Page last updated: 2024-12-05

levodopa

Description Research Excerpts Clinical Trials Roles Classes Pathways Study Profile Bioassays Related Drugs Related Conditions Protein Interactions Research Growth Market Indicators

Description

Levodopa: The naturally occurring form of DIHYDROXYPHENYLALANINE and the immediate precursor of DOPAMINE. Unlike dopamine itself, it can be taken orally and crosses the blood-brain barrier. It is rapidly taken up by dopaminergic neurons and converted to DOPAMINE. It is used for the treatment of PARKINSONIAN DISORDERS and is usually given with agents that inhibit its conversion to dopamine outside of the central nervous system. [Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), National Library of Medicine, extracted Dec-2023]

L-dopa : An optically active form of dopa having L-configuration. Used to treat the stiffness, tremors, spasms, and poor muscle control of Parkinson's disease [Chemical Entities of Biological Interest (ChEBI), Hastings J, Owen G, Dekker A, Ennis M, Kale N, Muthukrishnan V, Turner S, Swainston N, Mendes P, Steinbeck C. (2016). ChEBI in 2016: Improved services and an expanding collection of metabolites. Nucleic Acids Res]

Cross-References

ID SourceID
PubMed CID6047
CHEMBL ID1009
CHEBI ID15765
SCHEMBL ID22655
MeSH IDM0012434

Synonyms (292)

Synonym
.beta.-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
l-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
l-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-.alpha.-alanine
wln: qvyz1r cq dq -l
nsc-118381
alanine,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-
alanine,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-, (-)-
alanine,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-, l-
BIDD:GT0158
AB00052418-06
beta-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
dopar
beta-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-l-alanine
levodopum
(-)-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-l-alanine
CHEBI:15765 ,
(2s)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propanoic acid
(-)-dopa
KBIO1_000452
DIVK1C_000452
smr000058312
SDCCGMLS-0066924.P001
MLS000028514
D9628
EU-0100454
3,4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine, >=98% (tlc)
D00059
levodopa (jp17/usp/inn)
dopar (tn)
SPECTRUM_000454
PRESTWICK2_000017
PRESTWICK_185
cas-59-92-7
NCGC00015384-01
NCGC00016270-01
lopac-d-9628
3,4-dihydroxyphenyl-l-alanine
eldopar
3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
bendopa
insulamina
l-o-hydroxytyrosine
alanine, 3-(3, 4-dihydroxyphenyl)-, (-)-
syndopa
cidandopa
levedopa
larodopa
l-(3, 4-dihydroxyphenyl)-.alpha.-alanine
ro 4-6316
3, 4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
l-tyrosine, 3-hydroxy-
l-(3, 4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-l-alanine
dopalina
dopal-fher
l-dihydroxyphenylalanine
eldopal
deadopa
l(-)-dopa
(-)-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
component of sinemet
dopaidan
3, 4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine
helfo-dopa
l-(o-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
.beta.-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-l-alanine
maipedopa
prodopa
pardopa
nsc118381
.beta.-(3, 4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
brocadopa
levopa
alanine, 3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-, l-
l-.beta.-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
alanine, 3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-
dopasol
IDI1_000452
BSPBIO_000053
SPECTRUM5_001899
PDSP2_001525
LOPAC0_000454
BPBIO1_000059
PDSP1_001541
PRESTWICK3_000017
l-o-dihydroxyphenylalanine
cerepap
ccris 3766
dopaston
einecs 200-445-2
hsdb 3348
biodopa
nsc 118381
levodopum [inn-latin]
dopaflex
l-(-)-dopa
sobiodopa
l-beta-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-alpha-alanine
beta-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-alpha-l-alanine
3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (van)
c9h11no4
l-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
dopaston se
doparl
doparkine
helfo dopa
veldopa
doprin
eldopatec
eurodopa
alanine, 3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-, (-)-
dopastral
l-beta-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
l-dopa
3,4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine
levodopa
C00355
3-hydroxy-l-tyrosine
59-92-7
dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine
l dopa
l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
DB01235
NCGC00093869-04
KBIOGR_001177
KBIOSS_000934
KBIO2_003502
KBIO2_006070
KBIO2_000934
SPBIO_001974
SPECTRUM2_000496
PRESTWICK1_000017
NINDS_000452
SPECTRUM4_000539
PRESTWICK0_000017
SPBIO_000391
SPECTRUM2300205
BSPBIO_002354
l-dopa; levodopa
HMS2090O08
HMS2093N04
1E83F927-C221-46AA-B90A-81B33C5F3868
D 9628
D0600
NCGC00016270-06
bdbm50130192
(2s)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propanoic acidl-dopa
v-1512
cvt-301
CHEMBL1009 ,
levodopa (jp15/usp)
BMSE000322
l-3-hydroxytyrosine
HMS501G14
HMS1922J14
HMS1568C15
NCGC00016270-04
(s)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propanoic acid
A832543
HMS3261K10
HMS2095C15
4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
inbrija
levodopa [usan:usp:inn:ban:jan]
46627o600j ,
unii-46627o600j
nsc-759573
nsc759573
pharmakon1600-02300205
dtxsid9023209 ,
dtxcid303209
tox21_110338
atamet
l-3
HMS2230B04
AKOS010396267
l-3,4-dihydrophenylalanine
CCG-39571
NCGC00016270-07
weldopa
laradopa
ledopa
parda
BP-12850
NCGC00016270-10
LP00454
levodopa [vandf]
corbilta component levodopa
stalevo component levodopa
levodopa component of sinemet
ipx203 component levodopa
levodopa component of corbilta
levodopa component of rytary
duopa component levodopa
levodopa component of dopasnap
levodopum [who-ip latin]
ipx-203 component levodopa
rytary component levodopa
levodopa [who-dd]
levodopa component of duopa
dhivy component levodopa
levodopa [usan]
levodopa [orange book]
levodopa [ep impurity]
carbilev component levodopa
levodopa [mi]
levodopa [usp monograph]
levodopa [jan]
levodopa component of carbilev
dopa, l-
levodopa component of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone orion
levodopa component of dhivy
levodopa [mart.]
levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone orion component levodopa
levodopa [ep monograph]
levodopa component of parcopa
levodopa [ema epar]
levodopa [who-ip]
levodopa component of stalevo
levodopa [usp-rs]
parcopa component levodopa
levodopa [hsdb]
levodopa [inn]
dopasnap component levodopa
EPITOPE ID:150927
S1726
gtpl3639
inbrija (levodopa inhalation powder)
CS-1945
HY-N0304
AM82124
SCHEMBL22655
AB00052418-07
NCGC00261139-01
tox21_500454
(s)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxy-phenyl)-propionic acid
l-3-(3,4-dihydroxy-phenyl)alanine
NCGC00016270-09
F0347-4695
Q-201294
madopa (salt/mix)
levodopa, british pharmacopoeia (bp) reference standard
AB00052418_09
AB00052418_08
bdbm60928
AC-8432
sr-01000075384
SR-01000075384-1
levodopa, united states pharmacopeia (usp) reference standard
levodopa, european pharmacopoeia (ep) reference standard
EN300-52637
3,4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine, vetec(tm) reagent grade, 98%
levodopa, pharmaceutical secondary standard; certified reference material
SR-01000075384-7
SR-01000075384-4
SR-01000075384-6
SBI-0050439.P003
HMS3712C15
b-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)alanine
l-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-alanine
b-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-l-alanine
dopastone
l-b-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-a-alanine
l-4-5-dihydroxyphenylalanine
b-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-a-l-alanine
dopicar
3,4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine, certified reference material, tracecert(r)
l-dopa (3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine)
levodopa;3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
HB1925
Q300989
prolopa
levodopa (sinemet)
carbidopa ep impurity a
l-methyldopa ; (2s)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-2-methylpropanoic acid; 3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-?-methyl-l-alanine; 3-hydroxy-a-methyl-l-tyrosine
122769-74-8
AS-13287
h-phe{3,4-(oh)2}-oh
SDCCGSBI-0050439.P004
NCGC00016270-22
D70595
65170-01-6
(2s)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propanoicacid
levodopa (usp monograph)
levodopa (usp-rs)
levodopum (inn-latin)
levodopa (mart.)
levodopa (ep impurity)
n04ba01
levodopa (ep monograph)
levodopa (usan:usp:inn:ban:jan)
Z756440064

Research Excerpts

Overview

Levodopa (L-DOPA) is an essential drug for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Foslevodopa-foscarbidopa is a soluble formulation of levodopa and carbidopa prodrugs that is delivered as a 24-h/day continuous subcutaneous infusion.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
"Levodopa is a precursor of dopamine, having important beneficial effects in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. "( Voltammetric Determination of Levodopa Using Mesoporous Carbon-Modified Screen-Printed Carbon Sensors.
Apetrei, C; Dăscălescu, D, 2021
)
2.35
"Levodopa (L-DOPA) is an oral Parkinson's Disease drug that generates the active metabolite - dopamine (DA) in vivo. "( Particulate levodopa nose-to-brain delivery targets dopamine to the brain with no plasma exposure.
Akcan, O; Dimiou, S; Huang, H; Kubajewska, I; Lopes, RM; Mellor, RD; Schätzlein, AG; Schlosser, CS; Shet, MS; Uchegbu, IF; Whiteside, GT, 2022
)
2.54
"Foslevodopa-foscarbidopa is a soluble formulation of levodopa and carbidopa prodrugs that is delivered as a 24-h/day continuous subcutaneous infusion, and we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of this formulation in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease."( Safety and efficacy of continuous subcutaneous foslevodopa-foscarbidopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.
Aldred, J; Budur, K; Facheris, MF; Fisseha, N; Fung, VS; Hauser, RA; Jeong, A; Kimber, TE; Klos, K; Litvan, I; O'Neill, D; Robieson, WZ; Soileau, MJ; Spindler, MA; Standaert, DG; Talapala, S; Vaou, EO; Zheng, H, 2022
)
1.49
"Levodopa (L-DOPA) is an essential drug for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. "( Enhanced Physicochemical Stability of the L-DOPA Extract of
Kobtrakul, K; Vilairat, C; Vimolmangkang, S, 2023
)
2.35
"Levodopa is a precursor to dopamine that has been shown to improve functional recovery following stroke partly achieved through mechanisms of brain plasticity. "( Enhanced functional recovery by levodopa is associated with decreased levels of synaptogyrin following stroke in aged mice.
Häggman Henrikson, J; Pombo Antunes, AR; Ruscher, K; Wieloch, T, 2020
)
2.28
"Levodopa (L-dopa) is an effective medication for alleviating motor symptoms in PD that has been shown previously to reduce subcortical beta (13-30 Hz) oscillations."( L-dopa treatment increases oscillatory power in the motor cortex of Parkinson's disease patients.
Cao, C; Li, D; Litvak, V; Sun, B; Zhan, S; Zhang, C, 2020
)
1.28
"Levodopa or l-Dopa is an amino acid used in the treatment of PD that acts as the immediate precursor to dopamine."( L-Dopa release from mesoporous silica nanoparticles engineered through the concept of drug-structure-directing agents for Parkinson's disease.
Almendro, N; García-Muñoz, RA; McConnell, J; Morales, V; Pérez-Garnes, M; Sanz, R, 2021
)
1.34
"Levodopa is a drug that is commonly used to treat movement disorders associated with Parkinson's disease. "( Using epigenetic networks for the analysis of movement associated with levodopa therapy for Parkinson's disease.
Alty, JE; Cosgrove, J; Jamieson, S; Lones, MA; Smith, SL; Trefzer, MA; Turner, AP; Tyrrell, AM, 2016
)
2.11
"Levodopa (L-dopa) is a "gold standard" and most effective symptomatic agent in the Parkinson's disease (PD) treatment. "( Protective effect of two essential oils isolated from Rosa damascena Mill. and Lavandula angustifolia Mill, and two classic antioxidants against L-dopa oxidative toxicity induced in healthy mice.
Gadjeva, V; Karamalakova, Y; Kovacheva, N; Nikolova, G; Stanev, S; Zheleva, A, 2016
)
1.88
"Levodopa is a promising candidate for administration via the transdermal route because it exhibits a short plasma half-life and has a small window of absorption in the upper section of the small intestine. "( Enhancement of levodopa stability when complexed with β-cyclodextrin in transdermal patches.
Al-Shar'i, N; Athamneh, T; Obaidat, R; Tashtoush, B, 2018
)
2.28
"Levodopa is a potent alternative and can be given if there is an inadequate response to the agonist."( [Initial management and adaptation of Parkinson's disease treatment].
Gérard, JM, 2008
)
1.07
"Levodopa (LD) is an efficient drug for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). "( Entacapone.
Müller, T, 2010
)
1.8
"Etilevodopa is a unique, highly soluble prodrug of levodopa."( Pharmacokinetics of etilevodopa compared to levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: an open-label, randomized, crossover study.
Djaldetti, R; Giladi, N; Hassin-Baer, S; Melamed, E; Shabtai, H,
)
0.96
"Etilevodopa is an ethyl-ester prodrug of levodopa that has greater gastric solubility, passes quickly into the small intestine, is rapidly hydrolyzed to levodopa, and has a shortened time to maximum levodopa concentration."( A randomized controlled trial of etilevodopa in patients with Parkinson disease who have motor fluctuations.
Blindauer, K; Eyal, E; Fahn, S; Goetz, C; Goren, S; Kieburtz, K; Levy, R; Nutt, J; Oakes, D; Pagano, M; Salzman, P; Sayag, N; Schwid, S; Scolnik, M; Shoulson, I; Stern, M, 2006
)
1.12
"Levodopa is a dopamine precursor exerting its cardiovascular effects by conversion to dopamine and by other mechanisms not elucidated yet. "( The beta 2 receptor plays a role in the hypotensive effect of L-dopa.
Pérez-Olea, J; Prieto, JC; Quevedo, M, 1995
)
1.73
"Levodopa is a useful adjunctive therapy in HIV-1-infected children with extrapyramidal syndromes, by enhancing motor function and improving their quality of life."( Levodopa therapy improves motor function in HIV-infected children with extrapyramidal syndromes.
Hoyt, L; McSherry, G; Mendelson, J; Mintz, M; Oleske, J; Tardieu, M, 1996
)
2.46

Effects

Melevodopa/carbidopa has a more rapid absorption, less apparent drug accumulation, less inter-patient variability and more effective LD delivery after the early morning and early afternoon dose compared to standard LD. Levodopa itself has a very poor solubility.

Levodopa has become the main therapy for motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD) The levodopa (L-DOPA) has been reported as a promising adhesive for various materials. Foslevodopa-foscarbidopa has a favourable benefit-risk profile.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
"Foslevodopa-foscarbidopa has a favourable benefit-risk profile and represents a potential non-surgical alternative for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease."( Safety and efficacy of continuous subcutaneous foslevodopa-foscarbidopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.
Aldred, J; Budur, K; Facheris, MF; Fisseha, N; Fung, VS; Hauser, RA; Jeong, A; Kimber, TE; Klos, K; Litvan, I; O'Neill, D; Robieson, WZ; Soileau, MJ; Spindler, MA; Standaert, DG; Talapala, S; Vaou, EO; Zheng, H, 2022
)
1.49
"Melevodopa/carbidopa has a more rapid absorption, less apparent drug accumulation, less inter-patient variability and more effective LD delivery after the early morning and early afternoon dose compared to standard LD. "( A systematic review on the clinical experience with melevodopa/carbidopa fixed combination in patients with Parkinson disease.
Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2019
)
1.48
"Levodopa has a relatively short half-life, however, and is quickly metabolized in the plasma, leading to fluctuations, including wearing-off of effect and inconsistent symptomatic relief as well as development of dyskinesias, with both wearing off and dyskinesias worsening with advancing disease."( Advances in levodopa therapy for Parkinson disease: Review of RYTARY (carbidopa and levodopa) clinical efficacy and safety.
Dhall, R; Kreitzman, DL, 2016
)
1.53
"Levodopa has an established position in the treatment of Parkinson's disease for the last 40 years. "( [Levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson disease -- yesterday and today].
Sławek, J,
)
2.48
"Levodopa has a central role in the metabolism of the melanocyte but data do not permit the conclusion that it promotes the development of malignant melanoma."( Malignant melanoma and levodopa.
Braun, M; Rosin, MA, 1984
)
1.3
"Levodopa itself has a very poor solubility."( Current management of motor fluctuations in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease treated chronically with levodopa.
Djaldetti, R; Galili-Mosberg, R; Melamed, E; Ziv, I; Zoldan, J, 1999
)
1.24
"Levodopa has become the main therapy for motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD). "( The amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation predicts levodopa treatment response in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Bai, Y; Gao, D; Guo, Z; Hu, W; Li, Z; Liu, C; Mo, J; Wang, X; Wang, Y; Yang, B; Zhang, C; Zhang, J; Zhang, K; Zhang, X; Zhao, B; Zhao, X; Zou, L, 2021
)
2.31
"The levodopa (L-DOPA) has been reported as a promising adhesive for various materials. "( L-DOPA coating improved phosphate glass fibre strength and fibre/matrix interface.
Ahmed, I; Parsons, AJ; Rudd, CD; Sharmin, N; Tan, C, 2022
)
1.28
"Foslevodopa-foscarbidopa has a favourable benefit-risk profile and represents a potential non-surgical alternative for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease."( Safety and efficacy of continuous subcutaneous foslevodopa-foscarbidopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.
Aldred, J; Budur, K; Facheris, MF; Fisseha, N; Fung, VS; Hauser, RA; Jeong, A; Kimber, TE; Klos, K; Litvan, I; O'Neill, D; Robieson, WZ; Soileau, MJ; Spindler, MA; Standaert, DG; Talapala, S; Vaou, EO; Zheng, H, 2022
)
1.49
"Melevodopa/carbidopa has a more rapid absorption, less apparent drug accumulation, less inter-patient variability and more effective LD delivery after the early morning and early afternoon dose compared to standard LD. "( A systematic review on the clinical experience with melevodopa/carbidopa fixed combination in patients with Parkinson disease.
Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2019
)
1.48
"Levodopa has been a standard drug for treating Parkinson's disease since the 1960s, but it has caused many side effects such as wearing-off, motor fluctuation, and dystonia. "( Glutathione-decorated fluorescent carbon quantum dots for sensitive and selective detection of levodopa.
Jung, YK; Kim, TE; Park, SW, 2021
)
2.28
"Levodopa has been shown to impair reward-based learning in cognitive tasks."( Null effects of levodopa on reward- and error-based motor adaptation, savings, and anterograde interference.
Gribble, PL; MacDonald, PA; McGregor, HR; Palidis, DJ; Vo, A, 2021
)
1.69
"Levodopa has the best safety data for use in pregnancy and amantadine should be avoided in women who are pregnant or trying to become pregnant."( Parkinson's disease and pregnancy: An updated review.
Hiller, A; Seier, M, 2017
)
1.18
"Levodopa has been the mainstay of symptomatic therapy for Parkinson's disease (PD) for the last five decades. "( Modulatory Effects of Levodopa on Cerebellar Connectivity in Parkinson's Disease.
Ballarini, T; Holiga, Š; Jech, R; Möller, HE; Mueller, K; Piecha, FA; Růžička, E; Růžička, F; Schroeter, ML; Vymazal, J, 2019
)
2.27
"Levodopa has decreasing efficacy over time."( The association between Parkinson's disease symptom side-of-onset and performance on the MDS-UPDRS scale part IV: Motor complications.
Bay, AA; Corcos, DM; Hackney, ME; Hart, AR; Michael Caudle, W, 2019
)
1.24
"Levodopa has long been the standard of care for Parkinson disease (PD); however, the eventual onset of motor fluctuations and levodopa-induced dyskinesia (LID) complicates its utility in advanced PD. "( Neurosurgical Approaches to Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia.
Martini, ML; Mocco, J; Panov, F, 2019
)
2.25
"Oral levodopa has been proposed to be one of the more effective medications to alleviate freezing of gait, but there is limited data on its efficacy. "( Levodopa changes the severity of freezing in Parkinson's disease.
Ceballos-Baumann, AO; Fietzek, UM; Schroeteler, FE; Ziegler, K; Zwosta, J, 2013
)
2.35
"Oral levodopa has been widely used for over 40 years, often in combination with a dopa-decarboxylase inhibitor (DDCI), which reduces many treatment complications, extending its half-life and increasing levodopa availability to the brain."( Levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: current status and new developments.
Salat, D; Tolosa, E, 2013
)
2.29
"Levodopa has been demonstrated to be an effective medication for Parkinson's disease (PD), but its long-term use is complicated by the subsequent development of dyskinesias. "( The relationship between the phenotype of Parkinson's disease and levodopa-induced dyskinesia.
Guo, JF; Liu, ZH; Lou, MX; Song, CY; Tang, BS; Xu, Q; Yan, XX; Yu, RH; Zhang, YH, 2013
)
2.07
"Levodopa (L-dopa) has been at the forefront of antiparkinsonian therapy for a half century. "( Effects of levodopa on regional cerebral metabolism and blood flow.
Eidelberg, D; Ko, JH; Lerner, RP, 2015
)
2.25
"Levodopa treatment has been shown to improve gait spatio-temporal characteristics in both forward and backward walking. "( Gait variability in Parkinson's disease: levodopa and walking direction.
Bryant, MS; Collins, RL; Hou, JG; Protas, EJ; Rintala, DH, 2016
)
2.14
"Levodopa has remained the "gold standard" of the therapy even several decades after its introduction."( [Application of levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced Parkinson's disease].
Bereczki, D; Nagy, H; Takáts, A; Toth, A; Wacha, J, 2015
)
1.48
"Levodopa has a relatively short half-life, however, and is quickly metabolized in the plasma, leading to fluctuations, including wearing-off of effect and inconsistent symptomatic relief as well as development of dyskinesias, with both wearing off and dyskinesias worsening with advancing disease."( Advances in levodopa therapy for Parkinson disease: Review of RYTARY (carbidopa and levodopa) clinical efficacy and safety.
Dhall, R; Kreitzman, DL, 2016
)
1.53
"Levodopa therapy has no unfavorable effect on left ventricular systolic function in patients with PD."( Effects of levodopa therapy on global left ventricular systolic function in patients with Parkinson disease.
Bektaş, O; Günaydın, ZY; Karagöz, A; Özer, FF, 2016
)
2.27
"Levodopa (l-DOPA) has been proved to reverse the pathologic neuron activities in many brain regions related to Parkinson's disease (PD). "( Effect of l-DOPA on local field potential relationship between the pedunculopontine nucleus and primary motor cortex in a rat model of Parkinson's disease.
Geng, X; Han, H; Hou, Y; Lei, C; Li, M; Wang, M; Wang, X; Xie, J; Yao, X; Zhang, Q; Zhang, X, 2016
)
1.88
"Levodopa has been the mainstay of symptomatic therapy for Parkinson Disease (PD) for 40 years providing benefit to virtually all patients. "( Levodopa unresponsive symptoms in Parkinson disease.
Sethi, K, 2008
)
3.23
"Levodopa has been the mainstay of treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD) for more than 40 years. "( Levodopa: past, present, and future.
Hauser, RA, 2009
)
3.24
"As levodopa abuse has only been described in patients with PD, it was suspected to be promoted by central dopamine depletion (with consequent sensitization of dopamine receptors)."( Dopamine dysregulation syndrome in a patient with restless legs syndrome.
Arnulf, I; Brion, A; Karroum, E; Konofal, E; Leu-Semenescu, S, 2009
)
0.87
"Levodopa has been the gold standard therapy for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease for more than three decades. "( Tolcapone: review of its pharmacology and use as adjunctive therapy in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Truong, DD, 2009
)
1.8
"Levodopa has been used successfully for treatment of PD since its discovery, being still the drug of choice. "( [Reconsiderations in the treatment of Parkinson's disease with levodopa: some pharmacodynamic evidence].
Muñoz-S, D; Nicoletti, A; Tapia-Núñez, J; Zappia, M,
)
1.81
"Levodopa has been shown to produce analgesia in various clinical and experimental settings, but its use for chronic pain treatment has not been established. "( Levodopa analgesia in experimental neuropathic pain.
Cobacho, N; De la Calle, JL; González-Escalada, JR; Paíno, CL, 2010
)
3.25
"Levodopa/carbidopa CR has previously been found effective for treating night-time akinesia, but according to this study, it has no impact on the altered sleep structure in PD."( Effect of controlled-release levodopa on the microstructure of sleep in Parkinson's disease.
Deuschl, G; Herzog, J; Volkmann, J; Wailke, S; Witt, K, 2011
)
2.1
"Levodopa has been the mainstay of treatment for Parkinson's disease since the 1960s, but the dyskinesias it induces are a major drawback. "( [Stimulation therapies for Parkinson's disease: over the past two decades].
Benabid, AL, 2010
)
1.8
"Levodopa has been the mainstay of Parkinson's disease (PD) therapy for over 40 years, with its efficacy surpassing that of other antiparkinsonian medications. "( Optimizing levodopa therapy to treat wearing-off symptoms in Parkinson's disease: focus on levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone.
Emre, M; Reichmann, H, 2012
)
2.21
"Levodopa has an established position in the treatment of Parkinson's disease for the last 40 years. "( [Levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson disease -- yesterday and today].
Sławek, J,
)
2.48
"Levodopa has several advantages as a pharmacological challenge agent for human neuroscience research. "( Rapid intravenous loading of levodopa for human research: clinical results.
Black, KJ; Carl, JL; Hartlein, JM; Hershey, T; Perlmutter, JS; Warren, SL, 2003
)
2.05
"Levodopa therapy has numerous advantages that include greater efficacy, much lesser expense, simpler administration, and a lower frequency of hallucinosis and somnolence."( Parkinson's disease: is the initial treatment established?
Ahlskog, JE, 2003
)
1.04
"Levodopa treatment has been shown to increase plasma homocysteine levels in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and this may lead to an increased risk for coronary arterial diseases. "( The COMT inhibitor, entacapone, reduces levodopa-induced elevations in plasma homocysteine in healthy adult rats.
Helkamaa, T; Larjonmaa, H; Nissinen, E; Nissinen, H; Rauhala, P; Reenilä, I; Väänänen, A, 2005
)
2.04
"Levodopa has been the gold standard for Parkinson's disease (PD) therapy since it was successfully introduced in 1967. "( A new look at levodopa based on the ELLDOPA study.
Fahn, S, 2006
)
2.14
"Levodopa has been incriminated in the development and/or progression of melanoma."( [CDKN2A gene mutation and loss of p16 protein activity in a patient on levodopa presenting sporadic multiple primary melanoma].
Bressac de Paillerets, B; Charles, J; Combe, MC; Leccia, MT; Leroux, D; Templier, I, 2006
)
1.29
"Levodopa has been the mainstay treatment for Parkinson's disease for several decades, but the precise mechanism for its therapeutic action is still not well understood. "( Different levodopa actions on the extracellular dopamine pools in the rat striatum.
Dopico, JG; Gómez, I; González-Mora, JL; Morales, I; Obeso, JA; Rodríguez, M; Rodríguez-Oroz, MC; Sabaté, M, 2007
)
2.18
"Levodopa has played a central role in the treatment of Parkinson's disease for nearly 40 years and remains the single most effective symptomatic treatment for the disease. "( Balancing short-term symptom control and long-term functional outcomes in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Tetrud, JW, 2007
)
1.78
"Levodopa has also consistently been shown to produce motor fluctuations (in particular dyskinesias) sooner than has been observed in PD patients, especially younger patients, given dopamine agonists initially."( When should levodopa therapy be initiated in patients with Parkinson's disease?
Fernandez, HH; Halkias, IA; Haq, I; Huang, Z, 2007
)
1.44
"Levodopa has a central role in the metabolism of the melanocyte but data do not permit the conclusion that it promotes the development of malignant melanoma."( Malignant melanoma and levodopa.
Braun, M; Rosin, MA, 1984
)
1.3
"Levodopa has been implicated as an agent that could enhance the development of MM."( Malignant melanoma and levodopa: is there a relationship? Two new cases and a review of the literature.
Pfützner, W; Przybilla, B, 1997
)
1.33
"Levodopa has been used to treat some painful conditions and found to be effective in neuropathic pain due to herpes zoster in a double-blind study. "( Use of levodopa to relieve pain from painful symmetrical diabetic polyneuropathy.
Arac, N; Ertas, M; Ertekin, C; Sagduyu, A; Uludag, B, 1998
)
2.2
"Levodopa itself has a very poor solubility."( Current management of motor fluctuations in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease treated chronically with levodopa.
Djaldetti, R; Galili-Mosberg, R; Melamed, E; Ziv, I; Zoldan, J, 1999
)
1.24
"Both levodopa and biperiden has less effect on postural tremor."( A cross-over clinical and electromyographic assessment of treatment for parkinsonian tremor.
Milanov, I, 2001
)
0.77
"Levodopa has been shown to be a safe pharmacologic agent even after long-term usage."( Levodopa.
Yahr, MD, 1975
)
2.42
"Levodopa clearly has no place in the treatment of neuroleptic-induced Parkinson's disease; anticholinergics and antihistamines are the agents of choice."( Pharmacotherapy of Parkinson's disease.
Cohen, MM; Scheife, RT, 1977
)
0.98
"Levodopa has become established as the treatment of choice in Parkinson's disease. "( A review of some aspects of the pharmacology of levodopa.
Morris, JG, 1978
)
1.96
"Levodopa has been demonstrated to exert both central and peripheral effects on blood pressure in parkinsonian patients."( Central and peripheral catecholamine mechanisms in circulatory control.
Dollery, CT; Reid, JL, 1976
)
0.98
"Levodopa-carbidopa has been widely used in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. "( Inhibition of transformation by levodopa-carbidopa in lymphocytes derived from patients with melanoma.
Wick, MM, 1987
)
2

