|
|||||
|
|
Impact of belief in neuroprotection on therapeutic intervention in Parkinson's disease |
|
| Authors: | Rodger J. Elble MD PhD Oksana Suchowersky MD Stephanie Shaftman MSc MS William J. Weiner MD Peng Huang PhD Barbara Tilley PhD On Behalf of the NINDS NET‐PD Investigators |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Neurology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois, USA;2. Department of Medical Genetics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada;3. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada;4. Department of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA;5. Department of Neurology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA;6. Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA;7. Division of Biostatistics, University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, USA;8. Members of the “NET‐PD Steering Committee” are listed as an Appendix. |
| Abstract: | We explored the hypotheses that an investigator's belief in a putative neuroprotective agent might influence the timing of symptomatic intervention and the assessment of signs and symptoms of patients with Parkinson's disease with the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). These hypotheses were tested with Cox and general linear modeling, using data from a previously published double‐blind placebo‐controlled futility trial of coenzyme Q10 and GPI‐1485. We found the investigators' level of confidence in these agents had no effect on the time to symptomatic therapy or on the change in UPDRS during 12 months of treatment. © 2010 Movement Disorder Society |
| Keywords: | Parkinson's disease bias clinical trial Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale |