PGIC.     

Quality of life in early Parkinson's disease treated with levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone

We aimed to investigate whether treatment with levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone when compared with levodopa/carbidopa improves quality of life in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with no or minimal, nondisabling motor fluctuations. This is a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind study. One hundred eighty‐four patients on 3 to 4 equal doses of 100/25 to 200/50 mg levodopa/carbidopa or levodopa/benserazide, 0 to 3 hours of nondisabling OFF time over a 48 hour period and no dyskinesia were randomized to levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone or levodopa/carbidopa treatment for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was quality of life as assessed by the PDQ‐8. Secondary outcome measures were the UPDRS parts I–IV, and the Wearing Off Card. Treatment with levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone resulted in significantly greater improvements in PDQ‐8 scores compared to treatment with levodopa/carbidopa (mean difference 1.4 points, P = 0.021). Statistically significant improvements were seen predominantly in nonmotor domains (depression, personal relationships, communication, stigma, all P < 0.05; dressing P = 0.056). Patients who were randomly assigned to levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone also showed significantly greater improvement in UPDRS part II scores (P = 0.032) with UPDRS part III scores showing borderline significance. Differences in UPDRS parts I and IV and Wearing Off Card scores were not significant. Treatment with levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone results in improved quality of life compared with levodopa/carbidopa in PD patients with mild or minimal, nondisabling motor fluctuations. © 2007 Movement Disorder Society     

Crossover comparison of IPX066 and a standard levodopa formulation in advanced Parkinson's disease

The objective of the study was to compare the pharmacokinetics, motor effects, and safety of IPX066, a novel extended‐release formulation of carbidopa‐levodopa, with an immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa formulation in advanced Parkinson's disease. We performed an open‐label crossover study in 27 subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease experiencing motor fluctuations on levodopa therapy. Subjects were randomized 1:1 to 8 days' treatment with either immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa followed by IPX066 or IPX066 followed by immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa. Pharmacokinetic and motor assessments were undertaken on day 1 for 8 hours (following a single dose) and on day 8 for 12 hours (during multiple‐dose administration). Following a single dose of IPX066 or immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa, plasma levodopa concentrations increased at a similarly rapid rate and were sustained above 50% of peak concentration for 4 hours with IPX066 versus 1.4 hours with immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa (P < .0001). Multiple‐dose data showed IPX066 substantially reduced variability in plasma levodopa concentrations despite a lower dosing frequency (mean, 3.5 vs 5.4 administrations per day). In addition, total levodopa exposure during IPX066 treatment was approximately 87% higher, whereas the increase in levodopa C_max was approximately 30% compared with immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa. Both products were well tolerated. IPX066 provided more sustained plasma levodopa concentrations than immediate‐release carbidopa‐levodopa. Larger, longer‐term, well‐controlled studies should be conducted to provide rigorous assessment of the clinical effects of IPX066. © 2011 Movement Disorder Society     

Clinical efficacy of istradefylline (KW‐6002) in Parkinson's disease: A randomized,controlled study

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of istradefylline at an oral dose of 20 mg or 40 mg once daily for 12 weeks in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with motor complications on levodopa therapy based on the change in the daily OFF time compared with placebo and to assess the safety at these doses. A total of 363 subjects were randomly assigned to receive 20 mg/day istradefylline (n = 119), 40 mg/day istradefylline (n = 125), or placebo (n = 119). The primary outcome variable was the change from baseline at endpoint in daily OFF time based on patients' ON/OFF diaries. At endpoint, the daily OFF time reduced from baseline by 1.31 hours for 20 mg/day istradefylline (P = 0.013 as compared to the placebo), 1.58 hours for 40 mg/day istradefylline (P < 0.001), and 0.66 hours for placebo; istradefylline significantly reduced the daily OFF time compared with placebo. The UPDRS Part III subscale score (ON state) reduced by 5.7 at endpoint in both istradefylline groups and 3.7 in the placebo group (P = 0.006 for 20 mg/day and P = 0.006 for 40 mg/day group as compared with placebo). The most commonly reported drug‐related treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE) was dyskinesia, which occurred in 2.5% (3/119) of subjects receiving placebo, 8.5% (10/118) receiving 20 mg/day istradefylline, and 6.4% (8/125) receiving 40 mg/day istradefylline. We conclude that istradefylline at 20 mg and 40 mg once daily is effective in relieving wearing‐off fluctuations of PD patients. In addition, istradefylline was well tolerated at both doses. © 2010 Movement Disorder Society     

Double‐blind trial of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone versus levodopa/carbidopa in early Parkinson's disease

We performed a 39‐week, randomized, double‐blind, multicenter study to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (LCE, Stalevo) with levodopa/carbidopa (LC, Sinemet IR) in patients with early Parkinson's disease (PD). Four hundred twenty‐three patients with early PD warranting levodopa were randomly assigned to treatment with LCE 100/25/200 or LC 100/25 three‐times daily. The adjusted mean difference in total Unified Parkinson's disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Parts II and III between groups using the analysis of covariance model (prespecified primary outcome measure) was 1.7 (standard error = 0.84) points favoring LCE (P = 0.045). Significantly greater improvement with LCE compared with LC was also observed in UPDRS Part II activities of daily living (ADL) scores (P = 0.025), Schwab and England ADL scores (blinded rater, P = 0.003; subject, P = 0.006) and subject‐reported Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scores (P = 0.047). There was no significant difference in UPDRS Part III or investigator‐rated CGI scores. Wearing‐off was observed in 29 (13.9%) subjects in the LCE group and 43 (20.0%) in the LC group (P = 0.099). Dyskinesia was observed in 11 (5.3%) subjects in the LCE group and 16 (7.4%) in the LC group (P = 0.367). Nausea and diarrhea were reported more frequently in the LCE group. LCE provided greater symptomatic benefit than LC and did not increase motor complications. © 2008 Movement Disorder Society     

ND0612 (levodopa/carbidopa for subcutaneous infusion) in patients with Parkinson's disease and motor response fluctuations: A randomized,placebo-controlled phase 2 study

IntroductionND0612 is a continuous, subcutaneous levodopa/carbidopa delivery system under development for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and motor fluctuations.MethodsThis was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 2-period study evaluating the safety and pharmacokinetics of ND0612 in PD patients on an optimized oral levodopa regimen and experiencing ≥2 h/day of OFF time. During Period-1, patients received their current standard of care (SoC) levodopa/carbidopa and were randomized (2:1) to 14 days treatment with adjunct ND0612 (daily levodopa/carbidopa dose of 270/63 mg) or placebo infusion +SoC. During Period-2, 16 patients were randomized to receive 7 days treatment with ND0612 or ND0612 plus oral entacapone. Reduction in OFF time was analyzed as an exploratory measure using a futility design with a predefined margin of 1.6 h.ResultsND0612 was well-tolerated; most patients experienced infusion site nodules (95% vs. 56% with placebo), which all resolved without sequelae. Patients treated with adjunct ND0612 during Period-1 avoided deep troughs in levodopa plasma levels and had a decreased fluctuation index versus placebo (1.6 ± 0.5 vs 3.1 ± 1.6 at end of Period-1, respectively). In Period-2, the coadministration of entacapone with continuous ND0612 SC infusion translated to an increase in mean levodopa AUC_0–10h compared to baseline. Exploratory efficacy analysis of Period 1 showed mean ± SD OFF time reductions of −2.13 ± 2.24 [90%CI: -2.8, ∞] hours (p = 0.84 using H₀ of μ₀ ≤-1.6).ConclusionLevodopa/carbidopa infusion with ND0612 was generally well-tolerated and resulted in reduced fluctuations in plasma levodopa concentrations when given with SoC oral levodopa. ND0612 met the efficacy endpoint for the futility design.     