Actions

Levodopa can increase CBF by dilating proximal arteries. On levodopa, there was an increase in PPNa alpha (5-12 Hz) oscillatory activity and a decrease in beta (13-35 Hz) and gamma (65-90 Hz) bands activity.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
"Levodopa can increase CBF by dilating proximal arteries."( Effects of Levodopa Therapy on Cerebral Arteries and Perfusion in Parkinson's Disease Patients.
Chen, L; Chen, Z; Guo, H; He, L; Ji, L; Li, X; Ma, Y; Shirakawa, M; Xiong, Y; Yuan, C; Zhang, X; Zhao, H, 2022
)
2.55
"ON levodopa, there was an increase in PPNa alpha (5-12 Hz) oscillatory activity and a decrease in beta (13-35 Hz) and gamma (65-90 Hz) bands activity."( Pedunculopontine nucleus area oscillations during stance, stepping and freezing in Parkinson's disease.
Bastin, J; Benabid, AL; Chabardes, S; David, O; Debû, B; Ferraye, M; Fraix, V; Goetz, L; Pollak, P, 2013
)
0.9
"Levodopa can inhibit beta activity in the PPN of parkinsonian rats but cannot relieve parkinsonian patients' axial symptoms clinically."( The network of causal interactions for beta oscillations in the pedunculopontine nucleus, primary motor cortex, and subthalamic nucleus of walking parkinsonian rats.
Chang, J; Li, M; Li, X; Luo, F; Wang, J; Wang, N; Wang, Q; Wen, P; Xiao, H; Xie, Z; Yang, Y; Zhang, W; Zhou, M, 2016
)
1.16
"Levodopa appears to increase DA output by activating these nonfiring neurons; as a consequence, DA release is increased, but behavioral demand can now overwhelm the system, potentially leading to the inactivation and on/off phenomena."( Physiology of the normal and dopamine-depleted basal ganglia: insights into levodopa pharmacotherapy.
Grace, AA, 2008
)
1.3
"Levodopa led to an increase in mtDNA levels."( Mitochondrial abnormalities in the putamen in Parkinson's disease dyskinesia.
Kaczmarska, J; Konradi, C; Luksik, AS; Naydenov, AV; Vassoler, F, 2010
)
1.08
"This levodopa-induced increase in striatal quinoprotein was almost completely suppressed by adjunctive administration with pergolide on the lesioned side."( Dopamine agonist pergolide prevents levodopa-induced quinoprotein formation in parkinsonian striatum and shows quenching effects on dopamine-semiquinone generated in vitro.
Asanuma, M; Diaz-Corrales, FJ; Miyazaki, I; Miyoshi, K; Ogawa, N,
)
0.86
"Levodopa induces lower cortisol plasma levels and decreases serotonergic activity in certain brain areas of fish."( Acute levodopa intake and associated cortisol decrease in patients with Parkinson disease.
Muhlack, S; Müller, T,
)
1.33
"Levodopa caused an increase in plasma growth hormone concentration in 30 subjects."( Plasma DOPA levels and growth hormone response to levodopa in parkinsomism.
Galea-Debono, A; Jenner, P; Marsden, CD; Parkes, JD; Tarsy, D; Walters, J, 1977
)
1.23
"Levodopa induced an increase of about 400 fold in urinary DA; DOPAC was increased about 300 fold, 3-MT only about 70 fold, but HVA about 300 fold."( Urinary excretion of monoamines and their metabolites in patients with Parkinson's disease. Response to long-term treatment with levodopa alone or in combination with a dopa decarboxylase inhibitor and clinical correlations.
Rinne, UK; Siirtola, T; Sonninen, V, 1975
)
1.18
"Levodopa given alone increase the expression of c-fos mRNA."( Muscarinic cholinergic receptor-mediated modulation on striatal c-fos mRNA expression induced by levodopa in rat brain.
Asanuma, M; Chou, H; Hirata, H; Mori, A; Ogawa, N, 1992
)
1.22
"Levodopa did not produce any positive inotropic effect at concentrations up to 3 X 10(-3) M."( The inotropic effects of dopamine and its precursor levodopa on isolated human ventricular myocardium.
Brown, L; Erdmann, E; Lorenz, B, 1985
)
1.24

Treatment

Levodopa treatment is used to reduce rigidity and bradykinesia in Parkinson's disease. Levodopa/DDI long-term treatment contributes to altered levels of substrates of the O-methylation cycle in PP.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
"Levodopa treatment remains the gold standard for Parkinson's disease, but shortcomings related to the pharmacological profile, notably, oral administration and the consequent occurrence of motor complications, have led to the development of several add-on levodopa treatments or to research to improve the method of delivery. "( COMT Inhibitors in the Management of Parkinson's Disease.
Fabbri, M; Ferreira, JJ; Rascol, O, 2022
)
2.16
"Levodopa treatment was associated with greater slowing of progression in the tremor domain than the nontremor domain regardless of inosine exposure."( Dissecting the Domains of Parkinson's Disease: Insights from Longitudinal Item Response Theory Modeling.
Chan, J; Goetz, CG; Luo, S; Macklin, EA; Oakes, D; Schwarzschild, MA; Simuni, T; Stebbins, GT; Zou, H, 2022
)
1.44
"Levodopa treatment of Parkinson's disease tends to further elevate circulating homocysteine levels due to the metabolism of levodopa via catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT)."( Levodopa, homocysteine and Parkinson's disease: What's the problem?
Ahlskog, JE, 2023
)
3.07
"Levodopa treatment remains the most common treatment, especially for older patients."( Treatment Patterns in Patients with Incident Parkinson's Disease in the United States.
Boess, F; Constantinovici, N; Ding, Y; Freitas, R; Houghton, R; Ong, R; Verselis, L, 2019
)
1.24
"Levodopa treatment could induce protective cardiac effects through the increased Hsp27 activity. "( Cardiac Noradrenaline Turnover and Heat Shock Protein 27 Phosphorylation in Dyskinetic Monkeys.
Almela, P; Bautista-Hernández, V; Cuenca-Bermejo, L; de Pablos, V; Estrada, C; Fernández-Villalba, E; Herrero, MT; Laorden, ML; Yuste, JE, 2020
)
2
"Levodopa (L-DOPA) treatment in Parkinson's disease is limited by the emergence of L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia. "( The Multimodal Serotonergic Agent Vilazodone Inhibits L-DOPA-Induced Gene Regulation in Striatal Projection Neurons and Associated Dyskinesia in an Animal Model of Parkinson's Disease.
Altwal, F; Moon, C; Steiner, H; West, AR, 2020
)
2
"Levodopa-treated PD patients had higher plasma Hcy than levodopa-naive PD patients. "( Effects of vitamin B12, folate, and entacapone on homocysteine levels in levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease patients: A randomized controlled study.
Anamnart, C; Kitjarak, R, 2021
)
2.3
"Levodopa is the main treatment for symptoms of Parkinson's disease. "( Randomized Delayed-Start Trial of Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease.
Bloem, BR; Boel, JA; de Bie, RMA; de Haan, RJ; Deuschl, G; Dijkgraaf, MGW; Lang, AE; Munts, AG; Post, B; Suwijn, SR; Tissingh, G; van Hilten, JJ; van Laar, T; Verschuur, CVM, 2019
)
2.24
"Levodopa treatment does improve Parkinson's disease (PD) dysgraphia, but previous research is not in agreement about which aspects are most responsive. "( Effect of levodopa on handwriting tasks of different complexity in Parkinson's disease: a kinematic study.
Arjunan, SP; Kempster, P; Kumar, D; Nagao, KJ; Raghav, S; Viswanthan, R; Wong, K; Zham, P, 2019
)
2.36
"Levodopa treatment trial was initiated without a response."( Bupropion Causes Misdiagnosis in Brain Dopamine Transporter Imaging for Parkinsonism.
Honkanen, EA; Joutsa, J; Kaasinen, V; Kemppainen, N; Noponen, T; Seppänen, M,
)
0.85
"Levodopa and placebo treated animals exhibited a similar number of surviving dopaminergic cells in the SN."( Levodopa induces long-lasting modification in the functional activity of the nigrostriatal pathway.
Arbizu, J; Collantes, M; DiCaudo, C; Luquin, MR; Marcilla, I; Ordóñez, C; Peñuelas, I; Riverol, M, 2014
)
2.57
"Levodopa treatment improved motor UPDRS only in the group with abnormal SPECT."( Imaging of the dopamine transporter predicts pattern of disease progression and response to levodopa in patients with schizophrenia and parkinsonism: a 2-year follow-up multicenter study.
Barbui, C; Bovi, T; Cannas, A; Ceravolo, R; Cipriani, A; Dallocchio, C; Di Stefano, A; Frosini, D; Luca, A; Marrosu, F; Matinella, A; Minafra, B; Morgante, F; Morgante, L; Nicoletti, A; Pacchetti, C; Rossi, S; Sciarretta, M; Solla, P; Tinazzi, M; Ulivelli, M; Zappia, M, 2014
)
1.34
"Levodopa treatment is the major pharmacotherapy for Parkinson's disease. "( Molecular adaptations of striatal spiny projection neurons during levodopa-induced dyskinesia.
Cenci, MA; Fenster, RJ; Francardo, V; Greengard, P; Heilbut, A; Heiman, M; Kolaczyk, ED; Kulicke, R; Mesirov, JP; Surmeier, DJ, 2014
)
2.08
"Levodopa treatment reduced low-frequency activity and increased high-frequency activity in all three areas, but did not affect coherence."( Relationship between oscillatory activity in the cortico-basal ganglia network and parkinsonism in MPTP-treated monkeys.
Bliwise, D; Devergnas, A; Pittard, D; Wichmann, T, 2014
)
1.12
"Levodopa is first line treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). "( Is there a role for ADORA2A polymorphisms in levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease patients?
Altmann, V; Callegari-Jacques, SM; Hutz, MH; Rieck, M; Rieder, CR; Schneider Medeiros, M; Schumacher-Schuh, AF, 2015
)
2.12
"Levodopa treatment increased the specific binding of NMDA receptors in the basal ganglia."( Changes in glutamate receptors in dyskinetic parkinsonian monkeys after unilateral subthalamotomy.
Di Paolo, T; Grégoire, L; Jourdain, VA; Morin, N; Morissette, M, 2015
)
1.14
"Levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease (PD) causes motor fluctuations and dyskinesias, but few data describe their development or severity in unselected incident cohorts."( Motor complications in an incident Parkinson's disease cohort.
Counsell, CE; Macleod, AD; Scott, NW, 2016
)
1.88
"Levodopa treatment has been shown to improve gait spatio-temporal characteristics in both forward and backward walking. "( Gait variability in Parkinson's disease: levodopa and walking direction.
Bryant, MS; Collins, RL; Hou, JG; Protas, EJ; Rintala, DH, 2016
)
2.14
"No levodopa-treated participant had any adverse event from the levodopa."( Levodopa as a possible treatment of visual loss in nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy.
Johnson, LN; Lyttle, DP; Madsen, RW; Margolin, EA, 2016
)
2.39
"Levodopa is the main treatment method for reducing the symptoms of Parkinson's disease. "( Autonomic nervous system response to L-dopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Karjalainen, PA; Pekkonen, E; Rissanen, SM; Ruonala, V; Tarvainen, MP, 2015
)
1.86
"Levodopa treatment was effective in 13 out of 24 treated patients (54.16%) and in 3 patients unilateral thalamotomy provided excellent results."( Holmes tremor: Clinical description, lesion localization, and treatment in a series of 29 cases.
Calandra, C; Calvo, DS; Cersosimo, MG; Fernandez Pardal, MM; Folgar, SS; Giannaula, RJ; Giugni, JC; Micheli, FE; Paviolo, JP; Pellene, LA; Raina, GB; Tkachuk, VA; Tschopp, AL; Uribe Roca, MC; Velez, M; Zuñiga Ramirez, C, 2016
)
1.16
"Levodopa treatment should be considered because it might be beneficial in some patients."( Persistent pain as a non-motor symptom in corticobasal syndrome.
Iwata, A; Ohtomo, R; Tsuji, S, 2016
)
1.16
"Levodopa is first-line treatment of Parkinson's disease motor symptoms but, dose response is highly variable. "( Influence of genetic, biological and pharmacological factors on levodopa dose in Parkinson's disease.
Altmann, V; Callegari-Jacques, SM; Hutz, MH; Rieck, M; Rieder, CR; Schumacher-Schuh, AF, 2016
)
2.12
"Levodopa (L-dopa) treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD) is associated with elevated homocysteine (Hcy). "( Homocysteine is not associated with global motor or cognitive measures in nondemented older Parkinson's disease patients.
Bouchard, TP; Camicioli, RM; Somerville, MJ, 2009
)
1.8
"Levodopa treatment and subthalamic nucleus (STN) stimulation improve step length and walking speed, with less effect on postural instability."( Effects of nigral stimulation on locomotion and postural stability in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Agid, Y; Bardinet, E; Chastan, N; Do, MC; Welter, ML; Westby, GW; Yelnik, J, 2009
)
1.07
"Levodopa treatment did not affect sleep or lead to increased EDS in DLB patients."( Levodopa use and sleep in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies.
Burn, DJ; McKeith, IG; Minett, T; Molloy, S; O'Brien, JT, 2009
)
2.52
"Levodopa treatment improved motor symptoms in three out of ten patients of group I and in eight out of nine patients of group II."( Clinical and [123I]FP-CIT SPET imaging follow-up in patients with drug-induced parkinsonism.
Antonini, A; Bovi, T; Fiaschi, A; Moretto, G; Ottaviani, S; Pasquin, I; Steinmayr, M; Tinazzi, M, 2009
)
1.07
"Levodopa treatment did not change receptors of nigral AMPA, pallidal GABA, and subthalamic GABA, which remained the same as that in denervation group."( Quantitative autoradiographic study on receptor regulation in the basal ganglia in rat model of levodopa-induced motor complications.
Cao, X; Papa, SM; Qin, K; Xu, Y; Zhang, Z, 2009
)
1.29
"Levodopa treatment in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) is known to cause elevation in serum homocysteine levels. "( The effect of levodopa treatment on cerebral hemodynamics in patients with Parkinson's disease: serial transcranial Doppler studies.
Lee, KY; Lee, PH; Yong, SW, 2010
)
2.16
"Levodopa treatment could have either beneficial or detrimental effects on brain functions modulated by DA according to disease progression."( Dopaminergic modulation of amygdala activity during emotion recognition in patients with Parkinson disease.
Azulay, JP; Blin, O; Delaveau, P; Fakra, E; Micallef-Roll, J; Salgado-Pineda, P; Witjas, T, 2009
)
1.07
"The levodopa-treated MPTP-lesioned marmoset was used as a model of neuropsychiatric symptoms in PD patients."( Neuropsychiatric behaviors in the MPTP marmoset model of Parkinson's disease.
Brotchie, JM; Fox, SH; Gomez-Ramirez, J; Huot, P; Johnston, T; Reyes, G; Visanji, N, 2010
)
0.84
"Levodopa-treated MPTP monkeys developed dyskinesias while those that received levodopa+CI-1041 or levodopa+cabergoline did not."( Changes of AMPA receptors in MPTP monkeys with levodopa-induced dyskinesias.
Di Paolo, T; Gasparini, F; Gomez-Mancilla, B; Grégoire, L; Hoyer, D; Morissette, M; Ouattara, B, 2010
)
1.34
"Levodopa-treated PD participants with LID (n = 38) received LEV 500 mg/day, were assessed, titrated to 1,000 mg/day and reassessed, before and after crossover."( Levetiracetam for the management of levodopa-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease.
Konitsiotis, S; Peterson, D; Stathis, P; Tagaris, G, 2011
)
1.37
"Levodopa treatment induced dyskinesias and did not modify the striatal expression of either VGlut1 or VGlut2."( The metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonist 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl) pyridine decreases striatal VGlut2 expression in association with an attenuation of L-DOPA-induced dyskinesias.
Aguilar, E; Bonastre, M; Jiménez, A; Marin, C, 2011
)
1.09
"Levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease (PD) increases in serum homocysteine levels due to its metabolism via catechol O-methyltransferase. "( Comparison of endothelial progenitor cells in Parkinson's disease patients treated with levodopa and levodopa/COMT inhibitor.
Choi, Y; Hong, JY; Kim, HO; Kim, HS; Lee, JE; Lee, PH; Nam, HS; Sohn, YH, 2011
)
2.03
"Levodopa treatment was initiated at age 10 months and resulted in a distinct motor improvement."( Beneficial prenatal levodopa therapy in autosomal recessive guanosine triphosphate cyclohydrolase 1 deficiency.
Boor, R; Brüggemann, N; Gillessen-Kaesbach, G; Hellenbroich, Y; Klein, C; Opladen, T; Schneider, SA; Sperner, J; Spiegler, J; Stephani, U, 2012
)
1.42
"In levodopa-treated PD patients, adherence to ODDA therapy is suboptimal and strongly associated with the levodopa daily dose and the total number of drugs used to treat patients' medical conditions."( Levodopa dosage determines adherence to long-acting dopamine agonists in Parkinson's disease.
de la Fuente-Fernández, R; Prieto-Formoso, M; Santos-García, D, 2012
)
2.44
"Levodopa treatment of Parkinson's disease is very effective, but many types of adverse events can complicate the disease course, especially dyskinesias. "( Recurrent bilateral metatarsal "stress-and-insufficiency" fractures in a levodopa-treated young woman with Parkinson's disease.
Daragon, A; Derrey, S; Lefaucheur, R; Maltête, D; Nicolau, J; Verdet, M, 2013
)
2.06
"Levodopa treatment increased release of homocysteine on astrocytes culture media as well as in plasma and brain of PD animals."( Elevated homocysteine by levodopa is detrimental to neurogenesis in parkinsonian model.
Ahn, YH; Lee, PH; Paik, MJ; Park, HJ; Shin, JY; Sohn, YH, 2012
)
1.4
"Levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease patients who had been treated with deprenyl for up to 7 years, compared with patients who were changed to a placebo after about 5 years, experienced slower motor decline and were more likely to develop dyskinesias but less likely to develop freezing of gait."( Impact of sustained deprenyl (selegiline) in levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease: a randomized placebo-controlled extension of the deprenyl and tocopherol antioxidative therapy of parkinsonism trial.
Fahn, S; Kieburtz, K; Lang, A; Langston, JW; LeWitt, P; Oakes, D; Olanow, CW; Penney, JB; Rudolph, A; Shoulson, I; Tanner, C, 2002
)
1.3
"Levodopa treatment is useful and diagnosis may be done on fluctuant dystonia in the childhood."( [Hereditary progressive levodopa sensible: Segawa's syndrome].
Corral, SM; Grippo, J; Grippo, T; La Fuente, A,
)
1.88
"Levodopa treatment appears to have subtle detrimental effects on cognitive function in nondemented PD patients. "( Effects of levodopa on motor sequence learning in Parkinson's disease.
Carbon, M; Dhawan, V; Edwards, C; Eidelberg, D; Feigin, A; Fukuda, M; Ghez, C; Ghilardi, MF; Margouleff, C, 2003
)
2.15
"Levodopa-treated patients showed significantly higher IL-15 and RANTES circulating levels with respect to healthy controls and higher, although not significantly, levels with respect to untreated patients."( Effect of levodopa on interleukin-15 and RANTES circulating levels in patients affected by Parkinson's disease.
Basile, G; Di Pasquale, G; Epifanio, A; Ferlazzo, B; Gangemi, S; Merendino, RA; Morgante, L; Nicita-Mauro, V, 2003
)
1.44
"Levodopa treatment did not significantly change the plasma lipoprotein oxidation but LD monotherapy tended to result in an increase of autooxidation and in a decrease of plasma antioxidants with significance for ubiquinol-10."( Plasma and CSF markers of oxidative stress are increased in Parkinson's disease and influenced by antiparkinsonian medication.
Arlt, S; Beisiegel, U; Buhmann, C; Kontush, A; Möller-Bertram, T; Oechsner, M; Sperber, S; Stuerenburg, HJ, 2004
)
1.04
"Levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease is often complicated by the occurrence of motor fluctuations, which can be predictable ('wearing-off') or unpredictable ('on-off'). "( Presynaptic mechanisms of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease: a probabilistic model.
Calne, DB; de la Fuente-Fernández, R; Mak, E; Schulzer, M; Stoessl, AJ, 2004
)
1.77
"Levodopa, the major treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease, has been shown to induce a variety of compensatory effects, including facilitation of sprouting by dopaminergic neurons, in experimental animals with lesions leading to denervation of the striatum. "( Differential gene expression induced by chronic levodopa treatment in the striatum of rats with lesions of the nigrostriatal system.
Delfino, MA; Ferrario, JE; Gershanik, O; Mourlevat, S; Murer, MG; Raisman-Vozari, R; Ruberg, M; Stefano, A; Taravini, IR, 2004
)
2.02
"Levodopa, the treatment of choice, offers initial improvement, but causes long term important complications."( [Influence of levodopa on cognition of idiopathic Parkinson's disease].
Alonso-Prieto, E; Michel-Esteban, E; Palmero-Soler, E; Trujillo-Matienzo, C, 2004
)
1.41
"Levodopa treatment has been shown to increase plasma homocysteine levels in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and this may lead to an increased risk for coronary arterial diseases. "( The COMT inhibitor, entacapone, reduces levodopa-induced elevations in plasma homocysteine in healthy adult rats.
Helkamaa, T; Larjonmaa, H; Nissinen, E; Nissinen, H; Rauhala, P; Reenilä, I; Väänänen, A, 2005
)
2.04
"Levodopa treatment of Parkinson disease results in hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy) as a consequence of levodopa methylation by catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT). "( The controversy concerning plasma homocysteine in Parkinson disease patients treated with levodopa alone or with entacapone: effects of vitamin status.
Hauser, RA; Merlin, LR; Sullivan, KL; Wecker, L; Zesiewicz, TA,
)
1.8
"Levodopa, the main treatment for this condition, was first used for PD more than 40 years ago and today it still is the most powerful treatment for this disease."( [Levodopa for Parkinson's disease: What have we learned?].
Chaná C, P; Juri C, C, 2006
)
1.97
"Levodopa-treated patients (N = 37) were examined both in a practically defined 'OFF' as well as in the 'ON' state."( Slowing of oscillatory brain activity is a stable characteristic of Parkinson's disease without dementia.
Berendse, HW; Bosboom, JL; Deijen, JB; Stam, CJ; Stoffers, D; Wolters, EC, 2007
)
1.06
"Levodopa-treated PD patients showed significantly lower serum levels of folate and vitamin B12 than neurological controls, while depressed patients had significantly lower serum folate levels as compared to non-depressed."( Folate and vitamin B12 levels in levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease patients: their relationship to clinical manifestations, mood and cognition.
Angelopoulos, E; Boufidou, F; Evangelopoulos, ME; Kararizou, E; Nikolaou, C; Rentzos, M; Triantafyllou, NI; Vassilopoulos, D, 2008
)
1.35
"Levodopa treatment with vouchers produced higher proportions of cocaine-negative urines and longer periods of consecutive abstinence compared to other treatment combinations."( Levodopa pharmacotherapy for cocaine dependence: choosing the optimal behavioral therapy platform.
