Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS): Process, format, and clinimetric testing plan.

This article presents the revision process, major innovations, and clinimetric testing program for the Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), known as the MDS-UPDRS. The UPDRS is the most widely used scale for the clinical study of Parkinson's disease (PD). The MDS previously organized a critique of the UPDRS, which cited many strengths, but recommended revision of the scale to accommodate new advances and to resolve problematic areas. An MDS-UPDRS committee prepared the revision using the recommendations of the published critique of the scale. Subcommittees developed new material that was reviewed by the entire committee. A 1-day face-to-face committee meeting was organized to resolve areas of debate and to arrive at a working draft ready for clinimetric testing. The MDS-UPDRS retains the UPDRS structure of four parts with a total summed score, but the parts have been modified to provide a section that integrates nonmotor elements of PD: I, Nonmotor Experiences of Daily Living; II, Motor Experiences of Daily Living; III, Motor Examination; and IV, Motor Complications. All items have five response options with uniform anchors of 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. Several questions in Part I and all of Part II are written as a patient/caregiver questionnaire, so that the total rater time should remain approximately 30 minutes. Detailed instructions for testing and data acquisition accompany the MDS-UPDRS in order to increase uniform usage. Multiple language editions are planned. A three-part clinimetric program will provide testing of reliability, validity, and responsiveness to interventions. Although the MDS-UPDRS will not be published until it has successfully passed clinimetric testing, explanation of the process, key changes, and clinimetric programs allow clinicians and researchers to understand and participate in the revision process.     

Schizotypal disorder and schizophrenia: a profile analysis of neuropsychological functioning in Japanese patients.

This study compares neuropsychological functioning in a Japanese schizophrenia spectrum disorder group and a group of healthy Japanese volunteers. Participants were 37 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, 28 schizotypal patients, and 99 psychiatrically-normal volunteers. A wide range of cognitive measures were examined. All participants completed a Japanese version of a neuropsychological battery assessing executive function, working memory, processing speed, language, verbal memory, and spatial organization. Comparisons of neuropsychological function demonstrated similarities and differences between patients diagnosed with schizotypal disorder and those diagnosed with schizophrenia. Impairments in verbal memory, language, and processing speed were common to both patient groups and may represent a vulnerability to schizophrenia. Impairments in aspects of working memory, spatial organization and executive function were preferentially observed in schizophrenia and may be features of the overt manifestation of psychosis. Possible differences in the contributions of prefrontal and temporo-limbic structures provide direction for further studies.     

Percutaneous absorption of 2,6-di-tert-butyl-4-nitrophenol (DBNP) in isolated perfused porcine skin.

DBNP (2,6-di-tert-butyl-4-nitrophenol) has been reported as a potential contaminant in submarines. This yellow substance forms when lubrication oil mist containing the antioxidant additive 2,6-di-tert-butylphenol passes through an electrostatic precipitator and is nitrated. Percutaneous absorption of 14C-DBNP was assessed in the isolated perfused porcine skin flap (IPPSF). Four treatments were studied (n=4 flaps/treatment): 40.0 microgram/cm(2) in 100% ethanol; 40.0 microgram/cm(2) in 85% ethanol/15% H(2)O; 4.0 microgram/cm(2) in 100% ethanol; and 4.0 microgram/cm(2) in 85% ethanol/15% water. DBNP absorption was minimal across all treatment groups, with the highest absorption detected being only 1.08% applied dose in an aqueous ethanol group. The highest mass of 14C-DBNP absorbed was only 0.5 microgram. The majority of the applied dose remained on the surface of the skin. This suggests that there is minimal dermal exposure of DBNP when exposed topically to skin.     

Effects of the antimigraine compound zolmitriptan ('Zomig') on psychomotor performance alone and in combination with diazepam in healthy volunteers

Zolmitriptan (Zomig^TM) is a 5HT_1B/1D agonist which has the ability to cross the intact blood-brain barrier to access central as well as peripheral receptors. Because of the potential for central nervous system side effects, this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-period crossover study evaluated the effects of 2.5 and 5 mg doses of zolmitriptan on psychomotor performance and investigated any pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic interaction with diazepam. Twelve healthy volunteers received the following "treatments" as single doses: zolmitriptan 2.5 mg, zolmitriptan 5 mg, diazepam 10 mg, zolmitriptan 2.5 mg+diazepam 10 mg, zolmitriptan 5 mg+diazepam 10 mg and placebo. Pre-dose and at 1, 4, 8, and 24 h post-dose, the following validated battery of psychomotor tests was performed: Bond-Lader visual analogue scales (calmness, contentedness, and alertness factors), critical flicker fusion test, choice reaction time (recognition, motor, and total reaction times), finger-tapping test, number cancellation test and digit symbol substitution test. Plasma concentrations of zolmitriptan, its active metabolite, and diazepam and its active metabolites were measured at the same timepoints. Zolmitriptan 2.5 and 5 mg had no effect on psychomotor function when given alone. In contrast, diazepam 10 mg had profound effects, consistent with its sedative properties, but there was no synergism on concomitant administration of either dose of zolmitriptan. Plasma concentrations of zolmitriptan, diazepam, and their respective active metabolites were similar when the two drugs were given alone or in combination.