Optimizing levodopa pharmacokinetics: intestinal infusion versus oral sustained-release tablets

Continuous duodenal infusion of carbidopa/levodopa has been shown to control motor fluctuations in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). The authors compared the pharmacokinetics of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa in patients with advanced PD after administration of an oral sustained-release levodopa preparation and after continuous intestinal levodopa infusion with a new formulation as a gel suspension. A randomized crossover trial was carried out in 12 patients. Carbidopa/levodopa was administered as an oral sustained-release tablet and by nasoduodenal continuous infusion for 3-week periods for each treatment. Plasma levodopa concentrations and motor performance were evaluated every 30 minutes during 3 test days of each treatment period. The average intraindividual coefficient of variation for the plasma levodopa concentrations after oral therapy was 34% and was significantly lower (14%, p < 0.01) during continuous infusion. Hourly video evaluations showed a significant increase in ON time during infusion and a significant decrease in OFF time and dyskinesia. Continuous intraduodenal delivery of a new carbidopa/levodopa formulation offers a means for markedly improved control of motor fluctuations in late stages of PD.     

Comparison of orally dissolving carbidopa/levodopa (Parcopa) to conventional oral carbidopa/levodopa: A single‐dose,double‐blind,double‐dummy,placebo‐controlled,crossover trial

Levodopa use in fluctuating Parkinson's disease (PD) is complicated by an inconsistent and prolonged onset to clinical improvement. An orally dissolved carbidopa/levodopa (OD C/L) preparation (Parcopa UCB Pharma) is available in the United States. This offers potential advantages to shorten the duration from ingestion to clinical improvement. Surprisingly, this has never been clinically assessed. We tested 20 patients with fluctuating PD and a Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) “off” motor score of ≥25 in a 2‐day, single‐dose, double‐blind, double‐dummy, crossover study. Patients arrived in the morning in the practically defined “off” state and were randomly assigned to receive identical doses of either oral C/L and OD placebo or OD C/L and oral C/L placebo on 1st day and the reverse combination on a 2nd day. After training, patients underwent bilateral hand tapping at baseline and every 5 minutes for 60 minutes after dose ingestion. Stride length (SL) was recorded at 5‐minute intervals with an ambulatory gait monitor. Patients identified their subjective latency to “on” and noted drug preferences and adverse events. They also underwent a UPDRS motor examination at baseline and 60 minutes after dose. Twenty subjects [15 male, age 68.7 (9.7), PD duration 13.4 (6.8)] completed. There were no significant group differences in tapping speed, subjective time to “on,” latency of increased SL, or overall preference. However, all trends did favor OD C/L. Adverse events were similar. This small pilot study did not show significant group differences favoring OD C/L; however, larger studies may be justified, and individual patients may benefit. © 2010 Movement Disorder Society     

Randomized,double‐blind,multicenter evaluation of pramipexole extended release once daily in early Parkinson's disease

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pramipexole extended release (ER) administered once daily in early Parkinson's disease (PD). Pramipexole immediate release (IR) administered three times daily (TID) is an efficacious and generally well‐tolerated treatment for PD. A pramipexole ER formulation is now available. We performed a randomized, double‐blind, placebo and active comparator–controlled trial in subjects with early PD. The primary efficacy and safety evaluation of pramipexole ER compared with placebo took place at week 18. Two hundred fifty‐nine subjects were randomized 2:2:1 to treatment with pramipexole ER once daily, pramipexole IR TID, or placebo. Levodopa rescue was required by 7 subjects in the placebo group (14%), 3 subjects in the pramipexole ER group (2.9%, P = 0.0160), and 1 subject in the pramipexole IR group (1.0%, P = 0.0017). Adjusted mean [standard error (SE)] change in Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) II [activities of daily living (ADL)] + III (motor) scores from baseline to week 18, including post‐levodopa rescue evaluations, was ?5.1 (1.3) in the placebo group, ?8.1 (1.1) in the pramipexole ER group (P = 0.0282), and ?8.4 (1.1) in the pramipexole IR group (P = 0.0153). Adjusted mean (SE) change in UPDRS ADL + motor scores, censoring post‐levodopa rescue data, was ?2.7 (1.3) in the placebo group, ?7.4 (1.1) in the pramipexole ER group (P = 0.0010), and ?7.5 (1.1) in the pramipexole IR group (P = 0.0006). Adverse events more common with pramipexole ER than placebo included somnolence, nausea, constipation, and fatigue. Pramipexole ER administered once daily was demonstrated to be efficacious compared with placebo and provided similar efficacy and tolerability as pramipexole IR administered TID. © 2010 Movement Disorder Society     