Grabowski, J; Green, C; Moeller, FG; Mooney, ME; Schmitz, JM; Stotts, AL, 2008
)
2.51
"Levodopa treatment was initially effective in 95% of the patients but the response decreased with time."( Long-term Parkinson's disease--time for optimism.
Djaldetti, R; Melamed, E; Sthneer, S; Yust-Katz, S,
)
0.85
"Levodopa treatment did not have any significant effect on the enkephalin bindings."( Brain enkephalin receptors in Parkinson's disease.
Koskinen, V; Laakso, K; Lönnberg, P; Rinne, JK; Rinne, JO; Rinne, UK; Tenovuo, O, 1983
)
0.99
"Levodopa treatment improves significantly not only the parkinsonian disability but also the mortality rate. "( Problems associated with long-term levodopa treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Rinne, UK, 1983
)
1.99
"Levodopa treatment alleviated the parkinsonian symptoms to a considerable degree and substantially improved the quality of life of the parkinsonian patients."( Long-term responses of Parkinson's disease to levodopa therapy.
Marttila, R; Rinne, UK; Siirtola, T; Sonninen, V, 1980
)
1.24
"Oral levodopa treatment remains the most efficacious treatment of Parkinson's disease, but the majority of patients treated with a levodopa monotherapy for more than 5 years will develop fluctuations and/or dyskinesias. "( Current strategies in the drug treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease--new modes of dopamine substitution.
Poewe, W; Schelosky, L, 1993
)
0.8
"Levodopa treatment might change the dopaminergic and serotoninergic neuronal systems, but not the noradrenergic or adrenergic neuronal systems, in CNS of PD patients."( Monoamines and their metabolites in plasma and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid of Chinese patients with Parkinson's disease.
Cheng, FC; Chia, LG; Kuo, JS, 1993
)
1.01
"Levodopa treatment for PD may therefore constitute an additional challenge for the defective apoptosis-inhibiting systems in the nigrostriatal neurons."( Levodopa induces apoptosis in cultured neuronal cells--a possible accelerator of nigrostriatal degeneration in Parkinson's disease?
Barzilai, A; Melamed, E; Offen, D; Shirvan, A; Zilkha-Falb, R; Ziv, I, 1997
)
2.46
"Levodopa treatment had no effect on the measured autonomic responses."( Selegiline diminishes cardiovascular autonomic responses in Parkinson's disease.
Myllylä, VV; Sotaniemi, K; Suominen, K; Tolonen, U; Turkka, J, 1997
)
1.02
"Levodopa treatment produced a sustained LDR, and the SDR, measured on the 15th day of treatment, had lower magnitude and shorter duration than the response recorded after washout."( Long-duration response to levodopa influences the pharmacodynamics of short-duration response in Parkinson's disease.
Aguglia, U; Colao, R; Gambardella, A; Montesanti, R; Oliveri, RL; Quattrone, A; Rizzo, M; Zappia, M, 1997
)
1.32
"Levodopa/benserazide treatment significantly improved motor aspects of object retrieval performance but did not significantly improve cognition."( Effects of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist SIB-1508Y on object retrieval performance in MPTP-treated monkeys: comparison with levodopa treatment.
Lloyd, GK; Menzaghi, F; Schneider, JS; Van Velson, M, 1998
)
1.22
"In levodopa-treated animals, 5-HTP concentrations were moderately correlated (r = 0.679) between striatum and CSF, while weak correlations were present between striatal and CSF concentrations of both serotonin and 5-HIAA."( Influence of repeated levodopa administration on rabbit striatal serotonin metabolism, and comparison between striatal and CSF alterations.
Camp, DM; DeMaggio, AJ; Havaich, MK; Juneau, PL; LeWitt, PA; Loeffler, DA; Matson, WR; Milbury, PE, 1998
)
1.13
"Levodopa treatment is used to reduce rigidity and bradykinesia in Parkinson's disease (PD). "( Handwriting and speech changes across the levodopa cycle in Parkinson's disease.
Brookshire, RH; Poluha, PC; Teulings, HL, 1998
)
2.01
"Levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease has been suggested to contribute to disease progression through free radical generation. "( Time-dependent effects of levodopa on regional brain dopamine metabolism and lipid peroxidation.
Arnold, LA; Camp, DM; Hyland, K; Juneau, PL; LeWitt, PA; Loeffler, DA, 1998
)
2.04
"Levodopa/benserazide treatment was well tolerated and safe."( Rapid onset of action of levodopa in restless legs syndrome: a double-blind, randomized, multicenter, crossover trial.
Benes, H; Kazenwadel, J; Kohnen, R; Kummer, J; Kurella, B; Selzer, R, 1999
)
1.33
"Levodopa treatment did not unmask significant chorea."( Late onset levodopa responsive Huntington's disease with minimal chorea masquerading as Parkinson plus syndrome.
Andrews, TC; Brooks, DJ; Chaudhuri, KR; Clough, C; Hu, MT; Reuter, I, 2000
)
1.42
"Levodopa treatment significantly increased the expression of striatal MT-III mRNA in the non-lesioned side, but showed no significant effect in the 6-OHDA-lesioned side."( Expression of metallothionein-III mRNA and its regulation by levodopa in the basal ganglia of hemi-parkinsonian rats.
Asanuma, M; Higashi, Y; Miyazaki, I; Nakanishi, T; Ogawa, N; Sogawa, CA; Tanaka, KI, 2000
)
1.27
"Levodopa/DDI long-term treatment contributes to altered levels of substrates of the O-methylation cycle in PP."( Decrease of methionine and S-adenosylmethionine and increase of homocysteine in treated patients with Parkinson's disease.
Fowler, B; Hauptmann, B; Kuhn, W; Müller, T; Woitalla, D, 2001
)
1.03
"Levodopa treatment, alone or in combination with two different dopa-decarboxylase inhibitors, benserazide and carbidopa, does not modify the renin response to posture or to frusemide."( Effects of levodopa alone and in combination with dopa-decarboxylase inhibitors on plasma renin activity in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Dessi'-Fulgheri, P; Glorioso, N; Monaco, F; Rappelli, A; Tedde, R, 1978
)
1.37
"The levodopa treatment was repeated each day during one week."( Recovery from experimental paraplegia after levodopa administration.
Popovic, P; Popovic, V; Schaffer, R, 1976
)
1
"Levodopa treatment corrected these values to the level of controls, whereas the amount of phosphatidylserine was decreased."( Interaction between dopamine and phospholipids. Studies of the substantia nigra in Parkinson disease patients.
Pelliniemi, TT; Riekkinen, P; Rinne, UK; Sonninen, V, 1975
)
0.98
"Levodopa-treated patients were able to produce more correct responses, but were still unable to maintain the correct responses to produce more correct concepts than non-levodopa-treated patients."( Parkinsonism: effects of levodopa treatment on concept formation.
Bowen, FP; Burns, MM; Kamienny, RS; Yahr, M, 1975
)
1.28
"The levodopa treatment was repeated every day for 6 days."( Levodopa-enhanced recovery from paralysis induced by air embolism.
Popovic, P; Popovic, V; Schaffer, R, 1976
)
2.18
"Levodopa is the treatment of choice in Parkinson's disease, but a high percentage of patients develop complications in the response, including fluctuations, after some years of treatment. "( [Effect of a controlled low-protein diet on the pharmacological response to levodopa and on the plasma levels of L-dopa and amino acids in patients with Parkinson's disease].
Casarejo, MJ; de Yébenes, JG; de Yébenes, MJ; Jiménez, A; Martín del Río, R; Mena, MA; Morales, B; Sanchís, G; Tabernero, C,
)
1.8
"The levodopa-treated patients stopped taking levodopa before the test."( Slowing of high-speed memory scanning in Parkinson's disease is related to the severity of parkinsonian motor symptoms.
Berger, W; Bitschnau, W; Karamat, E; Kemmler, GW; Poewe, W; Ransmayr, G; Schmidhuber-Eiler, B, 1990
)
0.76
"Levodopa/carbidopa treatment decreased significantly prolactin and thyrotropin levels in serum but none of the additional treatments changed this action."( Effect of acute levodopa on brain catecholamines after selective MAO and COMT inhibition in male rats.
Kaakkola, S; Männistö, PT; Toivonen, M; Törnwall, M; Tuomainen, P, 1990
)
1.35
"With levodopa treatment: The duration of illness at each stage of severity was 3 to 5 years longer; at every duration of illness, death and disability were reduced 1.5- to 3-fold, except in patients whose treatment had been delayed; abnormal involuntary movements that interfered with function occurred in 24% of patients; severe fluctuations that required rescheduling of activities occurred in 29% of patients; severe AIMs and fluctuations were rare during the first 3 years of treatment, but remained constant thereafter, without progressive increase; prevalence of severe fluctuations was related only to age of onset of disease: If under 50, severe fluctuations developed in 66%, if age 50 to 59 at onset, they developed in 30%, if over age 60, in only 6%; average age at death was 6 years older; and observed/expected mortality was 1.2, not significantly different from the unaffected population."( Parkinson's disease: progression and mortality.
Hoehn, MM, 1987
)
0.73
"24 levodopa pretreated patients with advanced parkinsonism were split into two equal groups receiving mesulergine or bromocriptine respectively as an adjuvant therapy. "( Mesulergine and bromocriptine in long-term treatment of advanced parkinsonism.
Baas, H; Fischer, PA; Japp, G; Schneider, E, 1985
)
0.89
"Treatment with levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) can effectively relieve motor and non-motor symptoms in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). "( Safety and effectiveness of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel for advanced Parkinson's disease: A large single-center study.
Baille, G; Blaise, AS; Carrière, N; Defebvre, L; Devos, D; Dujardin, K; Grolez, G; Kreisler, A; Kyheng, M; Moreau, C; Mutez, E; Seguy, D, 2020
)
1.21
"Treatment with levodopa increases pain thresholds in patients with PD. "( Current Status of Pain Management in Parkinson's Disease.
Bruno, V; Farcy, N; Karnik, V; Zamorano, C, 2020
)
0.91
"Treatment with levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) was introduced at age 57."( [Optimal dose of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in the treatment of diphasic dyskinesia and freezing of gait].
Fujioka, S; Komorita, S; Mishima, T; Nishida, A; Okajima, M; Tsuboi, Y, 2021
)
1.3
"The treatment of levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease (PD) is an unmet need with no approved drug therapy."( Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of ADS-5102 (amantadine) extended-release capsules for levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease (EASE LID 3).
Azulay, JP; Eggert, K; Ehret, R; Felt, L; Hauser, RA; Isaacson, S; Oertel, W; Pahwa, R; Stempien, MJ; Tanner, CM; Trenkwalder, C, 2017
)
1.01
"Treatment with levodopa limited this evolution leading to a relative increase of shorter, lower amplitude bursts."( Beta burst dynamics in Parkinson's disease OFF and ON dopaminergic medication.
Brown, P; Herz, DM; Kühn, AA; Pogosyan, A; Tan, H; Tinkhauser, G, 2017
)
0.79
"Treatment of levodopa (L-dopa)-induced motor fluctuations is still an unmet medical need."( Adjunctive Therapies in Parkinson's Disease: How to Choose the Best Treatment Strategy Approach.
Fabbri, M; Ferreira, JJ; Rosa, MM, 2018
)
0.83
"Treatment with levodopa enhances functional recovery after experimental stroke but its mechanisms of action are elusive. "( Dopamine receptor activation increases glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor in experimental stroke.
Kuric, E; Ruscher, K; Wieloch, T, 2013
)
0.74
"Treatment with levodopa/benserazide completely recovered T-helper cell depletion in animals subjected to tMCAO whereas T-cell associated cytokines remained unaffected after stroke, however, cytokines were downregulated in levodopa treated sham operated animals."( Reversal of stroke induced lymphocytopenia by levodopa/benserazide treatment.
Kuric, E; Ruscher, K, 2014
)
1
"Treatment with levodopa relieved his symptoms and resulted in a height increase."( Growth hormone deficiency in a dopa-responsive dystonia patient with a novel mutation of guanosine triphosphate cyclohydrolase 1 gene.
Chen, WJ; Lin, MT; Lin, X; Lin, Y; Wang, DN; Wang, N, 2015
)
0.76
"Treatment with levodopa typically improves these three symptoms."( Dopa-Responsive Dystonia and gait analysis: A case study of levodopa therapeutic effects.
Arsenault, L; Broussolle, E; Delporte, L; Luauté, J; Mizuno, K; Rebour, R; Revol, P; Rossetti, Y, 2015
)
1
"Treatment with levodopa and STN-DBS reinstated a post-stimulus beta-modulation profile similar to controls, while STN-DBS reduced beta-band power in the resting-state."( Predictive timing functions of cortical beta oscillations are impaired in Parkinson's disease and influenced by L-DOPA and deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.
Boelmans, K; Buhmann, C; Engel, AK; Gerloff, C; Gulberti, A; Hamel, W; Koeppen, JA; Moll, CK; Schneider, TR; Westphal, M; Zittel, S, 2015
)
0.76
"IP treatment with levodopa also produced contralateral rotation in PD induced rats, and showed anti-Parkinson-like action."( CART modulates the effects of levodopa in rat model of Parkinson's disease.
Kokare, DM; Shelkar, GP; Subhedar, NK; Upadhya, MA, 2016
)
1.05
"Treatment with levodopa led to symptom control."( Holmes' tremor as a delayed complication of thalamic stroke.
Cristovam, Rdo A; Fussiger, H; Marrone, AC; Marrone, LC; Martins, WA; Taietti, MZ; Vedana, VM, 2016
)
0.77
"Treatment with levodopa and thalamic stereotactic lesional surgery seems to be effective."( Holmes tremor: Clinical description, lesion localization, and treatment in a series of 29 cases.
Calandra, C; Calvo, DS; Cersosimo, MG; Fernandez Pardal, MM; Folgar, SS; Giannaula, RJ; Giugni, JC; Micheli, FE; Paviolo, JP; Pellene, LA; Raina, GB; Tkachuk, VA; Tschopp, AL; Uribe Roca, MC; Velez, M; Zuñiga Ramirez, C, 2016
)
0.77
"Treatment with levodopa was initiated in order to treat her neurological problem and progressive remission of the skin lesions was noted."( Resolution of inverse psoriasis after treatment with levodopa for Parkinson's disease.
Arjona Aguilera, C; Espinosa Rosso, R; Jiménez Gallo, D; Linares Barrios, M; Rojo Suárez, N, 2017
)
1.04
"A pretreatment with Levodopa+Benserazide for two or seven days induced an additional decrease in Walking after rEMS."( Levodopa enhances immobility induced by spinal cord electromagnetic stimulation in rats.
de Andrade, LM; Gondim, FA; Pitcher, MR; Rola, FH; Sales, PM, 2016
)
2.19
"Treatment with levodopa/DDCI and entacapone extends the half-life of levodopa, avoiding deep troughs in levodopa plasma levels and providing more continuous delivery of levodopa to the brain."( Levodopa/DDCI and entacapone is the preferred treatment for Parkinson's disease patients with motor fluctuations in routine practice: a retrospective, observational analysis of a large French cohort.
Bourdeix, I; Damier, P; Rerat, K; Viallet, F; Ziegler, M, 2008
)
2.13
"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)."( Quality of life in early Parkinson's disease treated with levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone.
Fung, VS; Herawati, L; Wan, Y, 2009
)
0.94
"Treatment with levodopa alone did not change rCBF, whereas it increased basal ganglion DAT activity in the most affected hemisphere."( Complementary acupuncture in Parkinson's disease: a spect study.
Huang, Y; Jiang, X; Wik, G; Zhuo, Y, 2010
)
0.7
"Treatment with Levodopa/Carbidopa resulted in striking clinical improvement, with age-appropriate development at follow-up at 6 years."( Clinical and biochemical characterization of patients with early infantile onset of autosomal recessive GTP cyclohydrolase I deficiency without hyperphenylalaninemia.
Hinz, AB; Hoffmann, G; Hörster, F; Klein, C; Neidhardt, K; Opladen, T; Wolf, N, 2011
)
0.71
"Treatment with levodopa/benserazide significantly improved the recovery of sensorimotor function after transient occlusion of the middle cerebral artery without affecting the infarct volume. "( Levodopa treatment improves functional recovery after experimental stroke.
Kuric, E; Ruscher, K; Wieloch, T, 2012
)
2.17
"Treatment with levodopa or dopamine agonists is the first-line therapy for RLS; however, there are limited data on treatment in pregnancy."( Pregnancy outcome following use of levodopa, pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine for restless legs syndrome during pregnancy: a case series.
Dostal, M; Schaefer, C; Sobesky, J; Weber-Schoendorfer, C, 2013
)
1.01
"Treatment with levodopa increases postural sway abnormalities, whereas treatment with deep brain stimulation improves postural sway."( Effects of deep brain stimulation and levodopa on postural sway in Parkinson's disease.
Chiari, L; Horak, FB; Rocchi, L, 2002
)
0.93
"Treatment with levodopa ameliorates but usually does not normalize symptoms."( Tyrosine hydroxylase deficiency causes progressive encephalopathy and dopa-nonresponsive dystonia.
Assmann, B; Bräutigam, C; de Klerk, JB; Dionisi-Vici, C; Häussler, M; Hoffmann, GF; Naumann, M; Steenbergen-Spanjers, GC; Strassburg, HM; Wevers, RA, 2003
)
0.66
"Treatment with levodopa led to marked improvement in his neurological status and quality of life."( Hereditary spastic paraplegia associated with dopa-responsive parkinsonism.
Cersósimo, MG; Micheli, F; Zúñiga Ramírez, C, 2006
)
0.67
"Treatment with levodopa improved her symptoms considerably but incompletely."( Adult-onset dystonia: atypical manifestation of Segawa disease.
Meinck, HM; Regula, JU; Thoden, U, 2007
)
0.68
"Treatment with levodopa did not have any significant effect on the binding of 3H-enkephalins."( Brain receptor changes in Parkinson's disease in relation to the disease process and treatment.
Laakso, K; Laihinen, A; Lönnberg, P; Rinne, JK; Rinne, JO; Rinne, UK, 1983
)
0.61
"In untreated or levodopa-treated patients, there was considerable improvement of akinesia, rigidity, and tremor; on-off symptoms also improved in the levodopa-treated patients."( Treatment of Parkinson's disease with 8-alpha-amino-ergoline, CU 32-085.
Fischer, PA; Hubener, K; Schneider, E, 1983
)
0.6
"Treatment with levodopa was of clear benefit."( Benign paroxysmal tonic upgaze of childhood with ataxia. A neuro-ophthalmological syndrome of familial origin?
Campistol, J; Garaizar, C; Prats, JM, 1993
)
0.63
"Treatment with levodopa and dopa decarboxylase inhibitor (arm 1) or levodopa and decarboxylase inhibitor in combination with selegiline (arm 2)."( Comparison of therapeutic effects and mortality data of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in patients with early, mild Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's Disease Research Group of the United Kingdom.
Lees, AJ, 1995
)
0.89
"Treatment with levodopa, a precursor of dopamine, initially ameliorates the clinical manifestations of PD."( Altered thalamic response to levodopa in Parkinson's patients with dopa-induced dyskinesias.
Black, KJ; Carl, JL; Hershey, T; McGee-Minnich, LA; Perlmutter, JS; Stambuk, MK, 1998
)
0.93
"Treatment with levodopa produced substantial functional motor improvement with a 17 point reduction in the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (UPDRS) motor subscale including reduction of tremor, bradykinesia, and postural instability."( Levodopa responsive parkinsonism in an adult with Huntington's disease.
Perlmutter, JS; Racette, BA, 1998
)
2.08
"The treatment of levodopa-induced dyskinesias must be considered in regard to the subtype and the severity of dyskinesias, and the patient."( Treating and preventing levodopa-induced dyskinesias: current and future strategies.
Durif, F, 1999
)
0.94
"Treatment with levodopa has resulted in a marked decrease in disease-associated mortality and morbidity."( Maximizing the benefit:risk ratio of levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Gottwald, MD, 1999
)
0.92
"Treatment with levodopa was ineffective."( Unsuccessful treatment with levodopa of a parkinsonian patient with calcification of the basal ganglia.
Berendes, K; Dörstelmann, D, 1978
)
0.89
"Treatment with levodopa did not induce significant alterations in the mean brain, mean hemispheric or regional flow values in these patients."( Regional cerebral blood flow in parkinsonism. Measurement before and after levodopa.
Bentin, S; Cooper, G; Lavy, S; Melamed, E, 1978
)
0.83
"Treatment with levodopa makes these motor units accessible to activation and frequency control."( Motor unit control in Parkinson's disease and the influence of levodopa.
Jarcho, LW; Petajan, JH, 1975
)
0.83
"Treatment with levodopa gives remarkable and durable results, but it must be continued indefinitely."( [Dopa-sensitive dystonia].
Aicardi, J; Goutières, F; Rondot, P; Ziegler, M, 1992
)
0.62
"Treatment with levodopa failed to modify tumoral progress."( Impaired levodopa response in Parkinson's disease during melanoma therapy.
Esteguy, M; Leiguarda, R; Merello, M; Perazzo, F, 1992
)
1.04
"Treatment with levodopa induced an increase in interleukin-1 synthesis, and in IgM and IgA levels in plasma, which suggest a possible selective action on cells of the immune system."( The immunological status in Parkinson's disease.
Członkowska, A; Fiszer, U; Korlak, J; Piotrowska, K, 1991
)
0.62
"Treatment with levodopa, 50 mg, and benserazide, 12.5 mg, three times a day was withdrawn from a 76-year-old woman with mild Parkinson's disease because she was experiencing intermittent confusion. "( Neuroleptic malignant syndrome complicating levodopa withdrawal.
Goldswain, PR; Harrison, WB; Reutens, DC, 1991
)
0.9
"Treatment with levodopa, carbidopa and 5-hydroxytryptophan resulted in prompt neurological improvement."( Successful long term therapy of biopterin deficiency.
Pulmones, MT; Sansaricq, C; Snyderman, SE, 1987
)
0.61
"Treatment with levodopa gave some relief of the parkinsonism symptoms in two patients but exacerbated or reactivated the dystonia."( Parkinsonism following dystonia in three patients.
Duvoisin, RC; Katchen, M, 1986
)
0.61
"Oral treatment with levodopacarbidopa (1000/100 mg) or subcutaneous administration of apomorphine (1 mg) abolished the visually-triggered myoclonus, without modifying reflex myoclonus to electrical or tactile stimulation."( Dopamine agonists suppress visual-cortical reflex myoclonus.
Artieda, J; Luquin, MR; Martínez Lage, JM; Obeso, JA; Tuñón, T, 1985
)
0.58

Toxicity

5 to 1 mg/day rasagiline in addition to levodopa is a safe and well-tolerated combination therapy. No clinical improvements were observed with carbidopa/levodopa, tetrabenazine, or clonazepam.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
" Additional adverse reactions including dyskinesias, "on-off" phenomena, and declining efficacy of levodopa were present in all patients."( Early-morning dystonia. A late side effect of long-term levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Melamed, E, 1979
)
0.72
" The adverse effect reappeared in a more severe and prolonged form when she was treated one year later with levodopa in combination with the peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor Ro-4-4602."( Prolonged symptoms of brain dysfunction--adverse effect of levodopa.
Anggård, E; Samuelsson, K, 1976
)
0.71
" LD50 values of three of these compounds were assessed after intraperitoneal administration with a special emphasis on interactions with drugs increasing catecholaminergic neurotransmission."( Acute toxicity of three new selective COMT inhibitors in mice with special emphasis on interactions with drugs increasing catecholaminergic neurotransmission.
Männistö, PT; Törnwall, M, 1991
)
0.28
"001) on 'Sinemet CR4' although median (range) total daily dose of levodopa was increased from 700 (375-2525) to 800 (400-2800) mg without any increase in adverse effects."( Controlled release levodopa/carbidopa (Sinemet CR4) in Parkinson's disease--an open evaluation of efficacy and safety.
Bulling, MT; Burns, RJ; Wing, LM, 1991
)
0.85
" Adverse effects were mild and transient and resolved with dosage manipulation or a divided dosage regimen."( CV 205-502: safety, tolerance to, and efficacy of increasing doses in patients with Parkinson's disease in a double-blind, placebo crossover study.
Gauger, LL; Olanow, CW; Werner, EG, 1989
)
0.28
" Twelve patients in each treatment group were pair-matched for age, PD duration, duration of levodopa therapy, dosage of Sinemet, PD disability, and side-effect prevalence at study entry."( Development and progression of motor fluctuations and side effects in Parkinson's disease: comparison of Sinemet CR versus carbidopa/levodopa.
Gilley, DW; Goetz, CG; Klawans, HL; Tanner, CM, 1989
)
0.7
"8 nmol/mg for pirenzepine and 71 nmol/mg for chloroquine, a compound which has been described as provoking toxic side-effects in melanin-containing tissues and adjacent structures."( Melanosome binding and oxidation-reduction properties of synthetic L-dopa-melanin as in vitro tests for drug toxicity.
Debing, I; Ijzerman, AP; Vauquelin, G, 1988
)
0.27
" L-DOPA was toxic for both DA and non-DA neurons."( Toxic effects of L-DOPA on mesencephalic cell cultures: protection with antioxidants.
Casarejos, MJ; De Yébenes, JG; Mena, MA; Paíno, CL; Pardo, B, 1995
)
0.29
" Furthermore, these findings suggest that patients on long-term L-DOPA therapy are potentially at risk from the toxic intermediates formed as a result of its autoxidation."( L-dopa cytotoxicity to PC12 cells in culture is via its autoxidation.
Basma, AN; Geller, HM; Morris, EJ; Nicklas, WJ, 1995
)
0.29
" Neither L-dopa nor MnCl2 alone was toxic at these concentrations, and cytotoxicity was completely abrogated by substitution of L-tyrosine for L-dopa."( Fibroblasts that express aromatic amino acid decarboxylase have increased sensitivity to the synergistic cytotoxicity of L-dopa and manganese.
Graham, DG; Linney, E; Montine, TJ; Underhill, TM, 1994
)
0.29
"25 x 10(-4) M or larger, is toxic for the human neuroblastoma cell NB69."( Ascorbic acid protects against levodopa-induced neurotoxicity on a catecholamine-rich human neuroblastoma cell line.
Fahn, S; García de Yébenes, J; Mena, MA; Pardo, B, 1993
)
0.57
" While dysphagia is commonly encountered in patients with Parkinson's disease, the observed succession of drug discontinuation and resolution of obstruction in this case suggests an as yet rarely described side effect of levodopa."( [Reversible esophageal dysfunction as a side effect of levodopa].
Frank, M; Kellner, H; Liegl, U; Zoller, WG, 1996
)
0.73
" Mesencephalic glia therefore produced soluble factors which are neurotrophic for dopamine neurones, and which protect these neurones from the toxic effects of L-DOPA."( Glia conditioned medium protects fetal rat midbrain neurones in culture from L-DOPA toxicity.
Carazo, A; Casarejos, MJ; García de Yébenes, J; Mena, MA; Paino, CL, 1996
)
0.29
" Motor side effects and adverse events were recorded at each regular clinic visit."( Early institution of bromocriptine in Parkinson's disease inhibits the emergence of levodopa-associated motor side effects. Long-term results of the PRADO study.
Blümner, E; Danielczyk, W; Gerlach, M; Kaiser, HJ; Kraus, PH; Letzel, H; Przuntek, H; Riederer, P; Uberla, K; Welzel, D, 1996
)
0.52
" We have assessed the toxic effects of dopamine and L-DOPA toward catecholaminergic neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells and whether R(-)-deprenyl and several structurally related compounds possess antioxidant effects in this system."( R(-)-deprenyl potentiates dopamine-induced cytotoxicity toward catecholaminergic neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells.
Lai, CT; Yu, PH, 1997
)
0.3
" Hydrogen peroxide would be converted to more toxic hydroxyl free radicals."( Dopamine- and L-beta-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine hydrochloride (L-Dopa)-induced cytotoxicity towards catecholaminergic neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells. Effects of oxidative stress and antioxidative factors.
Lai, CT; Yu, PH, 1997
)
0.3
" Drugs used to treat PD, such as levodopa, offer symptomatic relief but often have neuropsychiatric adverse effects, most prominently psychosis and delirium."( Neuropsychiatric adverse effects of antiparkinsonian drugs. Characteristics, evaluation and treatment.
Camicioli, R; Ganzini, L; Young, BK, 1997
)
0.58
" There is abundant evidence that levodopa is toxic to embryonic nigral DA neurons in both cell culture and neural grafting models."( Comparison of neurotoxicity following repeated administration of l-dopa, d-dopa and dopamine to embryonic mesencephalic dopamine neurons in cultures derived from Fisher 344 and Sprague-Dawley donors.
Alexander, T; Roth, RH; Sladek, CD; Sortwell, CE; Steece-Collier, K,
)
0.41
" Adverse responses to Sinemet treatment alone in parkinsonian animals included vomiting, dykinesias, dystonias, and stereotypic movements."( Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor-levodopa interactions and reduction of side effects in parkinsonian monkeys.
Collins, F; Gash, DM; Hilt, D; Kryscio, R; Lapchak, PA; Lebel, C; Miyoshi, Y; Ovadia, A; Zhang, Z, 1997
)
0.56
" The principal adverse events were levodopa-related, but these were generally mild or moderate."( Tolcapone in stable Parkinson's disease: efficacy and safety of long-term treatment. The Tolcapone Stable Study Group.
Bailey, P; Deptula, D; Dorflinger, E; Kurth, M; LeWitt, P; Pedder, S; Shulman, LM; Waters, CH, 1997
)
0.57
" Pretreatment with rotenone significantly augmented the toxic effect of L-DOPA on DA neurons."( Metabolic inhibition enhances selective toxicity of L-DOPA toward mesencephalic dopamine neurons in vitro.
Itakura, T; Nakai, K; Nakao, N, 1997
)
0.3
" These results suggest that T-794 is an effective and particularly safe antidepressant and that it may make an important contribution in the treatment of depressive disorders."( In vivo characterization of T-794, a novel reversible inhibitor of monoamine oxidase-A, as an antidepressant with a wide safety margin.
Iwata, H; Katayama, T; Kato, M; Matsuoka, Y; Narita, H; Yamamura, M, 1998
)
0.3
"Whether a drug such as levodopa, which is prescribed for long periods, may be toxic is a legitimate and even indispensable question."( Levodopa: is toxicity a myth?
Agid, Y, 1998
)
2.05
" The principal adverse events were levodopa-related, but these were generally mild or moderate."( Tolcapone in stable Parkinson's disease: efficacy and safety of long-term treatment. Tolcapone Stable Study Group.
Bailey, P; Deptula, D; Dorflinger, E; Kurth, M; LeWitt, P; Pedder, S; Shulman, LM; Waters, CH, 1998
)
0.58
" In early therapy, the emergent adverse experiences more common with the ropinirole group compared with placebo were nausea, somnolence, leg edema, abdominal pain, vomiting, dyspepsia, and hallucinations."( The safety of ropinirole, a selective nonergoline dopamine agonist, in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Brooks, DJ; Brunt, E; Fuell, D; Korczyn, A; Poewe, W; Quinn, NP; Rascol, O; Schrag, AE; Stocchi, F,
)
0.13
" However, levodopa does not appear to be toxic to the development of fetal nigral neurons or to the survival of fetal cell transplants."( Levodopa neurotoxicity: experimental studies versus clinical relevance.
Brin, MF; Jenner, PG, 1998
)
2.15
" As the first MAO-B inhibitor approved for the treatment of Parkinson's disease, concerns were raised about the safety of the drug based on the adverse effect profiles of older, nonselective MAO inhibitors."( Safety of selegiline (deprenyl) in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Heinonen, EH; Myllylä, V, 1998
)
0.3
" Such toxic effects of levodopa can be blocked by co-treatment with antioxidants, particularly thiol-containing compounds."( Levodopa toxicity and apoptosis.
Barzilai, A; Djaldetti, R; Melamed, E; Offen, D; Shirvan, A; Ziv, I, 1998
)
2.05
"Bilateral pallidal DBS is safe and efficient in patients who have levodopa-responsive parkinsonism with severe fluctuations."( Efficiency and safety of bilateral contemporaneous pallidal stimulation (deep brain stimulation) in levodopa-responsive patients with Parkinson's disease with severe motor fluctuations: a 2-year follow-up review.
Assal, G; Fankhauser, H; Favre, J; Ghika, J; Ghika-Schmid, F; Villemure, JG, 1998
)
0.75
" Safety and tolerability were assessed on the basis of adverse events, vital signs, laboratory measurements, and ECG recordings."( Efficacy, safety, and tolerance of the non-ergoline dopamine agonist pramipexole in the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease: a double blind, placebo controlled, randomised, multicentre study.
Oertel, WH; Pinter, MM; Pogarell, O, 1999
)
0.3
" The adverse event profile disclosed a high tolerability."( Efficacy, safety, and tolerance of the non-ergoline dopamine agonist pramipexole in the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease: a double blind, placebo controlled, randomised, multicentre study.
Oertel, WH; Pinter, MM; Pogarell, O, 1999
)
0.3
" L-DOPA pretreatment did not significantly alter any of the toxic effects of the amphetamine."( Neurotoxic effects of amphetamine plus L-DOPA.
Halladay, AK; Myers, CS; Wagner, GC; Widmer, DA, 1999
)
0.3
" The introduction of levodopa therapy is often delayed, however, because of the fear that it might be toxic for the remaining dopaminergic neurons, and thus accelerate the deterioration of the patient's condition."( Levodopa in Parkinson's disease: neurotoxicity issue laid to rest?
Gershanik, O; Murer, MG; Raisman-Vozari, R, 1999
)
2.07
" Adverse effects were minor or transient."( [Efficacy and safety of posteroventral pallidotomy for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease].
Ferrer, E; Molinuevo, JL; Nobbe, FA; Rumià, J; Tolosa, E; Valldeoriola, F, 2000
)
0.31
"Microelectrode guided unilateral pallidotomy is an effective and safe procedure to improve contralateral motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease, being specially useful for the treatment of l-dopa induced dyskinesias."( [Efficacy and safety of posteroventral pallidotomy for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease].
Ferrer, E; Molinuevo, JL; Nobbe, FA; Rumià, J; Tolosa, E; Valldeoriola, F, 2000
)
0.31
" The dyskinesia develops over a period of exposure to L-dopa and is related to the dosage, therefore, the cause may involve inductive changes that produce toxic levels of metabolites, interfering with dopamine (DA) neurotransmission."( Effects of dopamine metabolites on locomotor activities and on the binding of dopamine: relevance to the side effects of L-dopa.
Charlton, CG; Crowell, B, 2000
)
0.31
" These advantages contrasted with a need for more intensive postoperative monitoring and a higher incidence of adverse events related to levodopa withdrawal."( Safety and efficacy of pallidal or subthalamic nucleus stimulation in advanced PD.
Allert, N; Freund, HJ; Sturm, V; Voges, J; Volkmann, J; Weiss, PH, 2001
)
0.51
"L-dopa may be toxic to dopamine neurons, possibly due to catechol-autoxidation."( COMT-dependent protection of dopaminergic neurons by methionine, dimethionine and S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) against L-dopa toxicity in vitro.
Bottiglieri, T; Bressman, S; Di Rocco, A; Prikhojan, A; Rempel, N; Werner, P; Yahr, MD, 2001
)
0.31
" High concentrations of levodopa are toxic in vitro."( Catechol-O-methyltransferase decreases levodopa toxicity in vitro.
Galili-Mosberg, R; Melamed, E; Offen, D; Panet, H,
)
0.71
" All entacapone patients were included in the safety evaluation of adverse events (AEs), vital signs, ECG, and laboratory parameters."( Twelve-month safety of entacapone in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Haapaniemi, H; Kultalahti, ER; Leinonen, M; Myllylä, VV, 2001
)
0.31
"L-3,4-Dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) is a common and effective treatment for Parkinson's disease, but dyskinesia continues to be a serious adverse effect with chronic use."( Behavioral activity and stereotypy in rats induced by L-DOPA metabolites: a possible role in the adverse effects of chronic L-DOPA treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Akiyama, A; Nakazato, T, 2002
)
0.31
"Entacapone is an effective and safe levodopa extender and enhancer, improving the symptomatic efficacy of levodopa in PD and adding to the patients' benefit."( Efficacy and safety of entacapone in Parkinson's disease patients with suboptimal levodopa response: a 6-month randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study in Germany and Austria (Celomen study).
Deuschl, G; Gordin, A; Kultalahti, ER; Leinonen, M; Poewe, WH, 2002
)
0.82
" However, L-DOPA has been suggested to be toxic to dopamine (DA) neurons and perhaps contribute to the progression of the disease."( L-DOPA does not cause neurotoxicity in VMAT2 heterozygote knockout mice.
Di Monte, DA; McCormack, AL; Miller, GW; Reveron, ME; Savelieva, KV; Tillerson, JL, 2002
)
0.31
" However, the metabolites containing methoxy residue at position 3 failed to show a toxic effect in the SH-SY5Y cells."( Apoptosis-inducing neurotoxicity of dopamine and its metabolites via reactive quinone generation in neuroblastoma cells.
Asanuma, M; Emdadul Haque, M; Higashi, Y; Miyazaki, I; Ogawa, N; Tanaka, K, 2003
)
0.32
" In conclusion, STN lesioning is a safe and very effective procedure to treat PD and probably an underutilized operation for those who can not afford the costs of DBS."( Unilateral subthalamic nucleus lesioning: a safe and effective treatment for Parkinson's disease.
da Silva, DJ; Vilela Filho, O, 2002
)
0.31
"To assess whether polymorphisms in the dopamine receptor genes and in the dopamine transporter gene (DAT ) are predictors of adverse effects of L -dopa."( L -dopa-induced adverse effects in PD and dopamine transporter gene polymorphism.
Brockmöller, J; Gasser, T; Grapengiesser, A; Hofer, A; Kaiser, R; Kupsch, A; Roots, I, 2003
)
0.32
" The entire coding and promoter regions of the DRD2 gene of 48 patients with early and severe appearance of adverse effects from L -dopa treatment and of eight never-afflicted patients were sequenced."( L -dopa-induced adverse effects in PD and dopamine transporter gene polymorphism.
Brockmöller, J; Gasser, T; Grapengiesser, A; Hofer, A; Kaiser, R; Kupsch, A; Roots, I, 2003
)
0.32
"The polymorphisms of DRD2, DRD3, and DRD4 were not associated with the risk to develop adverse effects of L -dopa."( L -dopa-induced adverse effects in PD and dopamine transporter gene polymorphism.
Brockmöller, J; Gasser, T; Grapengiesser, A; Hofer, A; Kaiser, R; Kupsch, A; Roots, I, 2003
)
0.32
"Genetic variations of the DRD2, DRD3, and DRD4 do not influence the occurrence of L -dopa-induced adverse effects."( L -dopa-induced adverse effects in PD and dopamine transporter gene polymorphism.
Brockmöller, J; Gasser, T; Grapengiesser, A; Hofer, A; Kaiser, R; Kupsch, A; Roots, I, 2003
)
0.32
"Dopamine (DA)- or L-dihydroxyphenylalanine-(L-DOPA-) induced neurotoxicity is thought to be involved not only in adverse reactions induced by long-term L-DOPA therapy but also in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease."( Dopamine- or L-DOPA-induced neurotoxicity: the role of dopamine quinone formation and tyrosinase in a model of Parkinson's disease.
Asanuma, M; Miyazaki, I; Ogawa, N, 2003
)
0.32
"4%) discontinued treatment due to adverse events (AEs) by the end of the extension phase."( Efficacy and safety of levodopa with entacapone in Parkinson's disease patients suboptimally controlled with levodopa alone, in daily clinical practice: an international, multicentre, open-label study.
Bernhard, G; Emre, M; Gershanik, O; Sauer, D, 2003
)
0.63
" Safety and tolerability were evaluated by treatment-emergent adverse event reports, clinical laboratory test results (blood chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis), vital signs, and electrocardiograms."( Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of pramipexole in untreated and levodopa-treated patients with Parkinson's disease.
Lu, CS; Mok, V; Shan, DE; Tsoi, TH; Wong, KS; Yang, CC, 2003
)
0.56
"Adopting the randomized double-blinded method, the effect of adding NYG to 30 patients with Parkinsonism in the treated group, who already received anti-Parkinsonism treatment but showing decreased response to Medopa and Artane and with obvious adverse reaction, was observed and controlled by 30 patients treated by adding placebo."( [Clinical observation on the efficacy enhancing and toxicity attenuating effect of nuzhen yangyin granule to the anti-parkinsonism therapy mainly with Medopa].
Hu, XJ; Yang, XG; Yang, XS, 2003
)
0.32
" NYG also showed markedly effective in reducing the adverse reactions of Medopa and Artane on digestive, neuro-psychiatric and cardiovascular system."( [Clinical observation on the efficacy enhancing and toxicity attenuating effect of nuzhen yangyin granule to the anti-parkinsonism therapy mainly with Medopa].
Hu, XJ; Yang, XG; Yang, XS, 2003
)
0.32
" In this short-term study, CEP-1347 was safe and well tolerated."( The safety and tolerability of a mixed lineage kinase inhibitor (CEP-1347) in PD.
, 2004
)
0.32
" Safety assessments included monitoring adverse events, and the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor examination."( Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses.
Cullen, EI; Hahne, WA; Kirby, L; Kumar, D; Okereke, CS; Pratt, RD, 2004
)
0.58
" The number of PD patients who experienced at least one adverse event during the study (13/25) was higher when they received donepezil HCl than when they received placebo (5/25), but was the same as healthy subjects who received donepezil HCl only (13/26)."( Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses.
Cullen, EI; Hahne, WA; Kirby, L; Kumar, D; Okereke, CS; Pratt, RD, 2004
)
0.58
" Co-administration of the two drugs led to a small increase in adverse events compared with administration of levodopa/carbidopa alone in PD patients."( Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses.
Cullen, EI; Hahne, WA; Kirby, L; Kumar, D; Okereke, CS; Pratt, RD, 2004
)
0.79
" Assessments included tolerability measures, adverse events profile, the disease-specific quality of life instrument PDQ-39, UPDRS parts II, III, and question 39 and investigator and patient global clinical assessments."( An open-label evaluation of the tolerability and safety of Stalevo (carbidopa, levodopa and entacapone) in Parkinson's disease patients experiencing wearing-off.
Guarnieri, M; Hubble, J; Koller, W; Rabinowicz, AL; Silver, D, 2005
)
0.56
"14 subjects (8%) discontinued treatment with Stalevo, of which 12 (7%) were due to adverse events."( An open-label evaluation of the tolerability and safety of Stalevo (carbidopa, levodopa and entacapone) in Parkinson's disease patients experiencing wearing-off.
Guarnieri, M; Hubble, J; Koller, W; Rabinowicz, AL; Silver, D, 2005
)
0.56
" This toxic effect was demonstrated both in vitro and in vivo in several models but the concentrations required to induce it are significantly higher than those needed to inhibit COMT."( Tolcapone in Parkinson's disease: liver toxicity and clinical efficacy.
Borges, N, 2005
)
0.33
" The acceptability of piribedil was assessed by physical examination, weight, blood pressure and heart rate as well as the reported adverse events."( Efficacy and safety of piribedil in early combination with L-dopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: a 6-month open study.
Bundhukul, A; Chankrachang, S; Laptikultham, S; Nidhinandana, S; Pisarnpong, A; Srisuwananukorn, S; Suwantamee, J, 2004
)
0.32
" Hoehn and Yahr stage and Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale were also significantly improved Reported adverse events were mainly gastrointestinal symptoms."( Efficacy and safety of piribedil in early combination with L-dopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: a 6-month open study.
Bundhukul, A; Chankrachang, S; Laptikultham, S; Nidhinandana, S; Pisarnpong, A; Srisuwananukorn, S; Suwantamee, J, 2004
)
0.32
" Alterations of VMAT2 function might therefore cause cytoplasmic accumulation of free DA, which is toxic for dopaminergic neurons."( Increased vulnerability to L-DOPA toxicity in dopaminergic neurons From VMAT2 heterozygote knockout mice.
Hirano, M; Kariya, S; Takahashi, N; Ueno, S, 2005
)
0.33
" Twenty-four drug-related adverse events were recorded of which four were regarded as serious."( Efficacy and safety of high-dose cabergoline in Parkinson's disease.
Ludolph, A; Odin, P; Oehlwein, C; Polzer, U; Renner, R; Schüler, P; Shing, M; Storch, A; Werner, G, 2006
)
0.33
"The authors examined age effects on adverse events from two randomized, controlled trials of rasagiline, comparing younger (younger than 70 years) and older (70 years and older) subjects."( Safety of rasagiline in elderly patients with Parkinson disease.
Eberly, SW; Goetz, CG; Oakes, D; Schwid, SR; Shoulson, I, 2006
)
0.33
" Outcome measures were overall improvement, quality of life, reduction of levodopa dose, and adverse events."( Efficacy and safety of herbal medicines for idiopathic Parkinson's disease: a systematic review.
Bian, Z; Chung, V; Gao, J; Kum, WF; Leuk Fong, W; Li, M; Liu, L; Zhao, Z, 2006
)
0.56
"Although unilateral pallidotomy is generally considered a safe and effective neurosurgical treatment for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD), controversies concerning efficacy and adverse effects of bilateral posteroventral pallidotomy (PVP) exist and need to be resolved."( Efficacy and safety of simultaneous bilateral pallidotomy in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Chung, SJ; Hong, SH; Jeon, SR; Kim, SR; Lee, MC, 2006
)
0.33
"Simultaneous bilateral PVP may be a safe and highly effective method of reducing levodopa-induced dyskinesia."( Efficacy and safety of simultaneous bilateral pallidotomy in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Chung, SJ; Hong, SH; Jeon, SR; Kim, SR; Lee, MC, 2006
)
0.56
"Tolcapone seemed to be safe and was generally well tolerated as an adjunctive treatment in patients starting treatment with carbidopa/levodopa for symptomatic PD."( Safety and tolerability of adjunctive tolcapone treatment in patients with early Parkinson's disease.
Lees, AJ; Oertel, WH; Ratziu, V; Tolosa, E, 2007
)
0.54
" Meanwhile, recent studies have emphasized that genetic factors may involve in the occurrence of the adverse effects of chronic L-dopa therapy in PD patients."( Genetic polymorphism of the angiotensin converting enzyme and L-dopa-induced adverse effects in Parkinson's disease.
Harn, HJ; Lin, JJ; Lin, SZ; Liu, JT; Yueh, KC, 2007
)
0.34
" Safety assessments included adverse events and oropharyngeal findings."( Safety and efficacy of newly formulated selegiline orally disintegrating tablets as an adjunct to levodopa in the management of 'off' episodes in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Bertoni, J; Kricorian, G; Leehey, M; Lew, MF; Pahwa, R, 2007
)
0.56
" Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 132 (52%) patients."( Safety and efficacy of newly formulated selegiline orally disintegrating tablets as an adjunct to levodopa in the management of 'off' episodes in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Bertoni, J; Kricorian, G; Leehey, M; Lew, MF; Pahwa, R, 2007
)
0.56
"Long-term treatment of L-dopa for Parkinson's disease (PD) patients induces adverse effects, including dyskinesia, on-off and wearing-off symptoms."( The role of 3-O-methyldopa in the side effects of L-dopa.
Charlton, C; Chen, H; King, J; Lee, ES, 2008
)
0.35
" Among genetic factors, increasing evidences suggest that deletion/insertion (D/I) gene polymorphism of the angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) may be involved in the pathogenesis of PD and in the occurrence of the adverse effects of chronic L-dopa therapy."( Genetic polymorphism of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme is not associated with the development of Parkinson's disease and of L-dopa-induced adverse effects.
Guglielmi, R; Meco, G; Pascale, E; Passarelli, E; Passarelli, F; Purcaro, C; Vestri, AR, 2009
)
0.35
" Moreover, we described all adverse events (early and late) and studied daily levodopa doses before and 6 months after treatment."( [Continuous dopaminergic stimulation by Duodopa in advanced Parkinson's disease: Efficacy and safety].
Annic, A; Defebvre, L; Destée, A; Devos, D; Dujardin, K; Seguy, D,
)
0.36
" Adverse events were due to PEG positioning for four patients, the equipment (pump, connection, inner tube) for all patients and levodopa for four patients."( [Continuous dopaminergic stimulation by Duodopa in advanced Parkinson's disease: Efficacy and safety].
Annic, A; Defebvre, L; Destée, A; Devos, D; Dujardin, K; Seguy, D,
)
0.34
" There were few severe adverse events."( Patient profile, indications, efficacy and safety of duodenal levodopa infusion in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Devos, D, 2009
)
0.59
" MMMA was not toxic in the bacterial assay, indicating that its toxicity is not related to increased oxidative stress."( Synthesis and in vitro cytotoxicity profile of the R-enantiomer of 3,4-dihydroxymethamphetamine (R-(-)-HHMA): comparison with related catecholamines.
Blanco, M; Felim, A; Herrera, G; Largeron, M; Neudörffer, A; O'Connor, JE, 2010
)
0.36
" The Cochrane Collaboration guidelines were followed and the following data were extracted from each study: identifier (title and bibliographical reference), classification of the quality of the evidence (Jadad criteria), type and design of the study, number of patients, patient demographics (average age, sex), Parkinson's disease stage (Hoehn and Yahr Scale), treatment (monotherapy or adjuvant to levodopa), drugs used (including dosage and duration), study objective (safety or tolerability), method of evaluation of results, randomization and blinding, and description of all the adverse events in all treatment groups."( Tolerability and safety of ropinirole versus other dopamine agonists and levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Kulisevsky, J; Pagonabarraga, J, 2010
)
0.76
"In all the included studies, dopamine agonists, including ropinirole, exhibited a higher incidence of adverse events than placebo."( Tolerability and safety of ropinirole versus other dopamine agonists and levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Kulisevsky, J; Pagonabarraga, J, 2010
)
0.59
" An understanding of structure-activity relationships (SARs) of chemicals can make a significant contribution to the identification of potential toxic effects early in the drug development process and aid in avoiding such problems."( Developing structure-activity relationships for the prediction of hepatotoxicity.
Fisk, L; Greene, N; Naven, RT; Note, RR; Patel, ML; Pelletier, DJ, 2010
)
0.36
" We show that both Synphilin-1 and α-synuclein are toxic by themselves, but when co-expressed, they suppress their toxicity reciprocally."( Synphilin suppresses α-synuclein neurotoxicity in a Parkinson's disease Drosophila model.
Fonseca-Ornelas, L; Hernández-Vargas, R; López-González, I; Reynaud, E; Riesgo-Escovar, J; Zurita, M, 2011
)
0.37
" Combination of α-lipoic acid efficiently halting deleterious toxic effects of L-dopa, revealed normalization of catalepsy score in addition to amelioration of neurochemical parameters and apparent preservation of striatal ultrastructure integrity, indicating benefit of both symptomatic and neuroprotective therapy."( Intervention of mitochondrial dysfunction-oxidative stress-dependent apoptosis as a possible neuroprotective mechanism of α-lipoic acid against rotenone-induced parkinsonism and L-dopa toxicity.
Abdin, AA; Sarhan, NI, 2011
)
0.37
" However, their use is limited by actual and perceived adverse events (AE)."( Apomorphine injections: predictors of initial common adverse events and long term tolerability.
Ferrara, JM; Hunter, C; Mostile, G; Ondo, WG, 2012
)
0.38
" These data identify a new class of therapeutic in Parkinson's disease and highlight the potential benefits of studying illicit drugs that in themselves would never be considered safe for long-term therapy."( A novel MDMA analogue, UWA-101, that lacks psychoactivity and cytotoxicity, enhances L-DOPA benefit in parkinsonian primates.
Brotchie, JM; Fox, SH; Gandy, MN; Gomez-Ramirez, J; Huot, P; Johnston, TH; Lee, J; Lewis, KD; Martin-Iverson, M; McIldowie, M; Millar, Z; Nash, JE; Piggott, MJ; Salomonczyk, D; Thiele, S; Wagg, K; Yong-Kee, CJ, 2012
)
0.38
"9%) reported adverse events (AEs), requiring withdrawal of 3 ER patients (5."( Efficacy and safety of extended- versus immediate-release pramipexole in Japanese patients with advanced and L-dopa-undertreated Parkinson disease: a double-blind, randomized trial.
Barone, P; Hasegawa, K; Hattori, N; Hauser, RA; Kagimura, T; Kuno, S; Mizuno, Y; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Sarashina, A; Schapira, AH; Yamamoto, M,
)
0.13
" Due to the nature of the data, it is not possible to give exact numbers for the frequency of adverse events."( Duodopa® treatment for advanced Parkinson's disease: a review of efficacy and safety.
Nyholm, D, 2012
)
0.38
" Primary outcomes included adverse events (AEs) and extent of rotigotine exposure."( The safety and tolerability of rotigotine transdermal system over a 6-year period in patients with early-stage Parkinson's disease.
Boroojerdi, B; Giladi, N; Surmann, E, 2013
)
0.39
" Safety evaluation included haematology, biochemistry, urinalysis parameters and adverse event monitoring."( Efficacy and safety of standardized extract of Trigonella foenum-graecum L seeds as an adjuvant to L-Dopa in the management of patients with Parkinson's disease.
Joshi, V; Mohan, V; Nathan, J; Panjwani, S; Thakurdesai, PA, 2014
)
0.4
" The possible toxic action of striatal GLU (retrograde excitotoxicity) on these cells, and on other neurons which innervate the striatum and which also degenerate in Parkinson's disease (thalamostriatal cells of the intralaminar thalamic nuclei), is still practically unexplored."( Striatal glutamate induces retrograde excitotoxicity and neuronal degeneration of intralaminar thalamic nuclei: their potential relevance for Parkinson's disease.
Morales, I; Rodriguez, M; Sabate, M, 2013
)
0.39
"3 % of the safety population) withdraw, due to adverse drug reaction (5), procedure and device related events (7), compliance (3) and lack of efficacy (8)."( Effect and safety of duodenal levodopa infusion in advanced Parkinson's disease: a retrospective multicenter outcome assessment in patient routine care.
Antonini, A; Bertaina, I; Calandrella, D; Cras, C; De Deyn, P; Gasser, UE; Mancini, F; Minafra, B; Odin, P; Opiano, L; Pacchetti, C; Pickut, B; Poewe, W; Spielberger, S; Tomantschger, V; Wolf, E; Zibetti, M, 2013
)
0.68
" Adverse effects from Western drug-based medical intervention prevent long-term adherence to these therapies in many patients."( Evaluation on the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medication Xifeng Dingchan Pill in treating Parkinson's disease: study protocol of a multicenter, open-label, randomized active-controlled trial.
Ma, YZ; Shen, XM; Zhang, J, 2013
)
0.39
" The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores, TCM symptoms scores, quality of life, change of Madopar's dosage and the toxic and adverse effects of Madopar will be observed during a 3-month treatment period and through a further 6-month follow-up period."( Evaluation on the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medication Xifeng Dingchan Pill in treating Parkinson's disease: study protocol of a multicenter, open-label, randomized active-controlled trial.
Ma, YZ; Shen, XM; Zhang, J, 2013
)
0.39
" The most frequent adverse event experienced in the ropinirole PR group was dyskinesia."( The efficacy and safety of ropinirole prolonged release tablets as adjunctive therapy in Chinese subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study.
Cai, M; Cao, H; Chen, S; Cheng, Y; Li, J; Liu, C; Qu, Q; Wang, J; Wang, Z; Zhang, B; Zhang, X; Zhang, Z; Zhu, R, 2013
)
0.39
" The adverse events observed were consistent with the established safety profile of ropinirole, with no new safety signal identified."( The efficacy and safety of ropinirole prolonged release tablets as adjunctive therapy in Chinese subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study.
Cai, M; Cao, H; Chen, S; Cheng, Y; Li, J; Liu, C; Qu, Q; Wang, J; Wang, Z; Zhang, B; Zhang, X; Zhang, Z; Zhu, R, 2013
)
0.39
"Levodopa is the most effective symptomatic therapy for Parkinson's disease, but its chronic use could lead to chronic adverse outcomes, such as motor fluctuations, dyskinesia and visual hallucinations."( Association of common genetic variants of HOMER1 gene with levodopa adverse effects in Parkinson's disease patients.
Altmann, V; Callegari-Jacques, SM; Hutz, MH; Medeiros, MS; Monte, TL; Rieck, M; Rieder, CR; Schumacher-Schuh, AF; Tovo-Rodrigues, L, 2014
)
2.09
"Layered hydroxide nanoparticles are generally biocompatible, and less toxic than most inorganic nanoparticles, making them an acceptable alternative drug delivery system."( Toxicity and metabolism of layered double hydroxide intercalated with levodopa in a Parkinson's disease model.
Ain, NM; Fakurazi, S; Hussein, MZ; Hussein-Al-Ali, SH; Kura, AU, 2014
)
0.64
"The results suggest that compounds that indirectly facilitate 5-HT1 A receptor activation, such as citalopram, may be more effective therapeutics than direct 5-HT1 A receptor agonists because they exhibit similar anti-dyskinesia efficacy, while possessing a reduced side effect profile."( Side effect profile of 5-HT treatments for Parkinson's disease and L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia in rats.
Bishop, C; Conti, MM; Lindenbach, D; Ostock, CY; Palumbo, N; Vilceus, N, 2015
)
0.42
" Outcome measures included improvement in motor functions; symptomatic improvement; improvement in quality of life; adverse effects."( Safety and efficacy of rasagiline in addition to levodopa for the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Cai, B; Cai, JP; Chen, WJ; Lin, Y; Wang, N, 2015
)
0.67
" There were no significant differences in adverse effects."( Safety and efficacy of rasagiline in addition to levodopa for the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Cai, B; Cai, JP; Chen, WJ; Lin, Y; Wang, N, 2015
)
0.67
"5 to 1 mg/day rasagiline in addition to levodopa is a safe and well-tolerated combination therapy for individuals with Parkinson's disease."( Safety and efficacy of rasagiline in addition to levodopa for the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Cai, B; Cai, JP; Chen, WJ; Lin, Y; Wang, N, 2015