Orodispersible sublingual piribedil to abort OFF episodes: A single dose placebo‐controlled,randomized, double‐blind,cross‐over study

S90049, a novel sublingual formulation of the non‐ergoline D₂‐D₃ agonist piribedil, has a pharmacokinetic profile promising to provide rapid relief on motor signs in Parkinson's disease (PD). We assessed the efficacy and safety of S90049 in aborting OFF episodes responding to subcutaneous apomorphine in PD patients with motor fluctuations. This was a single‐dose double‐blind double‐placebo 3 × 3 cross‐over study. Optimal tested doses were determined during a previous open‐label titration phase (S90049 median dose: 60 mg, apomorphine: 5 mg). Primary endpoint was the maximal change versus baseline in UPDRS motor score (ΔUPDRS III) assessed after drug administration following an overnight withdrawal of antiparkinsonian medications. Thirty patients (age: 60 ± 8 years, PD duration: 12 ± 6 years, UPDRS III OFF: 37 ± 15) participated. S90049 wassuperior to placebo on ΔUPDRS III (?13 ± 12 versus ?7 ± 9 respectively; estimated difference ?5.2, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)[?10.4;0.05], P = 0.05). This was also true for secondary outcomes: number of patients switching from OFF to ON (17 on S90049 vs. 8 on placebo, P = 0.03), time to turn ON (P = 0.013) and duration of the ON phase (P = 0.03). In the 17 patients who switched ON on S90049, ΔUPDRS III was similar on S90049 (?21.2 ± 10.1) and apomorphine (?23.6 ± 14.1) (estimated difference: 4.0 95% CI [?2.9;10.9]). S90049 was well tolerated: no serious or unexpected adverse event occurred. A single dose of up to 60 mg of S90049 given sublingually was superior to placebo in improving UPDRS III and aborting a practical OFF in patients with advanced PD. Testing greater doses might improve response rate. © 2009 Movement Disorder Society     

Evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to limit excessive antipsychotic co‐prescribing in schizophrenia out‐patients

Baandrup L, Allerup P, Lublin H, Nordentoft M, Peacock L, Glenthoj B. Evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to limit excessive antipsychotic co‐prescribing in schizophrenia out‐patients. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a multifaceted educational intervention on the frequency of antipsychotic co‐prescribing in adult schizophrenia out‐patients. Method: Controlled quasi‐experimental study performed in two Danish municipalities matched for baseline prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, socioeconomic status and functional level of patients. The intervention was aimed at psychiatric healthcare providers and consisted of 1 day of didactic lectures, six 3‐h educational outreach visits and an electronic reminder during drug prescribing. Results: Between‐group use of antipsychotic polypharmacy was compared at baseline (intervention group, N = 232/control group, N = 351) and after 1 year of intervention (intervention group, N = 216/control group, N = 386). The prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy at follow‐up was not significantly different between treatment settings when adjusting for differences in case‐mix (P = 0.07). Conclusion: This multifaceted educational intervention failed to reduce the frequency of antipsychotic co‐prescribing, but it suggested that future efforts to improve prescribing practice should address organizational barriers to implementation.     