)
0.94
" Continuous LCIG infusion tolerability and adverse drug reactions were consistent with the known safety profile of previous studies."( Global long-term study on motor and non-motor symptoms and safety of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in routine care of advanced Parkinson's disease patients; 12-month interim outcomes.
Antonini, A; Bergmann, L; Poewe, W; Preda, C; Yegin, A, 2015
)
0.65
" Safety assessments included monitoring adverse events (AEs), neurological examination, Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale questionnaire, liver chemistry, and laboratory tests."( An open-label extension study to evaluate the safety of ropinirole prolonged release in Chinese patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Cai, M; Chen, S; Cheng, Y; Hu, J; Li, J; Liu, C; Qu, Q; Wang, J; Wang, Z; Zhang, B; Zhang, X; Zhang, Z; Zhu, R, 2015
)
0.42
" Most subjects (95%) reported ≥1 adverse event (AE); only 3 subjects (4."( Long-term safety and maintenance of efficacy of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel: an open-label extension of the double-blind pivotal study in advanced Parkinson's disease patients.
Benesh, J; Chatamra, K; Dubow, J; Eaton, S; Fernandez, HH; Hall, C; Slevin, JT; Zadikoff, C, 2015
)
0.67
"The objective of this study was to investigate the risk factors of wearing-off phenomenon in Parkinson's disease (PD) and propose safe dosage of levodopa to reduce wearing-off development based on Chinese cohort."( Risk factors and safe dosage of levodopa for wearing-off phenomenon in Chinese patients with Parkinson's disease.
Chen, H; Fang, J; Feng, T; Gao, L; Li, F, 2015
)
0.9
" Adverse events of IPX066 from the different trials are presented."( Safety of IPX066 , an extended release carbidopa-levodopa formulation, for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Fahn, S; Kestenbaum, M, 2015
)
0.67
" Pharmacokinetics, adverse events (AEs), and efficacy were assessed."( Jejunal Infusion of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel versus oral administration of levodopa-carbidopa tablets in japanese subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetics and pilot efficacy and safety.
Benesh, J; Chatamra, K; Dutta, S; Mohamed, ME; Nagai, M; Othman, AA; Yanagawa, M, 2015
)
0.74
" Reported adverse events were comparable between LB and LC users."( Efficacy and safety of entacapone in levodopa/carbidopa versus levodopa/benserazide treated Parkinson's disease patients with wearing-off.
Kuoppamäki, M; Leinonen, M; Poewe, W, 2015
)
0.69
"Beyond the new generation non ergot dopamine agonists, no strong evidences allow the choice of a specific dopamine agonists for Parkinson 's disease treatment and by now dopamine agonists treatment should be tailored on specific adverse events profile."( A review of adverse events linked to dopamine agonists in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Bonuccelli, U; Ceravolo, R; Del Prete, E; Rossi, C, 2016
)
0.43
"Safety data from 4 studies were summarized using 2 overlapping data sets, permitting the separation of procedure/device-associated (n = 395) from non-procedure/device adverse events (n = 412)."( Integrated safety of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel from prospective clinical trials.
Benesh, JA; Boyd, JT; Chatamra, K; Chouinard, S; Draganov, PV; Dubow, J; Eaton, S; Espay, AJ; Fasano, A; Fernandez, HH; Fung, VS; Klostermann, F; Lang, AE; Lew, MF; Odin, P; Robieson, WZ; Rodriguez, RL; Schmulewitz, N; Slevin, JT; Stein, DA; Zadikoff, C, 2016
)
0.75
" Procedure/device adverse events occurred in 300 patients (76%), and serious adverse events occurred in 68 (17%); most frequently reported procedure/device adverse events and serious adverse events were complications of device insertion (41% and 8%, respectively) and abdominal pain (36% and 4%, respectively)."( Integrated safety of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel from prospective clinical trials.
Benesh, JA; Boyd, JT; Chatamra, K; Chouinard, S; Draganov, PV; Dubow, J; Eaton, S; Espay, AJ; Fasano, A; Fernandez, HH; Fung, VS; Klostermann, F; Lang, AE; Lew, MF; Odin, P; Robieson, WZ; Rodriguez, RL; Schmulewitz, N; Slevin, JT; Stein, DA; Zadikoff, C, 2016
)
0.75
" The mechanisms of drug-induced mitochondrial impairment will be discussed together with putative therapeutic strategies to counteract the adverse effects of the pharmacotherapy."( Drug-Induced Mitochondrial Toxicity.
Al Shahrani, M; Hargreaves, IP; Heales, SJ; Wainwright, L, 2016
)
0.43
" The issue of toxicity was raised in vitro studies, and suggests that L-dopa can be toxic to dopaminergic neurons, but it is not yet entirely proven."( Protective effect of two essential oils isolated from Rosa damascena Mill. and Lavandula angustifolia Mill, and two classic antioxidants against L-dopa oxidative toxicity induced in healthy mice.
Gadjeva, V; Karamalakova, Y; Kovacheva, N; Nikolova, G; Stanev, S; Zheleva, A, 2016
)
0.43
" Adverse events caused the premature study discontinuation of 12 individuals (4."( Assessment of Safety and Efficacy of Safinamide as a Levodopa Adjunct in Patients With Parkinson Disease and Motor Fluctuations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Anand, R; Fox, SH; Hauser, RA; Jankovic, J; Jost, WH; Kenney, C; Kulisevsky, J; Pahwa, R; Poewe, W; Schapira, AH, 2017
)
0.7
" The most frequently reported adverse event was dyskinesia (in 40 [14."( Assessment of Safety and Efficacy of Safinamide as a Levodopa Adjunct in Patients With Parkinson Disease and Motor Fluctuations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Anand, R; Fox, SH; Hauser, RA; Jankovic, J; Jost, WH; Kenney, C; Kulisevsky, J; Pahwa, R; Poewe, W; Schapira, AH, 2017
)
0.7
" At higher doses, 50 mg/500 mg/125 mg SpinalonTM was considered to have reached maximum tolerated dose (MTD) since 3 out of 4 subjects experienced related adverse events including vomiting."( Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Phase I/IIa Study (Safety and Efficacy) with Buspirone/Levodopa/Carbidopa (SpinalonTM) in Subjects with Complete AIS A or Motor-Complete AIS B Spinal Cord Injury.
Dyck, S; Guertin, PA; Kia, M; Matte, G; Mongeon, D; Prince, F; Radhakrishna, M; Roberts, M; Steuer, I; Vaillancourt, M, 2017
)
0.67
" The primary outcome measure was safety assessed through adverse events (AEs)."( ADS-5102 (Amantadine) Extended-Release Capsules for Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia in Parkinson's Disease (EASE LID 2 Study): Interim Results of an Open-Label Safety Study.
Felt, L; Hauser, RA; Isaacson, SH; Johnson, R; Oertel, W; Pahwa, R; Stempien, MJ; Tanner, CM, 2017
)
0.71
" However, patients on entacapone had a higher frequency of adverse events than those on placebo but no occurrence of severe adverse reactions."( Efficacy and Safety of Adjuvant Treatment with Entacapone in Advanced Parkinson's Disease with Motor Fluctuation: A Systematic Meta-Analysis.
Chen, J; Li, J; Liu, X; Lou, Z; Sun, Y, 2017
)
0.46
"LCIG infusion is a safe and efficacious treatment for the control of motor fluctuations, and for improvement or nonworsening of nonmotor aspects, long-term sustained, and feasible for use in routine care."( Long-term safety and effectiveness of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion.
Abu-Suboh, M; Alvarez-Sabín, J; Armengol, JR; De Fabregues, O; Dot, J; Ferré, A; Gómez, MR; Hernández-Vara, J; Ibarria, M; Puiggros, C; Quintana, M; Raguer, N; Romero, O; Seoane, JL, 2017
)
0.73
" No systemic adverse effects were observed."( Ninety-day Local Tolerability and Toxicity Study of ND0612, a Novel Formulation of Levodopa/Carbidopa, Administered by Subcutaneous Continuous Infusion in Minipigs.
Manno, RA; Maronpot, RR; Nyska, A; Ramot, Y; Sacco, G; Shaltiel-Karyo, R; Tsarfati, Y; Yacoby-Zeevi, O, 2017
)
0.68
" Assessments included spirometry and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs)."( Pulmonary Safety and Tolerability of Inhaled Levodopa (CVT-301) Administered to Patients with Parkinson's Disease.
Batycky, R; Corbin, A; LeWitt, PA; Murck, H; Pahwa, R; Sedkov, A, 2018
)
0.74
" CVT-301 was generally safe and well tolerated."( Pulmonary Safety and Tolerability of Inhaled Levodopa (CVT-301) Administered to Patients with Parkinson's Disease.
Batycky, R; Corbin, A; LeWitt, PA; Murck, H; Pahwa, R; Sedkov, A, 2018
)
0.74
" The age of the patient impacts the effect and adverse events of anti-parkinsonian treatment."( Efficacy and safety of rotigotine in elderly patients with Parkinson's disease in comparison with the non-elderly: a post hoc analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.
Iwaki, H; Kondo, H; Nomoto, M; Sakurai, M, 2018
)
0.48
" In the safety evaluation, it was found that acupuncture combined with Madopar was associated with significantly fewer adverse effects including gastrointestinal reactions (RR=0."( Effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with Madopar for Parkinson's disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Chen, L; Chen, W; Dong, H; Geng, G; Li, T; Liu, H; Zhan, S; Zhang, Z, 2017
)
0.46
" For each subgroup, changes from baseline in PD diary measures ("off" time and "on" time with and without troublesome dyskinesia), Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale Parts II + III scores, and adverse events were analyzed, comparing ER CD-LD with the active comparator."( Effect of Concomitant Medications on the Safety and Efficacy of Extended-Release Carbidopa-Levodopa (IPX066) in Patients With Advanced Parkinson Disease: A Post Hoc Analysis.
Gupta, S; Kell, S; Khanna, S; LeWitt, PA; Rubens, R; Verhagen Metman, L,
)
0.35
"Multiple daily doses of PF-06669571 were safe and well tolerated with no notable safety concerns."( A Phase I Study of the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of the Novel Dopamine D1 Receptor Partial Agonist, PF-06669571, in Subjects with Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease.
DeMartinis, N; Duvvuri, S; Gurrell, R; Sun, P, 2018
)
0.48
"Objective We conducted a study to obtain information that could be used to provide Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with appropriate advice on safe driving."( The Clinical Findings Useful for Driving Safety Advice for Parkinson's Disease Patients.
Aiba, I; Ando, R; Aoki, M; Hasegawa, K; Iwaki, H; Nagai, M; Nakashima, K; Nishikawa, N; Nomoto, M; Tsuboi, Y; Tsujii, T; Yabe, H, 2018
)
0.48
" The most common adverse reactions with amantadine are constipation, cardiovascular dysfunction including QT prolongation, orthostatic hypotension and edema, neuropsychiatric symptoms such as hallucinations, confusion and delirium, nausea and livedo reticularis."( Efficacy and safety of amantadine for the treatment of L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia.
Perez-Lloret, S; Rascol, O, 2018
)
0.48
" Although most patients (94%) reported an adverse event, the rate of adverse events decreased over time; 53% experienced a serious adverse event."( Long-term safety and efficacy of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Benesh, J; Boyd, JT; Chatamra, K; Eaton, S; Espay, AJ; Facheris, MF; Fernandez, HH; Fung, VSC; Hall, C; Lew, MF; Robieson, WZ; Rodriguez, RL; Slevin, JT; Standaert, DG; Vanagunas, AD; Zadikoff, C, 2018
)
0.76
" Although adverse event rates decreased over time, vigilance is required for device-related complications and adverse events."( Long-term safety and efficacy of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Benesh, J; Boyd, JT; Chatamra, K; Eaton, S; Espay, AJ; Facheris, MF; Fernandez, HH; Fung, VSC; Hall, C; Lew, MF; Robieson, WZ; Rodriguez, RL; Slevin, JT; Standaert, DG; Vanagunas, AD; Zadikoff, C, 2018
)
0.76
"The toxic effects of Ochratoxin A (OTA), a fungal secondary metabolite of the genera Aspergillus and Penicillium with 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) a Parkinson inducing drug were investigated to evaluate the neurotoxic effects exerted by OTA."( Restorative effect of l-Dopa treatment against Ochratoxin A induced neurotoxicity.
Anand, T; Bhat, PV; Khanum, F; Mohan Manu, T, 2018
)
0.48
" Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 50."( Efficacy and safety of adjunctive rasagiline in Japanese Parkinson's disease patients with wearing-off phenomena: A phase 2/3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study.
Hattori, N; Kato, M; Mochizuki, H; Nagai, M; Nishimura, A; Takahashi, R; Takeda, A; Takeda, S, 2018
)
0.48
" In total, 300 adverse events were classified as related to safinamide in 132 patients (44."( [Effectiveness and safety of safinamide as add-on to levodopa in patients with parkinson's disease: non-interventional study].
Bosse, D; Delf, M; Jost, WH; Kupsch, A; Mengs, J, 2018
)
0.73
"We aimed to provide evidence that subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective and safe treatment option for older patients with Parkinson's disease (PD)."( Bilateral subthalamic deep brain stimulation is an effective and safe treatment option for the older patients with Parkinson's disease.
Ahn, JH; Cho, JW; Cho, KR; Kim, M; Lee, JI; Park, JH; Park, S; Youn, J, 2018
)
0.48
" Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mostly mild or moderate and occurred in 83."( Long-term safety and efficacy of adjunctive rasagiline in levodopa-treated Japanese patients with Parkinson's disease.
Hattori, N; Mochizuki, H; Nagai, M; Nakaya, R; Nishimura, A; Takahashi, R; Takeda, A; Takeda, S, 2019
)
0.76
" Treatments were safe and well tolerated."( Safety and efficacy of CVT-301 (levodopa inhalation powder) on motor function during off periods in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.
Batycky, R; Fernandez, HH; Hauser, RA; Isaacson, SH; Lew, M; LeWitt, PA; Lopez-Manzanares, L; Oh, C; Pahwa, R; Pourcher, E; Rudzínska, M; Saint-Hilaire, M; Sedkov, A; Waters, C, 2019
)
0.8
"CVT-301 can improve UPDRS motor scores of patients with Parkinson's disease during in-clinic off periods, with few severe or serious adverse events."( Safety and efficacy of CVT-301 (levodopa inhalation powder) on motor function during off periods in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.
Batycky, R; Fernandez, HH; Hauser, RA; Isaacson, SH; Lew, M; LeWitt, PA; Lopez-Manzanares, L; Oh, C; Pahwa, R; Pourcher, E; Rudzínska, M; Saint-Hilaire, M; Sedkov, A; Waters, C, 2019
)
0.8
" Dopaminergic treatment is effective in management of motor symptoms, but poses a risk for motor and non-motor adverse events."( Genetic variability of inflammation and oxidative stress genes does not play a major role in the occurrence of adverse events of dopaminergic treatment in Parkinson's disease.
Dolžan, V; Flisar, D; Georgiev, D; Kojović, M; Kramberger, MG; Pirtošek, Z; Redenšek, S; Trošt, M, 2019
)
0.51
" We did not find any associations between selected polymorphisms and motor adverse events."( Genetic variability of inflammation and oxidative stress genes does not play a major role in the occurrence of adverse events of dopaminergic treatment in Parkinson's disease.
Dolžan, V; Flisar, D; Georgiev, D; Kojović, M; Kramberger, MG; Pirtošek, Z; Redenšek, S; Trošt, M, 2019
)
0.51
" Therefore, the results of our study suggest some links between genetic variability in inflammation- and oxidative stress-related pathways and non-motor adverse events of dopaminergic treatment."( Genetic variability of inflammation and oxidative stress genes does not play a major role in the occurrence of adverse events of dopaminergic treatment in Parkinson's disease.
Dolžan, V; Flisar, D; Georgiev, D; Kojović, M; Kramberger, MG; Pirtošek, Z; Redenšek, S; Trošt, M, 2019
)
0.51
" Serious adverse events were largely similar between groups."( Safety and efficacy of co-careldopa as an add-on therapy to occupational and physical therapy in patients after stroke (DARS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Bhakta, BB; Cozens, A; Farrin, AJ; Ford, GA; Hartley, S; Holloway, I; Meads, D; Pearn, J; Ruddock, S; Sackley, CM; Saloniki, EC; Santorelli, G; Walker, MF, 2019
)
0.51
" More patients in the levodopa monotherapy and LCIG polytherapy groups experienced treatment-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs) including dyskinesias and serious ADRs than did patients in the LCIG monotherapy group."( Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel Monotherapy: GLORIA Registry Demographics, Efficacy, and Safety.
Antonini, A; Bergmann, L; Kukreja, P; Poewe, W; Robieson, WZ, 2019
)
2.27
"3% of opicapone-treated patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) versus 57."( Safety Profile of Opicapone in the Management of Parkinson's Disease.
Ferreira, JJ; Gama, H; Lees, A; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2019
)
0.51
"Long-term use of opicapone once-daily over 1-year at doses of 25 mg or 50 mg was generally safe and well tolerated, supporting its clinical usefulness in the management of PD motor fluctuations."( Safety Profile of Opicapone in the Management of Parkinson's Disease.
Ferreira, JJ; Gama, H; Lees, A; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2019
)
0.51
" However, adverse events (AEs) are frequent."( Safety and effectiveness of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel for advanced Parkinson's disease: A large single-center study.
Baille, G; Blaise, AS; Carrière, N; Defebvre, L; Devos, D; Dujardin, K; Grolez, G; Kreisler, A; Kyheng, M; Moreau, C; Mutez, E; Seguy, D, 2020
)
0.85
" Adverse events were generally mild and transient and were mostly reported during the dose titration phase."( A Phase 2a Trial Investigating the Safety and Tolerability of the Novel Cortical Enhancer IRL752 in Parkinson's Disease Dementia.
Bergquist, F; Dizdar, N; Grigoriou, S; Hansson, F; Johansson, A; Nyholm, D; Odin, P; Rinne, J; Sonesson, C; Svenningsson, P; Tedroff, J; Tsitsi, P; Wictorin, K, 2020
)
0.56
"IRL752 appears to be safe and well tolerated for a 4-week treatment in patients with Parkinson's disease and dementia."( A Phase 2a Trial Investigating the Safety and Tolerability of the Novel Cortical Enhancer IRL752 in Parkinson's Disease Dementia.
Bergquist, F; Dizdar, N; Grigoriou, S; Hansson, F; Johansson, A; Nyholm, D; Odin, P; Rinne, J; Sonesson, C; Svenningsson, P; Tedroff, J; Tsitsi, P; Wictorin, K, 2020
)
0.56
" Adverse events occurred in 58."( Efficacy and safety of safinamide as an add-on therapy to L-DOPA for patients with Parkinson's disease: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II/III study.
Hattori, N; Nomoto, M; Sasagawa, Y; Tsuboi, Y; Yamamoto, A, 2020
)
0.56
" Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 78."( Long-term safety and efficacy of safinamide as add-on therapy in levodopa-treated Japanese patients with Parkinson's disease with wearing-off: Results of an open-label study.
Hattori, N; Nomoto, M; Sasagawa, Y; Tsuboi, Y; Yamamoto, A, 2020
)
0.8
"The results of the present study confirm that the overnight switch from rasagiline to safinamide is safe and well tolerated by patients."( Overnight switch from rasagiline to safinamide in Parkinson's disease patients with motor fluctuations: a tolerability and safety study.
Caminiti, G; Casali, M; D'Antoni, V; Grassini, P; Stocchi, F; Tomino, C; Torti, M; Vacca, L; Volterrani, M, 2021
)
0.62
" Other safety assessments included dyskinesia and adverse events (AEs)."( A 12-month, dose-level blinded safety and efficacy study of levodopa inhalation powder (CVT-301, Inbrija) in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Farbman, ES; Hauser, RA; Klingler, M; Lee, A; LeWitt, PA; Oh, C; Qian, J; Rudzińska, M; Waters, CH, 2020
)
0.8
"Nilotinib was safe and tolerated, and no adverse effects seemed to be related to the drug, and no differences in adverse events were observed between groups."( Long-Term Safety and Clinical Effects of Nilotinib in Parkinson's Disease.
Ahn, J; Ferrante, D; Hebron, ML; Matar, S; Moussa, C; Mulki, S; Pagan, FL; Torres-Yaghi, Y; Wilmarth, B, 2021
)
0.62
"This study provides evidence that nilotinib is safe and tolerated in Parkinson's disease."( Long-Term Safety and Clinical Effects of Nilotinib in Parkinson's Disease.
Ahn, J; Ferrante, D; Hebron, ML; Matar, S; Moussa, C; Mulki, S; Pagan, FL; Torres-Yaghi, Y; Wilmarth, B, 2021
)
0.62
"We searched PubMed for studies on PD patients treated with tolcapone, documenting the following outcomes: liver enzyme, adverse events (AEs), daily Off-time, levodopa daily dose, unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (UPDRS) part-III, quality of life (QoL), and non-motor symptoms."( Safety and efficacy of tolcapone in Parkinson's disease: systematic review.
Artusi, CA; Fabbri, M; Imbalzano, G; Lopiano, L; Sarro, L, 2021
)
0.82
" Safety was monitored via adverse events, laboratory testing, and physical, cardiovascular and neurological examinations."( Long-term safety and efficacy of opicapone in Japanese Parkinson's patients with motor fluctuations.
Hattori, N; Maeda, T; Nishimura, A; Nomoto, M; Takahashi, R; Takeda, A; Tsuboi, Y; Yoshida, K, 2021
)
0.62
" Moreover, patients will be actively monitored with regard to the occurrence of side effects of evaluated therapies, as well as adverse events that may be related to insufficient platelet inhibition (no-reflow phenomenon assessed immediately after PCI, administration of GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors during PCI, acute stent thrombosis)."( ANalgesic Efficacy and safety of MOrphiNe versus methoxyflurane in patients with acute myocardial infarction: the rationale and design of the ANEMON-SIRIO 3 study: a multicentre, open-label, phase II, randomised clinical trial.
Adamski, P; Buszko, K; Gasior, M; Gorący, J; Kleinrok, A; Kosobucka, A; Kubica, A; Kubica, J; Lesiak, M; Nadolny, K; Navarese, E; Niezgoda, P; Wojakowski, W, 2021
)
0.62
" Various LCIG procedure/device-associated adverse events (AEs) have been reported; however, reports on their treatment have been limited."( The impact of tube replacement timing during LCIG therapy on PEG-J associated adverse events: a retrospective multicenter observational study.
Fujioka, S; Fukuchi, T; Furukawa, K; Furune, S; Ikeda, Y; Jin, X; Kato, M; Koike, T; Kubota, E; Murakami, H; Sato, Y; Suzuki, T; Tsuboi, Y; Uehara, T; Yamashita, K; Yamazaki, Y; Yube, Y, 2021
)
0.62
" Therefore, the LCIG treatment is feasible and safe and is a unique treatment option for PD, requiring endoscopists' understanding and cooperation."( The impact of tube replacement timing during LCIG therapy on PEG-J associated adverse events: a retrospective multicenter observational study.
Fujioka, S; Fukuchi, T; Furukawa, K; Furune, S; Ikeda, Y; Jin, X; Kato, M; Koike, T; Kubota, E; Murakami, H; Sato, Y; Suzuki, T; Tsuboi, Y; Uehara, T; Yamashita, K; Yamazaki, Y; Yube, Y, 2021
)
0.62
"In summary, PIG-J insertion is safe with a similar complication rate to traditional PEG-J, well tolerated and effective for use in LCIG administration."( Per-oral image guided gastrojejunostomy insertion for levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in Parkinson's disease is safe and may be advantageous.
Baig, F; Boca, M; Cheminais, L; Collin, N; Mooney, L; Rolinski, M; Selikhova, M; Szewczyk-Krolikowski, K; Whone, A, 2021
)
0.87
"Drugs affecting dopaminergic neurotransmission may exert toxic and beneficial effects that persist after discontinuation by modulating gene expression in key brain regions."( Converging dopaminergic neurotoxicity mechanisms of antipsychotics, methamphetamine and levodopa.
Dimitriou, A; Efthimiou, P; Karveli, M; Lagadinou, M; Skaltsa, M; Tsigkou, A; Velissaris, D; Zareifopoulos, N, 2021
)
0.84
"The dopaminergic neurotoxins 6-oxidopamine and 1-methyl-4-phenyl-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) promote oxidative stress and inhibit mitochondrial function, while their affinity for the dopamine transporter ensures they are attain toxic intracellular concentrations exclusively in dopaminergic neurons."( Converging dopaminergic neurotoxicity mechanisms of antipsychotics, methamphetamine and levodopa.
Dimitriou, A; Efthimiou, P; Karveli, M; Lagadinou, M; Skaltsa, M; Tsigkou, A; Velissaris, D; Zareifopoulos, N, 2021
)
0.84
"Safinamide was well tolerated as a treatment for PD, and there was no significant difference in the frequency and severity of adverse events between the safinamide and placebo groups."( Efficacy and safety evaluation of safinamide as an add-on treatment to levodopa for parkinson's disease.
Fujioka, S; Kurihara, K; Mishima, T; Tsuboi, Y, 2022
)
0.95
" The outcomes of interest were as follows: the efficacy, unified Parkinson disease rating scale (UPDRS) scores, Hamilton depression rating scale score or adverse events."( Efficacy and safety of combination therapy with pramipexole and levodopa vs levodopa monotherapy in patients with Parkinson disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Jiang, DQ; Jiang, LL; Li, MX; Lu, CS; Wang, Y, 2021
)
0.86
" Pivotal secondary endpoints were changes in the sub-items of UDRS, Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part III, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs)."( Efficacy and safety of istradefylline in patients with Parkinson's disease presenting with postural abnormalities: Results from a multicenter, prospective, and open-label exploratory study in Japan.
Ito, H; Kajimoto, Y; Koh, J; Mori, A; Shimokawa, T; Takahashi, M; Takeshima, T; Yamashita, H, 2022
)
0.72
" Eligible studies were synthesized for efficacy, tolerability, OFF time, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III score, ON state with dyskinesia, and the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events."( Efficacy and safety of istradefylline for Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Chen, B; Feng, ST; Hu, D; Wang, XL; Wang, ZZ; Zhang, Y, 2022
)
0.72
" A total of 43 minor complications and 16 serious adverse events were reported."( [Adverse effects and complications of continuous intestinal infusion of levodopa-carbidopa in a cohort of patients with Parkinson's disease in a tertiary hospital].
Baviera-Muñoz, R; Campins-Romeu, M; Losada-López, M; Martínez-Torres, I; Morata-Martínez, C; Pérez-García, J; Pons-Beltrán, V; Sastre-Bataller, I, 2022
)
0.95
" Oxidative stress is regarded as an important starting factor for neuronal cell loss and necrosis, is one of the causes of Parkinson's disease (PD), and is considered to be the cause of adverse reactions caused by the current PD commonly used treatment drug levodopa (l-DA)."( Fucoxanthin Prevents Long-Term Administration l-DOPA-Induced Neurotoxicity through the ERK/JNK-c-Jun System in 6-OHDA-Lesioned Mice and PC12 Cells.
Chen, H; Chen, J; Chen, S; Li, Q; Liu, J; Lu, Y; Shao, F; Tang, M; Wu, W; Xu, Z; Yang, D; Zhai, L, 2022
)
0.9
"We conducted a retrospective analysis of 79 PD patients treated with LCIG between 2005 and 2020 in two Italian Neurological Centers, recording all adverse events (AEs), including weight loss (WL)."( Long-term safety, discontinuation and mortality in an Italian cohort with advanced Parkinson's disease on levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel infusion.
Antonini, A; Biundo, R; Calandrella, D; Carecchio, M; Carrer, T; Del Sorbo, F; Farinati, F; Garrì, F; Mainardi, M; Pezzoli, G; Pistonesi, F; Russo, FP; Sandre, M; Savarino, E; Soliveri, P; Weis, L; Zecchinelli, AL, 2022
)
0.93
" However, it requires invasive percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy (PEG-J) and may be associated with serious adverse effects (AE)."( Adverse effects of levodopa/carbidopa intrajejunal gel treatment: A single-center long-term follow-up study.
Kramberger, MG; Križnar, NZ; Ocepek, L; Pirtošek, Z; Premzl, M; Rajnar, R; Rus, T; Trošt, M, 2022
)
1.05
" The adverse drug reactions were those already described in the patients' information leaflet."( Effectiveness and safety of safinamide in routine clinical practice in a Belgian Parkinson's disease population: an open-label, levodopa add-on study.
Bergmans, B; Bourgeois, P; Cras, P; De Klippel, N; Dethy, S; Franco, G; Garraux, G; Geens, K; Jacquerye, P; Jeanjean, A; Krygier, C; Supiot, F; Van der Linden, C, 2023
)
1.12
" Over this 4-week trial, and after a 4-month follow-up visit, levodopa/carbidopa treatment had no significant effect on ocular tolerability and anterior surface integrity, visual function, ocular health, refraction/ocular biometry, and did not induce any non-ocular adverse events."( The safety and tolerability of levodopa eye drops for the treatment of ocular disorders: A randomized first-in-human study.
Anstice, N; Ashby, R; Game, J; Jong, T; Karouta, C; Leung, M; Maddess, T; Morgan, IG; Sabeti, F; Thomson, K, 2022
)
1.25
" Safety was evaluated through the frequency of adverse events and serious adverse events, physical examination, vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiograms, and laboratory exams."( The XINDI Study: A Randomized Phase III Clinical Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Safinamide as Add-On Therapy to Levodopa in Chinese Patients with Parkinson's Disease with Motor Fluctuations.
Cattaneo, C; Chen, S; Dong, X; Liu, C; Lu, Z; Pan, X; Shang, H; Sun, X; Tan, Y; Tao, E; Tian, Y; Wang, B; Wei, Q; Xu, P, 2022
)
0.93
" There were no significant between-group differences for adverse events or serious adverse events."( The XINDI Study: A Randomized Phase III Clinical Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Safinamide as Add-On Therapy to Levodopa in Chinese Patients with Parkinson's Disease with Motor Fluctuations.
Cattaneo, C; Chen, S; Dong, X; Liu, C; Lu, Z; Pan, X; Shang, H; Sun, X; Tan, Y; Tao, E; Tian, Y; Wang, B; Wei, Q; Xu, P, 2022
)
0.93
" Pramipexole ER ranked first in overall withdrawals, and rotigotine transdermal patch ranked first in the incidence of adverse events (≥1 AEs)."( Efficacy and safety of non-ergot dopamine-receptor agonists as an adjunct to levodopa in advanced Parkinson's disease: A network meta-analysis.
Chen, FF; Chen, XT; Wen, SY; Zhang, Q; Zhou, CQ, 2023
)
1.14
" We collected demographic data, disease and treatment histories, and recorded adverse events and adverse drug reactions (ADRs)."( Safety and effectiveness of istradefylline as add-on therapy to levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: Final report of a post-marketing surveillance study in Japan.
Horiguchi, S; Ito, S; Takahashi, M; Tsuji, Y, 2022
)
0.96
" Adverse events were reported in 63 (85%) of 74 patients in the foslevodopa-foscarbidopa group versus 42 (63%) of 67 in the levodopa-carbidopa group, and incidences of serious adverse events were similar between the groups (six [8%] of 74 vs four [6%] of 67, respectively)."( Safety and efficacy of continuous subcutaneous foslevodopa-foscarbidopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.
Aldred, J; Budur, K; Facheris, MF; Fisseha, N; Fung, VS; Hauser, RA; Jeong, A; Kimber, TE; Klos, K; Litvan, I; O'Neill, D; Robieson, WZ; Soileau, MJ; Spindler, MA; Standaert, DG; Talapala, S; Vaou, EO; Zheng, H, 2022
)
1.21
" For safety outcomes, rasagiline was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events than placebo and safinamide."( Comparative efficacy and safety of monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors plus channel blockers and monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors as adjuvant therapy to levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled
Cai, G; Cai, H; Cui, Y; Feng, T; Lin, F; Su, D; Yan, R, 2023
)
1.11
" Rasagiline is generally safe and well tolerated in Chinese PD patients."( Safety and Effectiveness of Rasagiline in Chinese Patients with Parkinson's Disease: A Prospective, Multicenter, Non-interventional Post-marketing Study.
Cao, S; Chen, H; Hu, X; Liang, Z; Liu, Z; Mao, W; Shao, M; Song, Z; Su, W; Tang, B; Wei, W; Wu, Y; Zhang, K, 2023
)
0.91
" Only one medication has demonstrated improvement in dyskinesia in levodopa-treated PD patients; however, every patient cannot tolerate it and therefore adjunctive therapy should be tailored to an individual's symptoms and risk for specific adverse effects."( Safety review of current pharmacotherapies for levodopa-treated patients with Parkinson's disease.
Lyons, KE; Pahwa, R; Richmond, AM,
)
0.62
" The review included patients diagnosed with chorea and NKX2-1-RD genetic diagnosis, drug therapy as intervention, no comparator, and outcomes of chorea improvement and adverse events."( Systematic review of drug therapy for chorea in NXK2-1-related disorders: Efficacy and safety evidence from case studies and series.
Bachoud-Lévi, AC; Blasco-Amaro, JA; Capuano, A; Isabel-Gómez, R; Martín-Gómez, C; Nou-Fontanet, L; Ortigoza-Escobar, JD; Zorzi, G, 2023
)
0.91
" No clinical improvements were observed with carbidopa/levodopa, tetrabenazine, or clonazepam, and various adverse effects were reported."( Systematic review of drug therapy for chorea in NXK2-1-related disorders: Efficacy and safety evidence from case studies and series.
Bachoud-Lévi, AC; Blasco-Amaro, JA; Capuano, A; Isabel-Gómez, R; Martín-Gómez, C; Nou-Fontanet, L; Ortigoza-Escobar, JD; Zorzi, G, 2023
)
1.16
" Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) total score and UPDRS part III score during on time were used to measure the overall severity of PD and motor complications, respectively, while the severity of adverse events was evaluated following the investigators' criteria."( SYNAPSES. A European observational study to evaluate the safety and the effectiveness of safinamide in routine clinical practice: post-hoc analysis of the Spanish study population.
Avilés, A; Esquivel, A; Freire-Álvarez, E; Gómez-Esteban, JC; Kulisevsky, J; Legarda-Ramírez, I; Mata-Álvarez-Santullano, M, 2023
)
0.91
" Increased safety concerns were undetected in any patient subgroup, although patients with cognitive impairment showed a slightly higher frequency of adverse events."( SYNAPSES. A European observational study to evaluate the safety and the effectiveness of safinamide in routine clinical practice: post-hoc analysis of the Spanish study population.
Avilés, A; Esquivel, A; Freire-Álvarez, E; Gómez-Esteban, JC; Kulisevsky, J; Legarda-Ramírez, I; Mata-Álvarez-Santullano, M, 2023
)
0.91
"This subanalysis further supports safinamide use as a safe and efficacious option for the management of motor fluctuations in different subgroups of levodopa-treated patients."( SYNAPSES. A European observational study to evaluate the safety and the effectiveness of safinamide in routine clinical practice: post-hoc analysis of the Spanish study population.
Avilés, A; Esquivel, A; Freire-Álvarez, E; Gómez-Esteban, JC; Kulisevsky, J; Legarda-Ramírez, I; Mata-Álvarez-Santullano, M, 2023
)
1.11
" Secondary objectives include exploring whether FMT leads to alterations in motor complications (fluctuations and dyskinesias) and PD motor and non-motor symptoms (including constipation), determining alterations in gut microbiota composition, assessing donor-recipient microbiota similarities and their association with PD symptoms and motor complications, evaluating the ease of the study protocol and examining FMT-related adverse events in patients with PD."( Safety and feasibility of faecal microbiota transplantation for patients with Parkinson's disease: a protocol for a self-controlled interventional donor-FMT pilot study.
Chernova, VO; Contarino, MF; Kuijper, EJ; Terveer, EM; van Hilten, JJ; Vendrik, KE, 2023
)
0.91
" The adverse events described were mild, with generalised weakness, dizziness, nausea, headache and alopecia."( Effectiveness and safety of safinamide in the Toledo Movement Disorders Unit.
Diezma-Martín, A; García-Meléndez, DD; López-Ariztegui, N; Morales-Casado, MI, 2023
)
0.91
"Safinamide has been shown to be effective and safe in improving motor fluctuations, motor symptoms and the subjective perception of disease severity in PD patients previously receiving rasagiline and in those receiving low-dose safinamide, all of which is accompanied by a good safety profile."( Effectiveness and safety of safinamide in the Toledo Movement Disorders Unit.
Diezma-Martín, A; García-Meléndez, DD; López-Ariztegui, N; Morales-Casado, MI, 2023
)
0.91

Pharmacokinetics

Entacapone increased statistically significantly the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of levodopa by 29% after a single dose and by 21% after 4 weeks' administration. Tolcapone increased the bioavailability (A UC 0-infinity) and apparent elimination half-life (t(1/2)) of levdopa by 80 and 40%, respectively, compared to placebo.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
" Thus, decarboxylase inhibition failed to alter the plasma half-life of levodopa."( Levodopa pharmacokinetics. Alterations after benserazide, a decarboxylase inhibitor.
Connor, JD; Doller, HJ; Dvorchik, BH; Lock, DR; Sloviter, RS; Vesell, ES,
)
1.81
" This review summarises that available pharmacokinetic data involving levodopa, especially as it relates to therapeutic response of parkinsonian patients."( Clinical pharmacokinetics of levodopa in parkinson's disease.
Bianchine, JR; Shaw, GM, 1976
)
0.78
" The plasma half-life clearance, volume of distribution, and maximum plasma concentrations of levodopa did not differ among groups."( Effect of long-term therapy on the pharmacodynamics of levodopa. Relation to on-off phenomenon.
Carter, JH; Gancher, ST; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1992
)
0.75
") pharmacokinetic profile of two controlled-release products of levodopa (Madopar HBS and Sinemet CR) was compared to conventional Madopar capsules in 18 healthy volunteers in a cross-over, randomized design."( Comparative multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of controlled-release levodopa products.
Collin, C; Eckernäs, SA; Grahnén, A; Ling-Andersson, A; Nilsson, M; Tiger, G, 1992
)
0.76
" Most management problems are related to the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of levodopa."( Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa.
Montgomery, EB, 1992
)
0.77
" administration of L-dopa, but had no effect on the half-life (t1/2) for its distribution or elimination."( Peripheral pharmacokinetic handling and metabolism of L-dopa in the rat: the effect of route of administration and carbidopa pretreatment.
Jenner, P; Marsden, CD; Rose, S, 1991
)
0.28
" The pharmacokinetic and clinical data of these patients were compared retrospectively with those of Parkinsonian patients with fluctuations in motor performance but with preserved clinical responses to single oral doses of levodopa."( Clinical and pharmacokinetic comparison of oral and duodenal delivery of levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease with a fluctuating response to levodopa.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Michotte, Y, 1991
)
0.7
"We address, from a pharmacokinetic viewpoint, the important question of why some patients with clinical idiopathic Parkinson's disease experience a fall off in benefit from levodopa maintenance therapy."( Effect of duration of levodopa/decarboxylase inhibitor therapy on the pharmacokinetic handling of levodopa in elderly patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease.
Bowes, SG; Deshmukh, AA; Dobbs, RJ; Dobbs, SM; Leeman, AL; Nicholson, PW; O'Neill, CJ, 1991
)
0.79
"kg-1) and a longer plasma elimination half-life (67."( Effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of oral levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Riva, R, 1991
)
0.54
" After training, only a limited number of these models, could explain the pharmacodynamic data observed by Mouradian et al."( A computational model of levodopa pharmacodynamics in Parkinson's disease.
Jamieson, PW, 1991
)
0.58
" For comparison, the pharmacokinetic parameters of both compounds were simultaneously determined in plasma using blood collection."( In vivo pharmacokinetics of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa in muscle. A microdialysis study.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Michotte, Y; Sarre, S, 1991
)
0.58
" route, elimination followed apparent first order kinetics and was biphasic with a t 1/2 alpha of 7 min and terminal half-life of 67 min."( Pharmacokinetics, bioavailability, metabolism, tissue distribution and urinary excretion of gamma-L-glutamyl-L-dopa in the rat.
Cummings, J; Matheson, LM; Maurice, L; Smyth, JF, 1990
)
0.28
" These data suggest that pulsatile levodopa administration does not acutely alter dopamine receptor responsiveness, and that other pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors contribute to the dose-to-dose variability in response to levodopa."( Acute effects of pulsatile levodopa administration on central dopamine pharmacodynamics.
Baronti, F; Brughitta, G; Davis, TL; Mouradian, MM, 1991
)
0.86
"Five patients with severe Parkinson's disease were characterized with respect to their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to levodopa given: orally, intravenously (three different infusion rates) and intraduodenally."( Pharmacokinetics and effects of levodopa in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Aquilonius, SM; Bredberg, E; Paalzow, L; Tedroff, J, 1990
)
0.77
"" Pharmacokinetic studies revealed no effect of deprenyl on the plasma levodopa concentration vs."( L-deprenyl, levodopa pharmacokinetics, and response fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Cedarbaum, JM; Clark, M; Harts, A; Kutt, H; Silvestri, M, 1990
)
0.89
" Dyskinesias may be considered a secondary pharmacodynamic consequence of such pharmacokinetically induced oscillations in brain dopamine levels."( Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations in management of motor response fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Cedarbaum, JM, 1990
)
0.28
"Eight parkinsonian patients participated in a pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic study of sequential doses of controlled-release carbidopa (CD)/levodopa (LD) at 4-hour intervals, with serial blood samples obtained before and after each dose."( Pharmacodynamic modeling of concentration-effect relationships after controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (Sinemet CR4) in Parkinson's disease.
Berchou, RC; Galloway, MP; Kareti, D; LeWitt, PA; Nelson, MV, 1990
)
0.7
" The disappearance of L-dopa from plasma and cisternal CSF compartments fits an open, two-compartment pharmacokinetic model."( L-dopa pharmacokinetics in plasma and cisternal and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid of monkeys.
Boucher, B; Gliessman, P; Hammerstad, JP; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1990
)
0.28
"To assess the relative influence of central pharmacodynamic and peripheral pharmacokinetic factors on the duration of motor response to levodopa, the relationship between motor function and plasma levodopa levels was studied in 31 Parkinsonian patients."( Levodopa peripheral pharmacokinetics and duration of motor response in Parkinson's disease.
Bovingdon, M; Frankel, JP; Kempster, PA; Lees, AJ; Stern, GM; Webster, R, 1989
)
1.92
" Delayed onset of antiparkinsonian effect of CR-4, resulting from an increase of Tmax for levodopa, was one of the major complaints and required additional small amounts of standard levodopa in three patients."( Clinical and pharmacokinetic evaluation of controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa (CR-4) in parkinsonian patients with severe motor fluctuations: a six month follow-up study.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Jacques, M; Michotte, Y, 1989
)
0.74
"Seventeen patients with advanced Parkinson's disease who had fluctuations in motor performance while taking standard Sinemet (STD) 25/100 underwent daylong pharmacokinetic and clinical observation studies while taking both STD and Sinemet CR, a new controlled-release formulation containing 50 mg carbidopa and 200 mg levodopa."( A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of Sinemet CR (50/200) and standard Sinemet (25/100).
Cedarbaum, JM; Kutt, H; McDowell, FH, 1989
)
0.45
" Several hypotheses have explained the advantage of the combined treatment by a pharmacodynamic interaction in the striatum."( The influence of levodopa in the pharmacokinetics of bromocriptine in Parkinson's disease.
Bar, M; Graff, E; Isakov, A; Oberman, Z; Rabey, JM; Scharf, M, 1989
)
0.62
" These observations were consistent with the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the formulation."( Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of Sinemet CR: a summary of human studies.
August, TF; Bush, DF; Lasseter, KC; Musson, DG; Schwartz, S; Smith, ME; Titus, DC; Yeh, KC, 1989
)
0.28
" With pharmacokinetic studies correlated to clinical ratings, plasma levodopa was less variable during Sinemet CR treatment, and clinical responses showed greater uniformity."( Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (Sinemet 50/200 CR4): clinical and pharmacokinetic studies.
Berchou, RC; Galloway, MP; Kareti, D; Kesaree, N; LeWitt, PA; Nelson, MV; Schlick, P, 1989
)
0.8
" Delayed onset of antiparkinsonian effect of CR, resulting from an increase of Tmax for levodopa, was one of the major patient complaints and required additional small amounts of standard levodopa in some patients."( Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (CR) in parkinsonian patients with response fluctuations on standard levodopa treatment: clinical and pharmacokinetic observations.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Jacques, M; Michotte, Y, 1989
)
0.79
" Mean L-DOPA plasma concentrations were fitted to a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model."( Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of L-dopa plasma concentrations and clinical effects in Parkinson's disease after Sinemet.
Berchou, RC; Galloway, MP; Kareti, D; Kesaree, N; Lewitt, PA; Nelson, MV; Schlick, P, 1989
)
0.28
" In 11 of 15 subjects, the disappearance of drug could be described by a two-compartment model, with a distribution half-life of 5 minutes and an elimination half-life of 33 minutes."( Peripheral pharmacokinetics of apomorphine in humans.
Boucher, B; Gancher, ST; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1989
)
0.28
" This, in turn, is influenced by the fluctuating plasma concentrations of levodopa produced by the drug's short half-life and erratic absorption, and by modifiable transport at the blood-brain barrier."( On-off phenomenon: relation to levodopa pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.
Nutt, JG, 1987
)
0.79
"The principal peripheral pharmacokinetic parameters of the levodopa/carbidopa association were investigated in 11 healthy volunteers and in 16 patients at various stages of Parkinson disease, with and without the on-off phenomenon."( Peripheral pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa/carbidopa and the on-off phenomenon in parkinsonian patients.
Bergamasco, B; Chiadò, I; De Gennaro, T; Delsedime, M; Gilli, M; Rainero, I; Riccio, A, 1988
)
0.78
"The contribution of the peripheral and central pharmacokinetic mechanisms of levodopa to the pathogenesis of the motor fluctuations that complicate its long-term administration was studied in 28 parkinsonian patients."( Levodopa pharmacokinetic mechanisms and motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Chase, TN; Fabbrini, G; Juncos, J; Mouradian, MM; Serrati, C, 1987
)
1.94
" There was no evidence of idiosyncratic pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic responses to levodopa to explain the fluctuating response."( Levodopa pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in fluctuating parkinsonian patients.
Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1986
)
1.94
" 163) on the serum t1/2 and other pharmacokinetic parameters of co-administered L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) were compared to those of the reversible inhibitor, carbidopa in rats."( A comparison of the effects of reversible and irreversible inhibitors of aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase on the half-life and other pharmacokinetic parameters of oral L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine.
Haegele, KD; Huebert, ND; Palfreyman, MG,
)
0.13
"The relationship between the dose of levodopa and its pharmacokinetic behavior following intravenous and oral administration was investigated in dogs and parkinsonian patients."( Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa III: Influence of dose on pharmacokinetic behavior of levodopa in dogs and Parkinsonian patients.
Habara, T; Morioka, T; Nakajima, E; Nitanai, T; Sasahara, K, 1980
)
0.78
" Also, despite the differences in dose, the values of the Cmax were similar, with average values of 12."( Pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of rectal apomorphine in patients with Parkinson's disease: a study of five different suppositories.
Danhof, M; Jansen, EN; Neef, C; Roos, RA; van Laar, T, 1995
)
0.29
" The dopamine concentration in the striatum increased immediately after L-dopa injection, with the peak concentration (15."( Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies of L-dopa in rats. II. Effect of L-dopa on dopamine and dopamine metabolite concentration in rat striatum.
Koitabashi, T; Koshiro, A; Sato, S, 1994
)
0.29
" Pretreatment with carbidopa had no significant effect on the pharmacokinetic parameters of L-dopa in blood plasma, but resulted in an increase in the area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) and elimination half-life (t1/2) of L-dopa in muscle ECF (0."( The effect of carbidopa and entacapone pretreatment on the L-dopa pharmacokinetics and metabolism in blood plasma and skeletal muscle in beagle dog: an in vivo microdialysis study.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Michotte, Y; Sarre, S, 1995
)
0.29
" The present study, therefore, compared single dose kinetics and pharmacodynamic effects of three dosages of L-dopa/bensearazid-s."( [Slow-release L-dopa vs. standard L-dopa in Parkinson patients in various stages of the disease. Studies of pharmacokinetics and motor effectiveness].
Baas, H; Bergemann, N; Fischer, PA, 1994
)
0.29
" The pharmacokinetic variables were then compared in both tissues with noncompartmental modeling."( Simultaneous in vivo microdialysis in plasma and skeletal muscle: a study of the pharmacokinetic properties of levodopa by noncompartmental analysis.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Michotte, Y; Sarre, S, 1994
)
0.5
" We conclude that inhibition of COMT by entacapone increases the plasma half-life of levodopa and augments the antiparkinsonian effects of single and repeated doses of levodopa."( Effect of peripheral catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibition on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa in parkinsonian patients.
Beckner, RM; Berggren, K; Carter, JH; Gancher, ST; Gordin, A; Hammerstad, JP; Nutt, JG; Stone, CK; Woodward, WR, 1994
)
0.72
" Conversely, levodopa equilibration half-life between plasma and effect-site concentration was five-fold shorter on average in fluctuating patients."( Pharmacodynamic modeling of oral levodopa: clinical application in Parkinson's disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Martinelli, P; Riva, R, 1993
)
0.94
" Plasma concentrations of levodopa; its metabolites 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD), 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), and homovanillic acid (HVA); as well as carbidopa and entacapone were determined for pharmacokinetic calculations."( The effect of catechol-O-methyl transferase inhibition by entacapone on the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of levodopa in healthy volunteers.
Gordin, A; Harjola, VP; Karlsson, M; Keränen, T; Korpela, K; Pentikäinen, PJ; Rita, H; Seppälä, L; Wikberg, T, 1993
)
0.8
" Tolcapone increased the area under the concentration-time curve and elimination half-life of levodopa."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction between the COMT inhibitor tolcapone and single-dose levodopa.
Da Prada, M; Dingemanse, J; Jorga, K; Schmitt, M; Sedek, G; Van Brummelen, P; Zürcher, G, 1995
)
0.73
" Plasma levodopa and levodopa metabolite pharmacokinetic profiles were determined using standard techniques."( A clinical and pharmacokinetic case study of an interaction of levodopa and antituberculous therapy in Parkinson's disease.
O'Connell, MT; Patsalos, PN; Quinn, NP; Wenning, GK, 1995
)
0.97
" The mean plasma concentration-time curves on each occasion were essentially superimposable and there were no significant differences in any calculated pharmacokinetic parameter."( The effect of selegiline on the peripheral pharmacokinetics of levodopa in young volunteers.
Macklin, BS; O'Shea, N; Renwick, AG; Roberts, J; Waller, DG, 1995
)
0.53
" Plasma concentrations of levodopa, 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD), 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), homovanillic acid (HVA), carbidopa, and entacapone were determined for pharmacokinetic calculations."( Effect of entacapone, a COMT inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of levodopa after administration of controlled-release levodopa-carbidopa in volunteers.
Ahtila, S; Gordin, A; Heinävaara, S; Kaakkola, S; Karlsson, M; Korpela, K; Männistö, PT; Tuomainen, P; Wikberg, T, 1995
)
0.82
" Entacapone increased statistically significantly the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of levodopa by 29% after a single dose and by 21% after 4 weeks' administration, without affecting other pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa."( Effect of one month's treatment with peripherally acting catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, entacapone, on pharmacokinetics and motor response to levodopa in advanced parkinsonian patients.
Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM, 1996
)
0.7
"A pharmacokinetic model of oral levodopa is proposed to elucidate the effects of carbidopa on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa."( Pharmacokinetic model of oral levodopa and role of carbidopa in parkinsonian patients.
Hasegawa, T; Mizutani, Y; Nabeshima, T; Ogawa, M; Okada, Y, 1995
)
0.86
" The levodopa plasma half-life is very short, resulting in marked plasma drug concentration fluctuations which are matched, as the disease progresses, with swings in the therapeutic response ('wearing-off' phenomena)."( Pharmacokinetic optimisation in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Riva, R, 1996
)
0.81
"We compared the pharmacokinetic and motor responses of Sinemet and Atamet (generic carbidopa/levodopa) in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Pharmacokinetic comparison of Sinemet and Atamet (generic carbidopa/levodopa): a single-dose study.
Koller, WC; Lyons, K; Marjama, J; McGuire, D; Pahwa, R; Silverstein, P; Ward, R; Zwiebel, F, 1996
)
0.75
" Most of these data to levodopa pharmacodynamics can be explained by a model which is presented in this paper and which is mainly based on cerebral pharmacokinetic mechanisms."( Fluctuations in Parkinson's disease. Pathogenetic significance of levodopa's cerebral pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.
Baas, H; Bürklin, F; Demisch, L; Fischer, PA; Harder, S; Stecker, K, 1995
)
0.84
" A moment analysis was also made to obtain pharmacokinetic parameters."( In vivo microdialysis to determine the relative pharmacokinetics of drugs.
Ichikawa, M; Matsuyama, K; Nakashima, M; Nakashima, MN; Sakurai, M; Sasaki, H; Zhao, MF, 1996
)
0.29
" A temporal variation of the kinetics of both L-dopa and carbidopa was demonstrated with higher plasma clearance and lower area under concentration curve after the administration at 2200 hours."( Circadian phase dependent pharmacokinetics of L-dopa, its main metabolites (3-OMD, HVA, DOPAC) and carbidopa in rats.
Andre, MH; Bruguerolle, B; Grignon, S, 1996
)
0.29
" Levodopa plasma concentration data and motor effect behaviour (tapping times) were obtained from 46 patients, for whom a total of 970 observations were available (approximately 21 pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic observations per patient)."( Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral levodopa in parkinsonian patients.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Charles, BG; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Martinelli, P; Riva, R; Triggs, EJ, 1996
)
1.45
"In the final regression models the Hoehn and Yahr (HY) status of the patient and duration of disease (DUR) were found to be important determinants of the pharmacodynamic parameters for levodopa."( Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral levodopa in parkinsonian patients.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Charles, BG; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Martinelli, P; Riva, R; Triggs, EJ, 1996
)
0.73
"In a clinical setting knowledge of the population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters for oral levodopa may prove useful in estimating the duration of the drug's beneficial motor activity in patients with mild to severe Parkinson's disease (Hoehn and Yahr status I-IV)."( Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral levodopa in parkinsonian patients.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Charles, BG; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Martinelli, P; Riva, R; Triggs, EJ, 1996
)
0.75
" Tolcapone had similar effects on plasma levodopa concentrations with the standard-release formulations: half-life and bioavailability increased approximately 2-fold compared with placebo, and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and time to Cmax (tmax) were unaffected, except for a slight increase in Cmax with the levodopa/benserazide 200/ 50 mg formulation."( The effect of COMT inhibition by tolcapone on tolerability and pharmacokinetics of different levodopa/benserazide formulations.
Aitken, J; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Nielsen, T; Schmitt, M; Zürcher, G, 1997
)
0.78
" As predicted from the plasma half-life (1."( Controlled release levodopa/carbidopa 25/100 (Sinemet CR 25/100): pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy in untreated parkinsonian patients.
Block, GA; Cyhan, G; Gancher, ST; Hammerstad, JP; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1994
)
0.62
"Previous investigations on the mutual pharmacokinetic influence of L-dopa and dopamine agonists in Parkinson's disease (PD) have shown controversial results."( Clinical and pharmacokinetic evaluation of L-dopa and cabergoline cotreatment in Parkinson's disease.
Bonuccelli, U; Colzi, A; Del Dotto, P; Fariello, R; Musatti, E; Persiani, S; Strolin Benedetti, M, 1997
)
0.3
" Nevertheless, the pharmacokinetic profile of the preparation has a number of advantages over that of Sinemet, in that it offers a steadier climb to peak plasma concentrations that are less extreme and of greater duration."( Pharmacokinetics of continuous-release carbidopa/levodopa.
Mark, MH; Sage, JI, 1994
)
0.54
" All patients underwent 10-h pharmacokinetic and clinical evaluations while on Std-L and again while on L-CR."( Comparison of standard carbidopa-levodopa and sustained-release carbidopa-levodopa in Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic and quality-of-life measures.
Koller, WC; Lyons, K; McGuire, D; Pahwa, R; Robischon, M; Silverstein, P; Zwiebel, F, 1997
)
0.58
" The peak levodopa concentration (Cmax) and the area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) were markedly increased after long-term levodopa therapy, whereas the time to the peak concentration (Tmax) and the elimination half-life (T(1/2)) were decreased."( Effects of chronic levodopa therapy on dopa pharmacokinetics.
Kanazawa, I; Murata, M, 1997
)
1.03
" It has an appropriate receptor affinity profile, with potent and long-lasting dopaminergic stimulatory effects in 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned rats and in MPTP (1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,5,6-tetrahydropyridine)-lesioned primates; it has a consistent pharmacokinetic profile, with a very long mean plasma elimination half-life of 65 to 110 hours, and its absorption and excretion are unaffected by food, age or renal or hepatic disease; moreover, when given concomitantly, cabergoline does not influence levodopa pharmacokinetics."( Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic features of cabergoline. Rationale for use in Parkinson's disease.
Fariello, RG, 1998
)
0.46
"The modification of the pharmacodynamic response to a single oral dose of levodopa/benserazide by the coadministration of the dopamine agonist apomorphine was investigated in parkinsonian patients with end-of-dose motor fluctuations."( Pharmacodynamics of levodopa coadministered with apomorphine in parkinsonian patients with end-of-dose motor fluctuations.
Baas, H; Bürklin, F; Demisch, L; Fischer, PA; Harder, S,
)
0.69
"Clinical pharmacology studies have shown that the catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor tolcapone increases the bioavailability area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and the plasma elimination half-life (t1/2) of levodopa."( The effect of tolcapone on levodopa pharmacokinetics is independent of levodopa/carbidopa formulation.
Aitken, J; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Nielsen, T; Sedek, G, 1998
)
0.78
" When given together with levodopa/DCI, tolcapone increases the relative bioavailability and plasma elimination half-life of levodopa, without affecting its peak plasma concentration."( Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and tolerability of tolcapone: a review of early studies in volunteers.
Jorga, KM, 1998
)
0.6
" Blood samples were withdrawn for pharmacokinetic analysis, and the clinical response was measured using the motor part of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale."( Population pharmacodynamic modeling of levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease receiving entacapone.
Gordin, A; Karlsson, MO; Naukkarinen, TH; Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM; Trocóniz, IF, 1998
)
0.57
"A population pharmacodynamic model for levodopa was built that took into account interindividual and intraindividual variability."( Population pharmacodynamic modeling of levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease receiving entacapone.
Gordin, A; Karlsson, MO; Naukkarinen, TH; Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM; Trocóniz, IF, 1998
)
0.84
"A multiple-dose study was performed to assess the pharmacokinetic profile of a new levodopa/benserazide dual-release formulation (DRF) in comparison with a conventional slow-release formulation (SRF)."( Comparative single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa following a new dual-release and a conventional slow-release formulation of levodopa and benserazide in healthy subjects.
Crevoisier, C; Dingemanse, J; Gasser, UE; Lankhaar, G; Ouwerkerk, M, 1998
)
0.77
"Thirty patients with Parkinson's disease not previously treated with dopamine agonists, of whom 28 produced evaluable pharmacokinetic data for ropinirole and 23 for L-dopa."( Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction at steady state between ropinirole and L-dopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Beerahee, A; Burns, E; Citerone, DR; Cyronak, MJ; Fitzpatrick, KL; Leigh, TJ; Lennox, G; Lopez-Gil, A; Taylor, AC; Vakil, SD, 1999
)
0.3
"Primary end points were AUC0-8 and Cmax for ropinirole, and AUC0-8, AUC0-infinity and Cmax for L-dopa."( Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction at steady state between ropinirole and L-dopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Beerahee, A; Burns, E; Citerone, DR; Cyronak, MJ; Fitzpatrick, KL; Leigh, TJ; Lennox, G; Lopez-Gil, A; Taylor, AC; Vakil, SD, 1999
)
0.3
"There are no pharmacokinetic grounds for adjusting dosages of either ropinirole or L-dopa when given in combination."( Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction at steady state between ropinirole and L-dopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Beerahee, A; Burns, E; Citerone, DR; Cyronak, MJ; Fitzpatrick, KL; Leigh, TJ; Lennox, G; Lopez-Gil, A; Taylor, AC; Vakil, SD, 1999
)
0.3
" This clinical and pharmacokinetic study was repeated after 6 weeks of tolcapone therapy (200 mg three times daily)."( Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of L-Dopa after acute and 6-week tolcapone administration in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Bellini, G; Bonuccelli, U; Del Dotto, P; Dell'Agnello, G; Gambaccini, G; Napolitano, A; Petrozzi, L,
)
0.13
" The advantage of the Dixon equation over the sigmoid equation is that the Dixon equation can take 3OMD into consideration for pharmacodynamic modelling."( Pharmacodynamic modelling of levodopa, 3-O-methyldopa and their effects: an application of the Dixon equation.
Furlanut, M; Wu, G, 1999
)
0.59
" Tolcapone increased the bioavailability (AUC 0-infinity) and apparent elimination half-life (t(1/2)) of levodopa by 80 and 40%, respectively, compared to placebo."( COMT inhibition by tolcapone further improves levodopa pharmacokinetics when combined with a dual-release formulation of levodopa/benserazide. A novel principle in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Crevoisier, C; Gasser, UE; Hovens, SE; Jorga, K; van Giersbergen, PL, 1999
)
0.78
" Pharmacokinetic parameters calculated from plasma drug concentrations on days 1-2 and 6-7 were compared with each other."( Pharmacokinetics of oral entacapone after frequent multiple dosing and effects on levodopa disposition.
Gordin, A; Huhtala, S; Huupponen, R; Korpela, K; Reinikainen, K; Rouru, J; Savontaus, E; Scheinin, M, 1999
)
0.53
"No changes in any pharmacokinetic parameters of carbidopa were observed."( COMT inhibition with tolcapone does not affect carbidopa pharmacokinetics in parkinsonian patients in levodopa/carbidopa (Sinemet).
Jorga, KM; Nicholl, DJ, 1999
)
0.52
" The elimination half-life is very short (30 to 90 min) depending on the type of parenteral administration."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships of apomorphine in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Neef, C; van Laar, T, 1999
)
0.3
"The pharmacokinetic model which best described the data was a two-compartment open model with first-order absorption and possibly a lag-time."( Population pharmacokinetics of tolcapone in parkinsonian patients in dose finding studies.
Banken, L; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Snell, P; Steimer, JL, 2000
)
0.31
" The parameter estimates obtained agreed with those obtained from conventional pharmacokinetic studies and no subpopulation was shown to be at risk of either under- or over-exposure to tolcapone."( Population pharmacokinetics of tolcapone in parkinsonian patients in dose finding studies.
Banken, L; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Snell, P; Steimer, JL, 2000
)
0.31
" Both agents extend the elimination half-life and plasma area under the curve of levodopa without affecting the maximal plasma concentration of levodopa (Cmax) or the time until an oral dose of levodopa reaches its peak plasma concentration (Tmax)."( Effect of COMT inhibition on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa in parkinsonian patients.
Nutt, JG, 2000
)
0.76
"To understand the delay in the clinical benefit that commonly occurs after initiation of levodopa (L-Dopa) treatment, we examined the pharmacokinetic profile of L-Dopa after the first oral dose ever taken of L-Dopa/carbidopa in untreated patients with Parkinson's disease and followed these parameters after 1 month of treatment."( The pharmacokinetic profile of the "first ever" oral dose of levodopa in de novo patients with Parkinson's disease.
Djaldetti, R; Melamed, E; Rosmarin, V; Ziv, I,
)
0.59
" Thereafter 6-[18F]levodopa PET was performed, and the influx rate constants (k(c)) for the putamen and the caudatus region were correlated with the median effective concentration (EC(50)) and the equilibrium half-life (T(eq)) of the PK-PD model."( Levodopa pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling and 6-[18F]levodopa positron emission tomography in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Baas, H; Dietz, M; Graff, J; Harder, S; Künig, G; Leenders, KL; Vontobel, P, 2001
)
2.08
" This effect was small but statistically significant for the area under the plasma concentration-time curve, whereas tmax (time of maximum plasma concentration) and peak-to-trough fluctuation were not affected."( Influence of the dopamine agonist alpha-dihydroergocryptine on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Althaus, M; de Mey, C; Falup-Pecurariu, C; Minea, D; Retzow, A; Varga, I,
)
0.35
"This study assessed the behavioural and pharmacokinetic effects of chronic oral administration of L-dopa plus carbidopa alone, or with co-administration of the peripheral COMT inhibitor entacapone, to normal macaque monkeys."( L-dopa induces dyskinesia in normal monkeys: behavioural and pharmacokinetic observations.
Heikkilä, M; Jenner, P; Lindén, IB; Pearce, RK, 2001
)
0.31
" The present study describes the pharmacokinetic properties of (S)-UH-301 after subcutaneous administration in rats, using a newly developed HPLC-UV bioanalytical method."( An integrative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the 5-HT1A receptor antagonist (S)-UH-301 in the rat.
Lewander, T; Yan, H; Yu, H, 2002
)
0.31
" To address this issue, we conducted a pharmacokinetic study with 164 patients with sporadic Parkinson's disease."( Body weight influences pharmacokinetics of levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Arabia, G; Bagalà, A; Bastone, L; Bonavita, S; Caracciolo, M; Crescibene, L; Di Costanzo, A; Gambardella, A; Nicoletti, G; Quattrone, A; Scornaienchi, M; Zappia, M,
)
0.39
" This entails evaluating the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic actions of the drug regimens used and possibly, dosage form and route of administration of the drugs."( Role of integrative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic optimization strategy in the management of Parkinson"s disease patients experiencing motor fluctuations with levodopa.
Okereke, CS,
)
0.33
" Plasma concentrations of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography for pharmacokinetic evaluation."( Comparative single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa following a new dual-release and a conventional slow-release formulation of levodopa and benserazide in healthy volunteers.
Crevoisier, C; Metzger, B; Monreal, A; Nilsen, T, 2003
)
0.86
"We conducted a pharmacokinetic study in 164 patients with sporadic Parkinson's disease (PD) to address the relationship between body weight and levodopa pharmacokinetics."( Body weight, levodopa pharmacokinetics and dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease.
Arabia, G; Bagalà, A; Bastone, L; Bosco, D; Caracciolo, M; Crescibene, L; Quattrone, A; Scornaienghi, M; Zappia, M, 2002
)
0.88
" Plasma concentrations of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography for pharmacokinetic evaluation."( Effects of food on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in a dual-release formulation.
Calvi-Gries, F; Crevoisier, C; Nilsen, T; Zerr, P, 2003
)
0.88
" The elimination half-life of cabergoline estimated from urinary data of healthy subjects ranges between 63 and 109 hours."( Clinical pharmacokinetics of cabergoline.
Bonuccelli, U; Del Dotto, P, 2003
)
0.32
" Cmax (maximal L-DOPA concentration reached) was 3161 +/- 345 ng/ml for Sinemet and 3274 +/- 520 ng/ml for Grifoparkin (NS)."( [Pharmacokinetic comparison of Sinemet and Grifoparkin (levodopa/carbidopa 250/25 mg) in Parkinson s disease: a single dose study].
Chaná, P; Fierro, A; Reyes-Parada, M; Sáez-Briones, P, 2003
)
0.57
" 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."( Pharmacokinetics of etilevodopa compared to levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: an open-label, randomized, crossover study.
Djaldetti, R; Giladi, N; Hassin-Baer, S; Melamed, E; Shabtai, H,
)
0.65
"The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effects of the COMT inhibitor entacapone on both the pharmacokinetic profile and clinical efficacy of controlled release levodopa in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients."( Entacapone improves the pharmacokinetic and therapeutic response of controlled release levodopa/carbidopa in Parkinson's patients.
Barbato, L; Bolner, A; Caraceni, T; Nordera, G; Stocchi, F, 2004
)
0.74
"This study investigated the tolerability and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between single oral administration of BIA 3-202 (50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 400 mg), a novel catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitor, and standard carbidopa/levodopa 25 mg/100 mg (Sinemet 25/100) in healthy adult volunteers."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction between BIA 3-202, a novel COMT inhibitor, and levodopa/carbidopa.
Almeida, L; Falcão, A; Loureiro, A; Machado, R; Maia, J; Silveira, P; Soares-da-Silva, P; Torrão, L; Vaz-da-Silva, M; Wright, L,
)
0.53