Long‐term safety and efficacy of levodopa‐carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced Parkinson's disease

Background: Levodopa‐carbidopa intestinal gel (designated as carbidopa‐levodopa enteral suspension in the United States) provides stable plasma levodopa concentrations and reduces motor fluctuations in advanced Parkinson's disease patients through continuous delivery of levodopa via percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy. We report long‐term safety and efficacy outcomes from an open‐label phase 3 treatment program. Methods: PD patients (n = 262) who completed a 12‐week double‐blind study and its 52‐week open‐label extension or a separate 54‐week open‐label study were enrolled in this ongoing phase 3 open‐label, multinational study (NCT00660673). Safety and efficacy assessments were collected every 6 months. Results: Mean total duration of exposure to levodopa‐carbidopa intestinal gel was 4.1 years (range, 1.2 to 6.9 years). The overall discontinuation rate was 34% (average annual discontinuation rate, 10%). Although most patients (94%) reported an adverse event, the rate of adverse events decreased over time; 53% experienced a serious adverse event. Of patients in this extension study, 54% required jejunal tube replacement during the study, and 37% required percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube replacement. Most patients were on levodopa monotherapy. Patients maintained reductions in “off” time and increases in mean “on” time without dyskinesia from initial levodopa‐carbidopa intestinal gel infusion to he study end point (P < 0.001; n = 81). Activities of daily living and quality‐of‐life assessments demonstrated significant improvements that persisted through the study. Conclusions: This long‐term study demonstrates sustained and clinically meaningful benefits from levodopa‐carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced PD patients. Although adverse event rates decreased over time, vigilance is required for device‐related complications and adverse events. © 2018 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society     

Pharmacokinetic‐pharmacodynamic crossover comparison of two levodopa extension strategies

Controlled‐release carbidopa and levodopa (CL‐CR) and the combination of carbidopa, levodopa, and entacapone (CLE) are used for extending levodopa (L ‐dopa) effects. In a randomized, open‐label crossover study of 17 PD subjects with wearing‐off responses, we compared 8‐hour L ‐dopa pharmacokinetics (PK) and clinical effects after two doses of CL‐CR (50 and 200 mg, respectively) and CLE (37.7, 150, 200 mg, respectively). PK analysis revealed the anticipated near‐equivalent mean L ‐dopa area‐under‐the‐concentration‐curve values (639,490 ng min/mL for two doses of CLE, and 662,577 for CL‐CR, P = 0.86). The mean hourly fluctuation index for L ‐dopa concentration was 235% for CLE and 196% for CL‐CR (P = 0.004). The mean maximal concentration for the first CLE dose was 1,926 ± 760 ng/mL and for CL‐CR, 1,840 ± 889 (P = 0.33). During the PK studies, the mean time that L ‐dopa concentration was ≥1,000 ng/mL for CLE was 291 ± 88 minutes and for CL‐CR, 306 ± 86 (P = 0.33). The mean percent‐time in “off” state was 18% for CLE and 28% for CL‐CR (P = 0.017), “on state without dyskinesia” was 64% for CLE and 65% for CL‐CR (P = 0.803), and “on state with nontroublesome dyskinesia” was 18% for CLE and 7% for CL‐CR (P = 0.03). Despite less “off” time with CLE, both formulations demonstrated similar mean PK values and marked intersubject PK variability. © 2009 Movement Disorder Society     

Paroxetine controlled-release formulation in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in Japan and Korea

Aim: The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of paroxetine controlled‐release (CR) formulation compared to placebo. A secondary objective was to test the hypothesis that the CR decreases selective‐serotonin‐reuptake‐inhibitors‐induced nausea as its formulation allows more distal gastrointestinal absorption than the paroxetine immediate‐release (IR) formulation. Methods: We conducted this study in Japanese and Korean patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) in order to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of paroxetine CR compared with placebo. The primary efficacy end‐point was the adjusted mean change from baseline in the 17‐item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score at Week 8. Results: A total of 416 patients with MDD were randomly assigned to the CR, IR and placebo groups. The mean change from baseline in the 17‐item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was ?12.8 in the CR group, ?12.5 in the IR group, and ?10.4 in the placebo group, which showed a statistically significant difference compared to placebo in CR (P < 0.001) and IR (P = 0.015). The incidence of adverse events was 65% in CR, 69% in IR and 55% in placebo. The adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in severity. In the early treatment period, when initiated from 12.5 mg, the incidence of nausea in the CR group was 6%, which was comparable with that of placebo (5%). Conclusion: Paroxetine CR is efficacious in the acute treatment of MDD and may have the potential benefit of decreasing the incidence of nausea in the early treatment period.