" The aim was to determine whether delayed entacapone administration may prolong CR L-dopa half-life in comparison to the co-administration modality."( Temporal administration of entacapone with slow release L-dopa: pharmacokinetic profile and clinical outcome.
Bassi, A; Brusa, L; Fedele, E; Giacomini, P; Lunardi, G; Pierantozzi, M; Stanzione, P, 2004
)
0.32
" Pharmacokinetic parameters for apomorphine (C(max), AUC, t(max), t(1/2)) were unchanged by the administration of entacapone, and changes in both the tapping test and AIMS score were similar with all treatments (entacapone 200 mg, entacapone 400 mg, and placebo)."( Safety of entacapone and apomorphine coadministration in levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease patients: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results of a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study.
Debilly, B; Durif, F; Lees, AJ; Rascol, O; Zijlmans, JC, 2004
)
0.57
" Blood samples were collected before, during and after the 15 doses of donepezil HCl for pharmacokinetic (PK) assessments."( Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses.
Cullen, EI; Hahne, WA; Kirby, L; Kumar, D; Okereke, CS; Pratt, RD, 2004
)
0.58
" The pharmacokinetic evaluation was repeatedly performed 1 week later in the same way except for adding 200 mg AsA to the tablet."( The effect of ascorbic acid on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in elderly patients with Parkinson disease.
Hamamoto, M; Katayama, Y; Nagayama, H; Nito, C; Ueda, M; Yamaguchi, H,
)
0.38
" The main levodopa pharmacokinetic outcome variables were time to peak and peak plasma concentration, plasma elimination half-life, and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve."( Genetic polymorphism of catechol-O-methyltransferase and levodopa pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic pattern in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Mochi, M; Riva, R, 2005
)
0.98
" The method has been successfully used to study the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in vivo; the values of the pharmacokinetics parameters Cmax, AUC(0-t) and Tmax were 16."( Microdialysis sampling and high-performance liquid chromatography with chemiluminescence detection for in-vivo on-line determination and study of the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in blood.
Deyong, H; Funan, C; Yingxue, Z; Zhujun, Z, 2005
)
0.76
"Human pharmacokinetic parameters are often predicted prior to clinical study from in vivo preclinical pharmacokinetic data."( Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
Jolivette, LJ; Ward, KW, 2005
)
0.33
" Current evidence suggests that these motor complications are related to the relatively short half-life of levodopa and its potential to induce pulsatile stimulation of striatal dopamine receptors."( Intermittent vs continuous levodopa administration in patients with advanced Parkinson disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study.
Olanow, CW; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2005
)
0.84
"To investigate the specific pharmacokinetic changes associated with the benefits of levodopa infusion."( Intermittent vs continuous levodopa administration in patients with advanced Parkinson disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study.
Olanow, CW; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2005
)
0.85
" Levodopa pharmacokinetic studies were performed at baseline and 6 months in 3 of these patients."( Intermittent vs continuous levodopa administration in patients with advanced Parkinson disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study.
Olanow, CW; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2005
)
1.54
" Results of plasma pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated that compared with oral administration, continuous levodopa infusion was associated with a significant increase in the levodopa area under the curve and avoided the low plasma trough levels seen with oral drug administration."( Intermittent vs continuous levodopa administration in patients with advanced Parkinson disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study.
Olanow, CW; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2005
)
0.84
" Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrate that reduced motor complications are associated with avoiding low plasma levodopa trough levels and are not adversely affected by relatively high plasma levodopa concentrations."( Intermittent vs continuous levodopa administration in patients with advanced Parkinson disease: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study.
Olanow, CW; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 2005
)
0.84
" In this experimental study we have investigated whether the presence of Plantago ovata husk (water-soluble fiber) modifies in rabbits the bioavailability and other pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa (20 mg/kg) when administered by the oral route at the same time."( Hydrosoluble fiber (Plantago ovata husk) and levodopa I: experimental study of the pharmacokinetic interaction.
Calle, A; Carriedo, D; Diez, MJ; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Gonzalez, A; Sahagun, A; Sierra, M, 2005
)
0.78
" ovata husk modifies in rabbits the bioavailability and other pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa (20 mg/kg) when administered by the oral route with carbidopa (5 mg/kg)."( Hydrosoluble fiber (Plantago ovata husk) and levodopa II: experimental study of the pharmacokinetic interaction in the presence of carbidopa.
Calle, A; Carriedo, D; Diez, MJ; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Gonzalez, A; Sahagun, A; Sierra, M, 2005
)
0.81
"Augmentation, defined as a loss of circadian recurrence with progressively earlier daily onset and increase in the duration, intensity, and anatomy of symptoms, not compatible with the half-life of the drug, is associated with dopaminergic treatment in restless legs syndrome (RLS) patients."( Polysomnographic and pharmacokinetic findings in levodopa-induced augmentation of restless legs syndrome.
Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Montagna, P; Plazzi, G; Provini, F; Vetrugno, R, 2006
)
0.59
" A two-compartment pharmacokinetic model with central volume (V1), peripheral volume (V2), clearance (CL) and inter-compartmental clearance (CL(ic)) was used to fit plasma levodopa concentrations."( Importance of within subject variation in levodopa pharmacokinetics: a 4 year cohort study in Parkinson's disease.
Chan, PL; Holford, NH; Nutt, JG, 2005
)
0.79
"The purpose of this analysis is to describe how levodopa pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters change over the first 4 years of long-term levodopa treatment in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes during the first four years of levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease.
Chan, PL; Holford, NH; Nutt, JG, 2005
)
0.81
" Using models for disease progression and pharmacodynamic models for drug effects we have characterized the changes in UPDRS over time to determine the influence of the various drug treatments."( Disease progression and pharmacodynamics in Parkinson disease - evidence for functional protection with levodopa and other treatments.
Chan, PL; Holford, NH; Kieburtz, K; Nutt, JG; Shoulson, I, 2006
)
0.55
" As most patients require the superior efficacy of levodopa during the course of their disease, an appreciation of the changing response to levodopa over time and an understanding of the pharmacokinetic principles underlying the development of complications such as wearing-off is essential in the long-term management of the patient."( The levodopa wearing-off phenomenon in Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic considerations.
Stocchi, F, 2006
)
1.14
" Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated for both treatments."( The effect of Madopar on the pharmacokinetics of ropinirole in healthy Chinese volunteers.
Bi, LL; Chen, XY; Jia, YY; Luo, XX; Wen, AD; Zhong, DF, 2007
)
0.34
" pharmacokinetic data on 670 drugs representing, to our knowledge, the largest publicly available set of human clinical pharmacokinetic data."( Trend analysis of a database of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters in humans for 670 drug compounds.
Lombardo, F; Obach, RS; Waters, NJ, 2008
)
0.35
" Levodopa pharmacokinetic profiles remain unchanged after multiple doses, and are similar between healthy volunteers and patients and among patients at different stages of disease."( The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Hsu, A; Khor, SP, 2007
)
1.51
"In this study, scintigraphic and pharmacokinetic studies were conducted on 10 healthy, fed volunteers."( Pharmacoscintigraphic and pharmacokinetic evaluation on healthy human volunteers of sustained-release floating minitablets containing levodopa and carbidopa.
Amighi, K; Blocklet, D; Deleuze, P; Goldman, S; Goole, J; Pandolfo, M; Pilcer, G; Van Gansbeke, B; Vanderbist, F, 2008
)
0.55
"The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa are dominated by two features: the short plasma half-life of the drug and the portion of the antiparkinsonian response that parallels the plasma levodopa levels, the so-called short-duration response."( Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa.
Nutt, JG, 2008
)
0.87
" Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters determined for levodopa included Cmin, Cmax, Cmax - Cmin, AUC, t(1/2), and tmax."( Comparison of pharmacokinetic profile of levodopa throughout the day between levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone and levodopa/carbidopa when administered four or five times daily.
Ellmén, J; Hänninen, J; Hartikainen, P; Kaakkola, S; Kaasinen, V; Kailajärvi, M; Korpela, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Löyttyniemi, E; Lyytinen, J; Marttila, R; Ruokoniemi, P, 2009
)
0.87
"This open-label phase I trial assessed potential pharmacokinetic interactions between oral levodopa/carbidopa and transdermal rotigotine treatment at steady state."( Lack of pharmacokinetic interactions between transdermal rotigotine and oral levodopa/carbidopa.
Andreas, JO; Boekens, H; Braun, M; Cawello, W; Horstmann, R, 2009
)
0.8
" Pharmacokinetic parameters C(max), t(max), t(1/2z), mean residence time (MRT), AUC(0-tau), AUC(0-infinity), CL(z)/F and V(z)/F were determined under the non-compartmental model."( Pharmacokinetic profile of talipexole in healthy volunteers is not altered when it is co-administered with Madopar (co-beneldopa).
Hang, TJ; Jia, L; Song, M; Wen, AD; Xu, XF; Yang, L; Zhang, TT, 2009
)
0.35
" For talipexole hydrochloride, there were no significant differences in the pharmacokinetic values between the two administrations."( Pharmacokinetic profile of talipexole in healthy volunteers is not altered when it is co-administered with Madopar (co-beneldopa).
Hang, TJ; Jia, L; Song, M; Wen, AD; Xu, XF; Yang, L; Zhang, TT, 2009
)
0.35
" There was no significant difference in pharmacokinetic parameters, including t(1/2alpha), t(1/2beta), AUC(0-infinity), CL/F, C(max), t(max) and V/F."( Genetic polymorphism of catechol O-methyltransferase and pharmacokinetics of levodopa in healthy Chinese subjects.
Huang, PF; Ke, M; Lin, CH; Liu, YW; Wang, CL; Xu, Y; Yu, CX,
)
0.36
" This study aims to investigate the feasibility of L-dopa nasal delivery systems prepared using maleic acid solution containing 2-hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin, and to develop pharmacokinetic models."( Pharmacokinetic evaluation and modeling of formulated levodopa intranasal delivery systems.
Chun, IK; Gwak, HS; Kang, W; Kim, TK; Lee, YH; Oh, SY, 2009
)
0.6
"0] kg/m2) completed the 4 treatment periods and had data available for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction between nebicapone and controlled-release levodopa/benserazide: a single-center, Phase I, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover study in healthy subjects.
Almeida, L; Costa, R; Falcão, A; Fernandes-Lopes, C; Loureiro, AI; Machado, R; Nunes, T; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P; Torrão, L; Vaz-da-Silva, M; Wright, L, 2009
)
0.58
"The aims of the present study were to investigate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (pk/pd) relationship of levodopa (l-dopa) in patients with advanced Parkinson disease (PD) and also to evaluate the effect of tolcapone on the pk/pd analysis of l-dopa in 1 patient with severe dyskinesias and fluctuations."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of levodopa in patients with advanced Parkinson disease.
Adamiak, U; Bialecka, M; Gawronska-Szklarz, B; Kaldonska, M; Klodowska-Duda, G; Safranow, K; Wyska, E, 2010
)
0.83
"Levodopa is the most effective treatment for Parkinson's disease, so it is important to understand the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic features of this drug."( Effects of dietary factors on levodopa pharmacokinetics.
Diez, MJ; Díez, R; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Sahagun, AM; Sierra, M, 2010
)
2.09
" Finally, the method was successfully applied to support the pharmacokinetic study after L-dopa and its prodrug AEPD were orally administrated to the Sprague-Dawley rats, respectively."( Simultaneous determination of L-dopa and its prodrug (S)-4-(2-acetamido-3-ethoxy-3-oxopropyl)-1,2-phenylene diacetate in rat plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and its application in a pharmacokinetic study.
Huang, X; Jiang, W; Lv, C; Lv, L; Shi, X; Wu, L; Xu, C; Zhou, S, 2010
)
0.36
" Levodopa plasma half-life is very short, resulting in marked plasma drug concentration fluctuations which are matched, as the disease progresses, to swings in the therapeutic response ("wearing-off" phenomena)."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa.
Contin, M; Martinelli, P, 2010
)
1.59
"The purpose of this work was to identify and estimate a population pharmacokinetic- pharmacodynamic model for duodenal infusion of a levodopa/carbidopa gel (Duodopa) to examine pharmacological properties of this treatment."( A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model for duodenal levodopa infusion.
Dougherty, M; Groth, T; Karlsson, MO; Nyholm, D; Pålhagen, S; Westin, J; Willows, T,
)
0.58
"The investigators conducted a single-dose pharmacokinetic (PK) study of levodopa/carbidopa delivered from novel gastric-retentive extended-release (ER) tablets versus a comparator ER tablet (M-ER) in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa delivered from gastric-retentive extended-release formulations in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Chen, C; Cowles, VE; Illarioshkin, SN; Stolyarov, ID; Sweeney, M, 2012
)
0.93
" The validated method was applied in a pharmacokinetic study with a levodopa/benserazide tablet formulation in healthy volunteers."( Simultaneous quantitation of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa in human plasma by HPLC-ESI-MS/MS: application for a pharmacokinetic study with a levodopa/benserazide formulation.
Bonfim, RR; Byrro, RM; Cardoso, FF; César, Ida C; da Silva, EP; Gomes, SA; Mundim, IM; Pianetti, GA; Teixeira, Lde S, 2011
)
0.9
"This review summarizes the overall pharmacokinetic profile of pramipexole for both the IR and ER formulations."( Pharmacokinetic evaluation of pramipexole.
Antonini, A; Calandrella, D, 2011
)
0.37
" Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis, and a finger-tapping test was performed to assess pharmacodynamics."( Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of gastroretentive delivery of levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson disease.
Chen, C; Cowles, VE; Illarioshkin, SN; Stolyarov, ID; Sweeney, M,
)
0.37
" The dispersible levodopa/benserazide formulation showed earlier time to Cmax and significantly higher Cmax for levodopa in plasma compared to the microtablets."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets versus levodopa/benserazide and levodopa/carbidopa in healthy volunteers.
Aquilonius, SM; Bäckström, T; Ehrnebo, M; Gomes-Trolin, C; Lewander, T; Nyholm, D; Nyström, C; Panagiotidis, G,
)
0.79
"The new levodopa/carbidopa microtablets had a pharmacokinetic profile that would allow for a convenient switch of therapy from standard tablets."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets versus levodopa/benserazide and levodopa/carbidopa in healthy volunteers.
Aquilonius, SM; Bäckström, T; Ehrnebo, M; Gomes-Trolin, C; Lewander, T; Nyholm, D; Nyström, C; Panagiotidis, G,
)
0.89
" All patients underwent levodopa pharmacokinetic study and the gastric emptying study using (13)C-octanoic acid expiration breath test."( Plasma levodopa peak delay and impaired gastric emptying in Parkinson's disease.
Doi, H; Kishi, M; Masaka, T; Sakakibara, R; Sato, M; Takahashi, O; Tateno, A; Tateno, F; Tsuyusaki, Y, 2012
)
1.14
" Half-life was 58."( L-DOPA pharmacokinetics in the MPTP-lesioned macaque model of Parkinson's disease.
Brotchie, JM; Fox, SH; Huot, P; Johnston, TH; Koprich, JB, 2012
)
0.38
" L-DOPA t(max) and half-life are also similar to those reported in human."( L-DOPA pharmacokinetics in the MPTP-lesioned macaque model of Parkinson's disease.
Brotchie, JM; Fox, SH; Huot, P; Johnston, TH; Koprich, JB, 2012
)
0.38
" This was the first study designed to characterize the full pharmacokinetic profiles of levodopa, carbidopa, and levodopa metabolite, 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD) with 16-h LCIG infusion."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa, carbidopa, and 3-O-methyldopa following 16-hour jejunal infusion of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced Parkinson's disease patients.
Chatamra, K; Dutta, S; Johansson, A; Locke, C; Nyholm, D; Odin, P; Othman, AA, 2013
)
0.94
"A pharmacodynamic model is presented to describe the motor effects (tapping rate, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS] Part III, and investigator-rating of ON/OFF, including dyskinesia) of levodopa (LD) in patients with advanced idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) treated with immediate-release (IR) carbidopa-levodopa (CD-LD) or an extended-release (ER) formulation of CD-LD (IPX066)."( Population pharmacodynamics of IPX066: an oral extended-release capsule formulation of carbidopa-levodopa, and immediate-release carbidopa-levodopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Mao, Z; Modi, NB, 2013
)
0.8
" A new formulation, an orally disintegrating tablet (ODT), has recently been introduced to overcome these pharmacokinetic problems by avoiding its presystemic metabolism."( The pharmacokinetic evaluation of selegiline ODT for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Magyar, K; Szökő, E; Tábi, T; Vécsei, L, 2013
)
0.39
"The authors summarize the pharmacokinetic and clinical efficacy data of selegiline ODT and compare them with the more conventional oral selegiline."( The pharmacokinetic evaluation of selegiline ODT for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Magyar, K; Szökő, E; Tábi, T; Vécsei, L, 2013
)
0.39
"Selegiline ODT shows a clear pharmacokinetic advantage over the conventional form."( The pharmacokinetic evaluation of selegiline ODT for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Magyar, K; Szökő, E; Tábi, T; Vécsei, L, 2013
)
0.39
" Istradefylline , a xanthine derivative, has the longest half-life of all the currently available A2A adenosine receptor antagonists; it can successfully permeate through the blood-brain barrier and has a high human A2A adenosine receptor affinity."( Suitability of the adenosine antagonist istradefylline for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic and clinical considerations.
Müller, T, 2013
)
0.39
" Specifically, the article reviews the clinical and pharmacokinetic information available to elucidate its therapeutic potential."( Suitability of the adenosine antagonist istradefylline for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic and clinical considerations.
Müller, T, 2013
)
0.39
" l-dopa has a complex pharmacokinetic behavior and causes long-term behavioral and metabolic side effects."( Suitability of the adenosine antagonist istradefylline for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic and clinical considerations.
Müller, T, 2013
)
0.39
" Pharmacokinetic trials of oral LD/dopa decarboxylase inhibitor (DDCI) formulations with and without the catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, entacapone, showed that repeated administration with entacapone causes an increase in both the maximum concentration (Cmax) and time to Cmax (Tmax) of LD."( Pharmacokinetic considerations for the use of levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson disease: focus on levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone for treatment of levodopa-associated motor complications.
Müller, T,
)
0.39
" The pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated relatively low bioavailability for L-dopa and adequate plasma levels of pramipexole, even at baseline, on a stable daily dose."( Therapeutic response to pramipexole in a patient with multiple system atrophy with predominant parkinsonism: positron emission tomography and pharmacokinetic assessments.
Ishii, K; Katayama, Y; Nagayama, H; Nakajima, N; Nishiyama, Y; Ueda, M, 2013
)
0.39
"Opicapone increased levodopa systemic exposure by 2-fold not changing Cmax values and reduced both 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD) exposure and Cmax values by 5-fold."( Brain and peripheral pharmacokinetics of levodopa in the cynomolgus monkey following administration of opicapone, a third generation nitrocatechol COMT inhibitor.
Bonifácio, MJ; Soares-da-Silva, P; Sutcliffe, JS; Torrão, L; Wright, LC, 2014
)
0.99
"The objective of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic characteristics of levodopa (L-dopa) from nasal powder formulations using highly water-soluble levodopa methyl ester hydrochloride (LDME)."( Pharmacokinetic evaluation of formulated levodopa methyl ester nasal delivery systems.
Chun, IK; Gwak, HS; Kim, KH; Lee, KE; Lee, YH; Rhie, JY; Yoon, IK, 2014
)
0.89
" The final model was internally evaluated using stochastic simulations and bootstrap and externally evaluated using sparse pharmacokinetic data from 311 subjects treated in a long term safety study of LCIG."( Population pharmacokinetics of levodopa in subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion vs. oral tablets.
Dutta, S; Othman, AA, 2014
)
0.69
" The purpose of this study was to compare the levodopa pharmacokinetic profile throughout a day driven by the COMT inhibition either following repeated doses of opicapone or concomitant administration with entacapone."( Effect of opicapone and entacapone upon levodopa pharmacokinetics during three daily levodopa administrations.
Falcão, A; Lopes, N; Nunes, T; Pinto, R; Rocha, JF; Santos, A; Soares-da-Silva, P; Vaz-da-Silva, M; Wright, LC, 2014
)
0.93
" Changes of small magnitude but with possible clinical impact were found according to tmax and Cmax that tended to be lower in HP- patients and AUC0-t that was larger in the HP+ group."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa in patients with Parkinson disease and motor fluctuations depending on the presence of Helicobacter pylori infection.
Adamiak-Giera, U; Białecka, M; Gawrońska-Szklarz, B; Madaliński, MH; Narożańska, E; Robowski, P; Schinwelski, M; Sołtan, W; Sławek, J,
)
0.45
"Levodopa Cmax was very similar in the initial situation (603."( A randomised clinical trial to evaluate the effects of Plantago ovata husk in Parkinson patients: changes in levodopa pharmacokinetics and biochemical parameters.
Anguera-Vila, A; Calle-Pardo, A; Carriedo-Ule, D; Diez-Liebana, MJ; Fernandez-Martinez, MN; Garcia-Vieitez, JJ; Hernandez-Echevarria, L; Sahagún-Prieto, AM; Sierra-Vega, M, 2014
)
2.06
" In the presence of levodopa, gastric emptying is interrupted at times associated with double-peaks in pharmacokinetic profiles."( Empirical and semi-mechanistic modelling of double-peaked pharmacokinetic profile phenomenon due to gastric emptying.
Aarons, L; Ogungbenro, K; Pertinez, H, 2015
)
0.74
"In Japanese subjects with advanced PD, LCIG resulted in an improved pharmacokinetic profile that appeared to be associated with reduced motor complications compared with LC-oral."( Jejunal Infusion of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel versus oral administration of levodopa-carbidopa tablets in japanese subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetics and pilot efficacy and safety.
Benesh, J; Chatamra, K; Dutta, S; Mohamed, ME; Nagai, M; Othman, AA; Yanagawa, M, 2015
)
0.74
" The main levodopa pharmacodynamic variables were the maximum percentage increase in tapping frequency over baseline values (ΔTapmax %) and the area under the tapping effect-time curve (AUCTap)."( Pharmacodynamics of a low subacute levodopa dose helps distinguish between multiple system atrophy with predominant Parkinsonism and Parkinson's disease.
Calandra-Buonaura, G; Capellari, S; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Doria, A; Guaraldi, P; Lopane, G; Martinelli, P, 2016
)
1.11
" Comparison of 1 and 2 IPX066 245-mg LD capsules showed dose-proportional pharmacokinetics for Cmax and AUCt."( Clinical Pharmacokinetics of IPX066: Evaluation of Dose Proportionality and Effect of Food in Healthy Volunteers.
Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Modi, NB; Yao, HM,
)
0.13
" From the comparison of the results of pharmacokinetic study before and after taking LD/CD or LD/CD/soy, the estimated marginal mean (EMM) of HVA after LD/CD/soy increased in the PD group."( Effects of soybean ingestion on pharmacokinetics of levodopa and motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease--In relation to the effects of Mucuna pruriens.
Ito, H; Koh, J; Kondo, T; Nagashima, Y; Sakata, M, 2016
)
0.68
" In order to simultaneously determine levodopa and 1,1-dimethyl-3-carboxy-6,7-dihydroxy-1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline (MD01) in rat plasma, an improved LC-MS/MS method was developed and validated for a pharmacokinetic study in rats orally administered levodopa or Mucuna pruriens extract (MPE)."( Development and validation of an LC-MS/MS method for simultaneous quantification of levodopa and MD01 in rat plasma and its application to a pharmacokinetic study of mucuna pruriens extract.
Chen, C; Cheng, Z; Deng, L; Huang, J; Jiang, H; Liu, J; Yang, G; Zhang, F, 2016
)
0.93
"To compare the levodopa/carbidopa (LC) and levodopa/benserazide (LB) pharmacokinetic profiles following repeated doses of opicapone (OPC) administered apart from levodopa."( Effect of opicapone multiple-dose regimens on levodopa pharmacokinetics.
Almeida, L; Bonifácio, MJ; Falcão, A; Fauchoux, N; Loureiro, AI; Nunes, T; Pinto, R; Rocha, JF; Santos, A; Sicard, É; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2017
)
1.07
"This study aimed to investigate the pharmacokinetic profiles of levodopa-carbidopa and the motor function following a single-dose microtablet administration in Parkinson's disease."( Levodopa/carbidopa microtablets in Parkinson's disease: a study of pharmacokinetics and blinded motor assessment.
Aquilonius, SM; Askmark, H; Bergquist, F; Constantinescu, R; Ericsson, A; Lycke, S; Medvedev, A; Memedi, M; Nyholm, D; Ohlsson, F; Senek, M; Spira, J; Westin, J, 2017
)
2.14
" We present in this report the comparative pharmacokinetic profiles of LCIG and LC-oral from this pivotal study."( Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel Pharmacokinetics: Lower Variability than Oral Levodopa-Carbidopa.
Chatamra, K; Dutta, S; Locke, C; Othman, AA; Rosebraugh, M, 2017
)
1.9
"  This review presents a synthesis of the population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models of levodopa described in Parkinson's disease."( Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease: A Review of Population Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics Analysis.
Azulay, JP; Blin, O; Guilhaumou, R; Marsot, A, 2017
)
2.11
" Different pharmacodynamic effects were described: UPDRS, Tapping, Dyskinesia, CURSΣ and treatment response scale."( Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease: A Review of Population Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics Analysis.
Azulay, JP; Blin, O; Guilhaumou, R; Marsot, A, 2017
)
1.9
" New pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic population modelling studies could be consider to improve future models and decrease variability, to better understand the evolution of patients with Parkinson's disease treated by levodopa."( Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease: A Review of Population Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics Analysis.
Azulay, JP; Blin, O; Guilhaumou, R; Marsot, A, 2017
)
2.08
" Areas covered: The purpose of this study was to evaluate pharmacokinetic of OPC for the treatment of PD."( Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of opicapone for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Kostić, V; Kresojević, N; Svetel, M; Tomić, A, 2018
)
0.48
" The pharmacodynamic endpoint did not meet the pre-specified criteria for significant improvement."( A Phase I Study of the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of the Novel Dopamine D1 Receptor Partial Agonist, PF-06669571, in Subjects with Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease.
DeMartinis, N; Duvvuri, S; Gurrell, R; Sun, P, 2018
)
0.48
" Moreover, the bioanalytical method was applied to a pharmacokinetic study in healthy volunteers."( Sensitive LC-MS/MS method for quantitation of levodopa and carbidopa in plasma: application to a pharmacokinetic study.
Brandão, AH; Davanço, MG; de Campos, DR; Ferreira, MS; Gabbai, JJ; Júnior, PS; Martho, AC; Meulman, J; Noboli, AC; Pepi, GT; Previde, N; Riccio, MF, 2018
)
0.74
" We proposed mechanisms for the interaction between LDCD and MgO and conducted pharmacokinetic studies on rats and humans."( Effects of magnesium oxide on pharmacokinetics of L-dopa/carbidopa and assessment of pharmacodynamic changes by a model-based simulation.
Hirakawa, M; Hirota, T; Ieiri, I; Irie, S; Kashihara, Y; Kimura, M; Kubota, T; Matsuki, S; Terao, Y; Yoda, K, 2019
)
0.51
" We conducted pharmacokinetic interaction studies of MgO and LDCD on rats and healthy volunteers."( Effects of magnesium oxide on pharmacokinetics of L-dopa/carbidopa and assessment of pharmacodynamic changes by a model-based simulation.
Hirakawa, M; Hirota, T; Ieiri, I; Irie, S; Kashihara, Y; Kimura, M; Kubota, T; Matsuki, S; Terao, Y; Yoda, K, 2019
)
0.51
"This is the first study to show a clear pharmacokinetic interaction between LDCD and MgO in humans."( Effects of magnesium oxide on pharmacokinetics of L-dopa/carbidopa and assessment of pharmacodynamic changes by a model-based simulation.
Hirakawa, M; Hirota, T; Ieiri, I; Irie, S; Kashihara, Y; Kimura, M; Kubota, T; Matsuki, S; Terao, Y; Yoda, K, 2019
)
0.51
"Compared with Rytary and IR CD-LD, IPX203 had a longer pharmacodynamic effect consistent with LD pharmacokinetics for the 3 treatments."( Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of IPX203 in Patients With Advanced Parkinson Disease: A Comparison With Immediate-Release Carbidopa-Levodopa and With Extended-Release Carbidopa-Levodopa Capsules.
Gupta, S; Khanna, S; Mittur, A; Modi, NB; Rubens, R,
)
0.33
" Areas covered: This narrative review aims to describe the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the available reversible and irreversible monoamine oxidase B inhibitors for the treatment of Parkinson's disease in daily practice."( Pharmacokinetics of monoamine oxidase B inhibitors in Parkinson's disease: current status.
Möhr, JD; Müller, T, 2019
)
0.51
"We conducted pharmacokinetic experiments in pigs, mice, and humans to characterize effects of continuous subcutaneous CD delivery co-administered with LD as compared with oral LD/CD administration on LD pharmacokinetics."( Subcutaneous Administration of Carbidopa Enhances Oral Levodopa Pharmacokinetics: A Series of Studies Conducted in Pigs, Mice, and Healthy Volunteers.
Caraco, Y; LeWitt, PA; Nemas, M; Oren, S; Shaltiel-Karyo, R; Weinstock, I; Yacoby-Zeevi, O; Zawaznik, E,
)
0.38
" Pharmacokinetic and motor assessments were conducted on days 1 and 15 of each treatment period."( Pharmacodynamics, Efficacy, and Safety of IPX203 in Parkinson Disease Patients With Motor Fluctuations.
Dinh, P; Gupta, S; Mittur, A; Modi, NB; Rubens, R,
)
0.13
"While several generic preparations of levodopa/carbidopa and levodopa/benserazide (LBD) are currently available, pharmacokinetic (PK) equivalence and therapeutic equivalence studies with levodopa generics are not available in Italy."( Clinical and pharmacokinetics equivalence of multiple doses of levodopa benserazide generic formulation vs the originator (Madopar).
Alessandroni, J; Bonassi, S; Bravi, D; Casali, M; Fossati, C; Grassini, P; Ialongo, C; Onofrj, M; Radicati, FG; Stocchi, F; Torti, M; Vacca, L, 2019
)
1.02
" Using a holistic approach, a pharmacokinetic model of levodopa was combined to a dopamine dynamics and a neurocomputational model of basal ganglia."( Nonlinear pharmacodynamics of levodopa through Parkinson's disease progression.
Lévesque, D; Nekka, F; Robaey, P; Ursino, M; Véronneau-Veilleux, F, 2020
)
1.09
" We combined a pharmacokinetic model of levodopa to a model of dopamine's kinetics and a neurocomputational model of basal ganglia."( An integrative model of Parkinson's disease treatment including levodopa pharmacokinetics, dopamine kinetics, basal ganglia neurotransmission and motor action throughout disease progression.
Nekka, F; Robaey, P; Ursino, M; Véronneau-Veilleux, F, 2021
)
1.13
" In this study, a rapid High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) method was validated in presence of internal standard to determine pharmacokinetic parameters following levodopa administration to rats in three different intravenous solution, intranasal solution and intranasal thermosensitive gel groups."( Rapid High-Performance Liquid Chromatography Method for Levodopa Quantitation at Low UV Wavelength: Application of Pharmacokinetics Study in Rat Following Intranasal Delivery.
Alipour, S; Mohammadi, Z; Parhizkar, E, 2021
)
1.06
" Personalized dose-response relationship is demonstrated within a group of human subjects, along with close pharmacokinetic correlation between the finger touch-based fingertip sweat and capillary blood samples."( Non-Invasive Sweat-Based Tracking of L-Dopa Pharmacokinetic Profiles Following an Oral Tablet Administration.
De la Paz, E; Huang, N; Litvan, I; Longardner, K; Mahato, K; Moon, JM; Sempionatto, JR; Sonsa-Ard, T; Teymourian, H; Wang, J, 2021
)
0.62
"Inhibiting catechol-O-methyltransferase extends the plasma half-life of levodopa, potentially allowing physicians to optimize the levodopa regimen in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) experiencing motor fluctuations."( Effect of Opicapone on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease.
Antonini, A; Ferreira, JJ; Guimarães, B; Moreira, J; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P; Stocchi, F, 2022
)
1.26
" Despite a 100 mg lower total levodopa/carbidopa daily dose, adding opicapone 50 mg at least doubled the levodopa plasma half-life and minimal concentrations, with a significant ≈30% increase in total exposure."( Effect of Opicapone on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease.
Antonini, A; Ferreira, JJ; Guimarães, B; Moreira, J; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P; Stocchi, F, 2022
)
1.32
" Despite the lower levodopa dose, modifying the levodopa pharmacokinetic profile with opicapone was associated with decreased off time and increased on time."( Effect of Opicapone on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease.
Antonini, A; Ferreira, JJ; Guimarães, B; Moreira, J; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P; Stocchi, F, 2022
)
1.36
"A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover, phase I, pharmacokinetic study with 25 healthy volunteers was conducted."( Effect of Carbidopa Dose on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics With and Without Catechol-O-Methyltransferase Inhibition in Healthy Subjects.
Ellmén, J; Kuoppamäki, M; Rouru, J; Sjöstedt, N; Tuunainen, J; Vahteristo, M; Yliperttula, M, 2023
)
1.2
" Theoretical pharmacokinetic simulations suggested that the plasma profile of oral IR levodopa can be even further improved by optimizing AADC and COMT inhibition."( Effect of Carbidopa Dose on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics With and Without Catechol-O-Methyltransferase Inhibition in Healthy Subjects.
Ellmén, J; Kuoppamäki, M; Rouru, J; Sjöstedt, N; Tuunainen, J; Vahteristo, M; Yliperttula, M, 2023
)
1.43
" At steady-state (day 14), opicapone Cmax (peak plasma concentration) and AUC 0-last (area under the curve-time curve) were 459 ± 252 ng/mL and 2022 ± 783 ng/mL·h, respectively."( Opicapone Pharmacokinetics and Effects on Catechol- O -Methyltransferase Activity and Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Patients With Parkinson Disease Receiving Carbidopa/Levodopa.
Jimenez, R; Kieburtz, KD; Klepitskaya, O; LeWitt, P; Liang, GS; Loewen, G; Olanow, CW; Olson, K,
)
0.35

Compound-Compound Interactions

The administration of Resagiline combined with levodopa and benserazide hydrochloride can significantly lower the body's serum Hcy level, significantly raise IGF-1 levels, and significantly improve motor function in patients with Parkinson's disease. These results suggest that pramipexole could be administered with a reduced dose oflevodopa to minimize dyskinesia.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
"The effects of carbidopa combined with levodopa (carbidopa/levodopa) and levodopa alone on the cardiovascular system of patients with Parkinson's disease were evaluated."( Comparison of dopa decarboxylase inhibitor (carbidopa) combined with levodopa and levodopa alone on the cardiovascular system of patients with parkinson's disease.
Leibowitz, M; Lieberman, A, 1975
)
0.76
" With the combination medication, levodopa-carbidopa, on an average 420 mg/42 mg combined with 950 mg of levodopa in slow release form, a statistically significant improvement in parkinsonian signs could be achieved without any worsening of the side effects."( Effect of a slow release preparation of levodopa on Parkinson's disease in combination with a peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor.
Hokkanen, E; Myllylä, VV; Saarinen, A; Tokola, O, 1978
)
0.8
" Levodopa treatment, alone or in combination with two different dopa-decarboxylase inhibitors, benserazide and carbidopa, does not modify the renin response to posture or to frusemide."( Effects of levodopa alone and in combination with dopa-decarboxylase inhibitors on plasma renin activity in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Dessi'-Fulgheri, P; Glorioso, N; Monaco, F; Rappelli, A; Tedde, R, 1978
)
1.56
"Since L-dopa in combination with a decarboxylase inhibitor is currently the most effective therapy available for treatment of Parkinson's disease, the authors compare the actual causes of death in a large series of treated Parkinson patients with a normal population and with previous studies."( Mortality among Parkinson patients treated with L-dopa combined with a decarboxylase inhibitor.
Siegfried, J; Zumstein, H, 1976
)
0.26
"Eighty-one Parkinsonic patients were treated with L-dopa alone and/or combined with Ro4-4602, during 27 to 60 months."( [5 years of experience in the treatment of parkinsonism with L-dopa and its combination with Ro4-4602].
Chouza, C; Gomensoro, JB; Romero, S, 1976
)
0.26
"The further therapeutic benefit of piribedil when combined with amantadine or Levodopa was studied by a double-blind, cross-over trial in 15 patients with Parkinson's disease."( Piribedil (ET 495) in the treatment of Parkinson's disease combined with amantadine or levodopa.
Callaghan, N; Fitzpatrick, E; O'Mahony, JB, 1975
)
0.71
" (1) Concentrations of dopa and dopamine in plasma and brain were measured in cats following intraperitoneal injection of L-dopa alone (100 mg/kg) or combined with MK-486 (10 mg/kg)."( L-dopa therapy combined with peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor (MK-486) in Parkinsonism.
Kishikawa, H; Ohmoto, T, 1975
)
0.25
"5 g of levodopa daily for up to six months and in 30 patients receiving levodopa (800-1,000 mg) combined with a dopa decarboxylase inhibitor, benserazide (200-250 mg)."( Urinary excretion of monoamines and their metabolites in patients with Parkinson's disease. Response to long-term treatment with levodopa alone or in combination with a dopa decarboxylase inhibitor and clinical correlations.
Rinne, UK; Siirtola, T; Sonninen, V, 1975
)
0.91
" Careful preoperative evaluation and screening combined with limited prescribing can help to limit the magnitude of this problem."( Drug interactions in anesthesia.
Cooke, JE, 1985
)
0.27
"In an experiment on Wistar male rats the authors studied the effects of teturam, diethyldithiocarbamate and Esperale in combination with L-DOPA on the consumption of alcohol and metabolism of biogenic amines in the brain."( [Increased efficacy of teturam combined with L-DOPA in experimental alcoholism in the rat].
Bobkova, NV; Gromova, EA; Khesin, II; Plakkhinas, LA; Tokareva, AE, 1986
)
0.27
"In an open study 25 depressed patients were treated with L-5-hydroxytryptophan (L-5-HTP) either alone or in combination with a peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor."( L-5-hydroxytryptophan alone and in combination with a peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor in the treatment of depression.
Battegay, R; Gastpar, M; Zmilacher, K, 1988
)
0.27
" Brief information on the following reports of drug-drug interactions is given in this article with the intention of giving these reports wider publicity and, possibly, encouraging further observation and research to establish or disprove their validity in a larger and wider range of patients or volunteer subjects."( Early reports on drug interactions.
D'Arcy, PF, 1983
)
0.27
"Lisuride, a semisynthetic ergoline and potent central dopamine and serotonin agonist, was combined with levodopa in 20 patients with advanced Parkinson disease who were no longer responding satisfactorily to levodopa, including 14 patients with "on-off' phenomena."( Lisuride combined with levodopa in advanced Parkinson disease.
Goldstein, M; Gopinathan, G; Leibowitz, M; Lieberman, AN; Neophytides, A; Pact, V; Walker, R, 1981
)
0.79
"Bromocriptine (Parlodel) was given for 2 years to 17 parkinsonian patients showing inadequate response to treatment over a mean of 7 years with levodopa combined with a decarboxylase inhibitor."( Bromocriptine combined with levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Gauthier, G; Martins da Silva, A, 1982
)
0.76
"We examined whether or not the antiparkinsonian activity of talipexole (B-HT 920, 6-allyl-2-amino-5,6,7,8-tetrahydro-4H-thiazolo[4,5-d]-azepine) could be optimised by combination with L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-dopa)."( Antiparkinsonian activity of talipexole in MPTP-treated monkeys: in combination with L-dopa and as chronic treatment.
Fukuda, T; Irifune, M; Nomoto, M, 1994
)
0.29
"In order to compare two titrations of Parlodel in early combination with levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease a multicentre randomized open study was performed with a fast titration in group A (15 mg/day for 3 weeks) and slow in group B (15 mg/day for 5 weeks)."( [Parlodel in early combination with levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson disease. Comparison of 2 dosage forms].
Bourdeix, I; Chaumet-Riffaud, PD; Goulley, F; Wolmark, Y,
)
0.64
"To compare effectiveness of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in treating early, mild Parkinson's disease."( Comparison of therapeutic effects and mortality data of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in patients with early, mild Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's Disease Research Group of the United Kingdom.
Lees, AJ, 1995
)
0.83
"Treatment with levodopa and dopa decarboxylase inhibitor (arm 1) or levodopa and decarboxylase inhibitor in combination with selegiline (arm 2)."( Comparison of therapeutic effects and mortality data of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in patients with early, mild Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's Disease Research Group of the United Kingdom.
Lees, AJ, 1995
)
0.89
"Levodopa in combination with selegiline seemed to confer no clinical benefit over levodopa alone in treating early, mild Parkinson's disease."( Comparison of therapeutic effects and mortality data of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in patients with early, mild Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's Disease Research Group of the United Kingdom.
Lees, AJ, 1995
)
1.98
" When combined with N-0923, nicotine did not further enhance its effects."( Nicotine alone and in combination with L-DOPA methyl ester or the D(2) agonist N-0923 in MPTP-induced chronic hemiparkinsonian monkeys.
Domino, EF; Ni, L; Zhang, H, 1999
)
0.3
"The effects of ketamine, a noncompetitive antagonist of NMDA receptors, on the striatal dopaminergic system were evaluated multiparametrically in the monkey brain using high-resolution positron emission tomography (PET) in combination with microdialysis."( Ketamine decreased striatal [(11)C]raclopride binding with no alterations in static dopamine concentrations in the striatal extracellular fluid in the monkey brain: multiparametric PET studies combined with microdialysis analysis.
Fukumoto, D; Harada, N; Kakiuchi, T; Nishiyama, S; Ohba, H; Sato, K; Tsukada, H, 2000
)
0.31
" For the first 3 weeks patients received single doses of levodopa 100 mg or placebo daily in combination with physiotherapy."( Effect of levodopa in combination with physiotherapy on functional motor recovery after stroke: a prospective, randomised, double-blind study.
Fries, W; Koenig, E; Müller, F; Scheidtmann, K, 2001
)
0.96
"A single dose of levodopa is well tolerated and, when given in combination with physiotherapy, enhances motor recovery in patients with hemiplegia."( Effect of levodopa in combination with physiotherapy on functional motor recovery after stroke: a prospective, randomised, double-blind study.
Fries, W; Koenig, E; Müller, F; Scheidtmann, K, 2001
)
1.05
" In the present study, we examined tissues from normal macaque monkeys treated for 13 weeks with high doses of L-DOPA (in combination with the peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor, carbidopa) and/or the COMT inhibitor, entacapone."( Chronic high dose L-DOPA alone or in combination with the COMT inhibitor entacapone does not increase oxidative damage or impair the function of the nigro-striatal pathway in normal cynomologus monkeys.
Halliwell, B; Jenner, P; Lyras, L; McKenzie, G; Pearce, RK; Zeng, BY, 2002
)
0.31
" When a levodopa or droxidopa preparation, judged as grade 3 in screening, was concomitantly administered with an iron preparation, a significant reduction in bioavailability of the test drug was observed, indicating possible drug interaction between the test drug and oral iron."( [Simple method for precognition of drug interaction between oral iron and phenolic hydroxyl group-containing drugs].
Kamimura, N; Murayama, N; Sunagane, N; Terawaki, Y; Uruno, T; Yoshinobu, E, 2005
)
0.76
"In two 4-week polysomnography pilot studies with 10 patients each, we investigated the efficacy of oral lisuride as monotherapy in de novo RLS patients as well as in combination with levodopa in advanced RLS."( Lisuride treatment of restless legs syndrome: first studies with monotherapy in de novo patients and in combination with levodopa in advanced disease.
Benes, H; Deissler, A; Engfer, A; Kohnen, R; Rodenbeck, A, 2006
)
0.73
"Fifty cases in a treatment group were treated by acupuncture combined with madopar, and 30 cases in a control group treated by madopar only."( Fifty cases of Parkinson's disease treated by acupuncture combined with madopar.
Ren, XM, 2008
)
0.35
" We now examine the effects of the novel high affinity, dopamine D(2) receptor partial agonist, aplindore alone and in combination with L-dopa in the 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-treated common marmoset."( The dopamine D(2) receptor partial agonist aplindore improves motor deficits in MPTP-treated common marmosets alone and combined with L-dopa.
Andree, TH; Hansard, M; Hoffman, DC; Hurtt, MR; Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; Kehne, JH; Pitler, TA; Smith, LA; Stack, G, 2010
)
0.36
" These results suggest that pramipexole could be administered with a reduced dose of levodopa to minimize dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease while maintaining therapeutic efficacy."( Pramipexole combined with levodopa improves motor function but reduces dyskinesia in MPTP-treated common marmosets.
Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; Olanow, CW; Rose, S; Tayarani-Binazir, KA, 2010
)
0.88
"An HPLC method combined with second-order calibration based on alternating trilinear decomposition (ATLD) algorithm has been developed for the quantitative analysis of levodopa (LVD), carbidopa (CBD) and methyldopa (MTD) in human plasma samples."( Quantitative analysis of levodopa, carbidopa and methyldopa in human plasma samples using HPLC-DAD combined with second-order calibration based on alternating trilinear decomposition algorithm.
Fu, HY; Li, SF; Li, YN; Nie, JF; Wu, HL; Yu, RQ; Yu, YJ, 2010
)
0.86
" However, once dyskinesia has developed, dopamine agonists administered with l-dopa exacerbate involuntary movements."( The partial dopamine agonist pardoprunox (SLV308) administered in combination with l-dopa improves efficacy and decreases dyskinesia in MPTP treated common marmosets.
Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; McCreary, AC; Rose, S; Tayarani-Binazir, K, 2010
)
0.36
"To determine the efficacy of standard levodopa combined with controlled release levodopa and entacapone in controlling end-of-dose symptoms in Parkinson's disease."( A single-blind cross over study investigating the efficacy of standard and controlled release levodopa in combination with entacapone in the treatment of end-of-dose effect in people with Parkinson's disease.
Danoudis, M; Iansek, R, 2011
)
0.86
"A single-blind cross over design was used to compare the duration of action for three pharmacological combinations: standard levodopa (L/DDC); standard levodopa combined with entacapone (L/DDC/E); and standard levodopa combined with controlled release levodopa (CR) and entacapone (L/DDC/CR/E)."( A single-blind cross over study investigating the efficacy of standard and controlled release levodopa in combination with entacapone in the treatment of end-of-dose effect in people with Parkinson's disease.
Danoudis, M; Iansek, R, 2011
)
0.79
" We sought to prospectively study the effects of levodopa (LD) and/or methylphenidate (MPH) in combination with physiotherapy on mood and cognition following stroke in human subjects."( Effect of methylphenidate and/or levodopa combined with physiotherapy on mood and cognition after stroke: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Delbari, A; Lokk, J; Salman-Roghani, R, 2011
)
0.9
"A 15-day course of daily MPH + LD combined with physiotherapy over a 3-week period was safe and significantly improved mood status in ischemic stroke patients."( Effect of methylphenidate and/or levodopa combined with physiotherapy on mood and cognition after stroke: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Delbari, A; Lokk, J; Salman-Roghani, R, 2011
)
0.65
" VU0364770 showed efficacy alone or when administered in combination with L-DOPA or an adenosine 2A (A2A) receptor antagonist currently in clinical development (preladenant)."( The metabotropic glutamate receptor 4-positive allosteric modulator VU0364770 produces efficacy alone and in combination with L-DOPA or an adenosine 2A antagonist in preclinical rodent models of Parkinson's disease.
Amalric, M; Blobaum, AL; Bode, J; Bridges, TM; Bubser, M; Conn, PJ; Daniels, JS; Dickerson, JW; Engers, DW; Hopkins, CR; Italiano, K; Jadhav, S; Jones, CK; Lindsley, CW; Morrison, RD; Niswender, CM; Thompson, AD; Turle-Lorenzo, N, 2012
)
0.38
"A short-term, randomized, partly blinded, crossover, investigator-initiated clinical trial was performed, with levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel combined with oral entacapone and tolcapone on two different days in 10 patients."( Levodopa infusion combined with entacapone or tolcapone in Parkinson disease: a pilot trial.
Askmark, H; Johansson, A; Lennernäs, H; Nyholm, D, 2012
)
2.03
" However, when combined with high dose oral levodopa, an increase in the plasticity of the visual cortex can lead to occlusion amblyopia."( Occlusion-amblyopia following high dose oral levodopa combined with part time patching.
Kothari, M, 2014
)
0.92
" However, our results suggest that mavoglurant combined with higher doses of L-dopa may be effective in treating patients with Parkinson's disease experiencing L-dopa-related motor fluctuations and dyskinesias."( Mavoglurant (AFQ056) in combination with increased levodopa dosages in Parkinson's disease patients.
Dronamraju, N; Graf, A; Hauser, RA; Kenney, C; Kumar, R; Merschhemke, M; Mostillo, J, 2016
)
0.69
" The cost-effectiveness of DBS combined with BMT, versus BMT alone, was evaluated from a UK payer perspective."( The cost-effectiveness of deep brain stimulation in combination with best medical therapy, versus best medical therapy alone, in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Annoni, E; Ashkan, K; Chaudhuri, KR; Deuschl, G; Eggington, S; Valldeoriola, F, 2014
)
0.4
"The aim of this review is to describe the rationale and main underlying reasons for undertaking, during clinical development, the study of drug candidates used separately and/or in combination with other technologies."( Rationale for Assessing Safety and Efficacy of Drug Candidates Alone and in Combination with Medical Devices: The Case Study of SpinalonTM.
Guertin, PA, 2017
)
0.46
"To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with Madopar for the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD), compared to the use of Madopar alone."( Effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with Madopar for Parkinson's disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Chen, L; Chen, W; Dong, H; Geng, G; Li, T; Liu, H; Zhan, S; Zhang, Z, 2017
)
0.46
" Meta-analyses showed that acupuncture combined with Madopar for the treatment of PD can significantly improve the clinical effectiveness compared with Madopar alone (RR=1."( Effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with Madopar for Parkinson's disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Chen, L; Chen, W; Dong, H; Geng, G; Li, T; Liu, H; Zhan, S; Zhang, Z, 2017
)
0.46
"Acupuncture combined with Madopar appears, to some extent, to improve clinical effectiveness and safety in the treatment of PD, compared with Madopar alone."( Effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with Madopar for Parkinson's disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Chen, L; Chen, W; Dong, H; Geng, G; Li, T; Liu, H; Zhan, S; Zhang, Z, 2017
)
0.46
" Dilution of propionic anhydride 1:4 (v/v) in acetonitrile in combination with 50 μL of plasma resulted in the highest mass spectrometric response."( In Matrix Derivatization Combined with LC-MS/MS Results in Ultrasensitive Quantification of Plasma Free Metanephrines and Catecholamines.
Bischoff, R; de Jong, WHA; Eijkelenkamp, K; Kema, IP; van der Ley, CP; van Faassen, M, 2020
)
0.56
"In total, 160 PD patients who were admitted to our hospital were equally randomized into a control treatment group (levodopa alone) and the study group (pramipexole combined with levodopa)."( Efficacy of pramipexole combined with levodopa for Parkinson's disease treatment and their effects on QOL and serum TNF-
Ding, J; Hong, W; Huang, J; Ren, Y; Yang, Z, 2020
)
1.04
"Pramipexole combined with levodopa relieved PD symptoms and improved the quality of life of PD patients, potentially by suppressing serum TNF-α levels."( Efficacy of pramipexole combined with levodopa for Parkinson's disease treatment and their effects on QOL and serum TNF-
Ding, J; Hong, W; Huang, J; Ren, Y; Yang, Z, 2020
)
1.13
"To systematically evaluate the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) compounds combined with levodopa medicine in the treatment of Parkinson's disease(PD), and screen basic herbs to provide certain evidence-based medical proof and program for better guidance on clinical drug use."( [Systematic review and screening of basic Chinese herbs for traditional Chinese medicine compounds combined with levodopa medicine in treatment of Parkinson's disease].
He, TZ; Liu, DD; Liu, HJ; Tan, LJ; Wu, Q; Zhang, JL, 2020
)
0.98
" The subjects in the control group received only levodopa and benserazide hydrochloride treatment, while the observation group was treated with Resagiline in combination with the clinical control group."( Effects of rasagiline combined with levodopa and benserazide hydrochloride on motor function and homocysteine and IGF-1 levels in elderly patients with Parkinson's disease.
Gao, F; Gao, L; Miao, J; Yang, Y, 2023
)
1.44
"In patients with Parkinson's disease who are in the middle and late stages of the disease, the administration of Resagiline combined with levodopa and benserazide hydrochloride can significantly lower the body's serum Hcy level, significantly raise IGF-1 levels, and significantly improve motor function in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Effects of rasagiline combined with levodopa and benserazide hydrochloride on motor function and homocysteine and IGF-1 levels in elderly patients with Parkinson's disease.
Gao, F; Gao, L; Miao, J; Yang, Y, 2023
)
1.39

Bioavailability

This study aimed to examine the effects of banana juice on levodopa bioavailability in rats. Domperidone slightly increases the immediate bioavailability (over 4 h) and anti-parkinsonian response to a given dose of Levodopa.

ExcerptReferenceRelevance
" A number of these derivatives effectively prevent the metabolism of L-Dopa prior to and/or during the absorption process, resulting in a significantly better bioavailability of the drug."( Improved delivery through biological membranes. 4. Prodrugs of L-dopa.
Bodor, N; Higuchi, T; Sasahara, K; Sloan, KB, 1977
)
0.26
"The physiological basis for the reduced levodopa bioavailability following oral administration was investigated."( Influence of route of administration on physiological availability of levodopa in dogs.
Boxenbaum, HG; Cotler, S; Holazo, A; Kaplan, SA, 1976
)
0.76
" This non-linear increase in laevodopa bioavailability is consistent with the hypothesis that high oral doses of laevodopa are required to saturate gastro-intestinal metabolism of the drug."( Dose-dependent pharmacokinetics of laevodopa and its metabolites in the rat.
Cheng, LK; Fung, HL, 1976
)
0.26
" There was a relationship between the improvement of constipation and the higher bioavailability of L-dopa."( Clinical and pharmacokinetic effects of a diet rich in insoluble fiber on Parkinson disease.
Astarloa, R; de la Vega, L; de Yébenes, JG; Mena, MA; Sánchez, V, 1992
)
0.28
" Almost equivalent bioavailability (85-90%) of levodopa was demonstrated for the controlled-release formulations relative to that of conventional Madopar capsules."( Comparative multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of controlled-release levodopa products.
Collin, C; Eckernäs, SA; Grahnén, A; Ling-Andersson, A; Nilsson, M; Tiger, G, 1992
)
0.78
" Bioavailability of Sinemet CR levodopa is less than that of standard Sinemet, so a slightly higher total daily levodopa dose is required to achieve a comparable effect; but because Sinemet CR is absorbed much more slowly than is the standard preparation, dosing frequency can be reduced by up to half."( The use of Sinemet CR in the management of mild to moderate Parkinson's disease.
Rodnitzky, RL, 1992
)
0.57
" A significant negative regression was also seen of duration of therapy on the dose absorbed per unit distribution volume, but not on the elimination rate constant, indicating a decrease in bioavailability and/or an increase in distribution volume with duration."( Effect of duration of levodopa/decarboxylase inhibitor therapy on the pharmacokinetic handling of levodopa in elderly patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease.
Bowes, SG; Deshmukh, AA; Dobbs, RJ; Dobbs, SM; Leeman, AL; Nicholson, PW; O'Neill, CJ, 1991
)
0.6
" The relative bioavailability of SL apomorphine ranged from 10 to 22% of a parenteral apomorphine dose."( Absorption of apomorphine by various routes in parkinsonism.
Gancher, ST; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1991
)
0.28
" dosing (65 min), and bioavailability was 40%."( Pharmacokinetics, bioavailability, metabolism, tissue distribution and urinary excretion of gamma-L-glutamyl-L-dopa in the rat.
Cummings, J; Matheson, LM; Maurice, L; Smyth, JF, 1990
)
0.28
"The effect of chronic intake of the anticholinergic drug orphenadrine on the bioavailability of levodopa was studied in six patients with Parkinson's disease."( Combined levodopa-anticholinergic therapy in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Effect on levodopa bioavailability.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Procaccianti, G; Riva, R, 1991
)
0.92
" enhanced bioavailability and prolonged plasma half-life of L-DOPA, pronounced DOPA sparing effect and blockade of 3-OMD formation."( Ro 40-7592: inhibition of COMT in rat brain and extracerebral tissues.
Colzi, A; Da Prada, M; Zürcher, G, 1990
)
0.28
" The methods have been utilized to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of oral dosage forms containing levodopa and carbidopa."( Simultaneous high-performance liquid chromatographic analysis of carbidopa, levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa in plasma and carbidopa, levodopa and dopamine in urine using electrochemical detection.
August, TF; Bayne, WF; Eisenhandler, R; Musson, DG; Titus, DC; Yeh, KC, 1990
)
0.72
" The negative aspects of Madopar HBS are a lower bioavailability that means a dosage increase and a longer latency for the therapeutic response in the morning."( Long-term treatment with Madopar HBS in parkinsonians with fluctuations.
Aljanati, R; Buzó, R; Caamaño, JL; Chouza, C; De Medina, O; Fernandez, A; Plachín, V; Romero, S; Scaramelli, A, 1990
)
0.28
" Nitecapone slightly but significantly increased the relative bioavailability of L-Dopa."( Effect of a novel catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, nitecapone, on the metabolism of L-dopa in healthy volunteers.
Gordin, A; Järvinen, M; Kaakkola, S; Nissinen, E; Pentikäinen, PJ; Rita, H; Schultz, E; Wikberg, T, 1990
)
0.28
" This study examined the effects of administering ferrous sulphate 325 mg with Sinemet (100/25 tablet) on levodopa and carbidopa bioavailability and on signs of Parkinson's disease in nine patients."( Sinemet-ferrous sulphate interaction in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Campbell, NR; Goodridge, AE; Hasinoff, BB; Kara, M; Rankine, D, 1990
)
0.49
"Ferrous sulfate decreases L-dopa bioavailability in humans probably as a result of binding of L-dopa by iron in the gastrointestinal tract."( The effect of ferrous sulfate and pH on L-dopa absorption.
Barrowman, J; Campbell, NR; Campbell, RR; Chernenko, G; Hasinoff, B, 1990
)
0.28
" Mean levodopa plasma levels were comparable between the two types of formulations during optimal treatment, however systemic bioavailability was significantly higher with CR-4."( Clinical and pharmacokinetic evaluation of controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa (CR-4) in parkinsonian patients with severe motor fluctuations: a six month follow-up study.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Jacques, M; Michotte, Y, 1989
)
1
" Current research is directed at overcoming this effect by 1) combining levodopa with new dopamine agonists such as cabergoline or terguride, which have useful pharmacological properties; 2) administering the drugs in different ways to improve their bioavailability (intravenous or subcutaneous infusion); 3) understanding the neurobiological implications of cellular brain grafting; 4) safely transferring the surgical procedure from the experimental to the clinical field."( [Current approaches in the treatment of Parkinson disease].
Caraceni, T; Geminiani, G; Tamma, F, 1989
)
0.51
" Total daily levodopa intake was greater with Sinemet CR, although the bioavailability of levodopa and carbidopa from the two preparations was equivalent."( A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of Sinemet CR (50/200) and standard Sinemet (25/100).
Cedarbaum, JM; Kutt, H; McDowell, FH, 1989
)
0.65
"Prodrugs may be used to improve the absorption and bioavailability of certain active compounds."( NB-355: a novel prodrug for L-DOPA with reduced risk for peak-dose dyskinesias in MPTP-treated squirrel monkeys.
Iversen, SD; Miyaji, M; Naruse, T; Rupniak, NM; Tye, SJ, 1989
)
0.28
" Total daily levodopa dosage increased from 623 to 808 mg/day (+33%), a factor consistent with the lower bioavailability of the controlled-release formulation."( An open multicenter long-term treatment evaluation of Sinemet CR. Sinemet CR Multicenter Study Group.
Bush, DF; Liss, CL; Morton, A, 1989
)
0.65
" Results indicate a levodopa bioavailability of 71% for Sinemet CR, in contrast to a bioavailability of 99% for Sinemet for these subjects."( Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of Sinemet CR: a summary of human studies.
August, TF; Bush, DF; Lasseter, KC; Musson, DG; Schwartz, S; Smith, ME; Titus, DC; Yeh, KC, 1989
)
0.6
" Levodopa bioavailability and clearance were similar between formulations."( Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (Sinemet 50/200 CR4): clinical and pharmacokinetic studies.
Berchou, RC; Galloway, MP; Kareti, D; Kesaree, N; LeWitt, PA; Nelson, MV; Schlick, P, 1989
)
1.48
" Although dosages of CR required for an optimal therapeutic response were not significantly higher compared with conventional levodopa, bioavailability significantly increased."( Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (CR) in parkinsonian patients with response fluctuations on standard levodopa treatment: clinical and pharmacokinetic observations.
Deleu, D; Ebinger, G; Jacques, M; Michotte, Y, 1989
)
0.77
"5-fold increase in daily carbidopa intake on the bioavailability of levodopa was studied in six patients with Parkinson's disease on a low chronic regimen of carbidopa-levodopa (Sinemet) at the fixed ratio of 1:10."( Increased dosage of carbidopa in parkinsonian patients on low carbidopa-levodopa regimen. Effect on levodopa bioavailability.
Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Procaccianti, G; Riva, R, 1989
)
0.74
"The bioavailability of L-dopa following rectal administration of a series of short-chain alkyl esters of L-dopa was determined in rats and dogs."( Short-chain alkyl esters of L-dopa as prodrugs for rectal absorption.
Alexander, J; Cortese, M; Engle, K; Fix, JA; Leppert, P; Repta, AJ, 1989
)
0.28
" The bioavailability of levodopa was significantly greater in the elderly (0."( The effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa administered alone and in the presence of carbidopa.
Everest, H; George, CF; Monks, K; Renwick, AG; Robertson, DR; Waller, DG; Wood, ND, 1989
)
0.84
"4 times larger bioavailability (AUC) on plasma L-dopa concentrations than those of L-dopa itself."( A new potential prodrug to improve the duration of L-dopa: L-3-(3-hydroxy-4-pivaloyloxyphenyl)alanine.
Hisaka, A; Ihara, M; Sawasaki, Y; Takehana, H; Tomimoto, K; Tsuchiya, Y; Yano, M, 1989
)
0.28
" Current research efforts are directed at developing oral dopamine analogs that exhibit improved bioavailability and do not traverse the blood-brain barrier."( The use of levodopa, an oral dopamine precursor, in congestive heart failure.
Broderick, G; Rajfer, SI, 1989
)
0.67
"This study examined the effect of ferrous sulfate, a widely used iron treatment, on levodopa bioavailability in normal subjects."( Ferrous sulfate reduces levodopa bioavailability: chelation as a possible mechanism.
Campbell, NR; Hasinoff, B, 1989
)
0.81
"The effect of doubling carbidopa intake on single dose bioavailability of L-Dopa was examined in five parkinsonian patients."( Effect of supplemental carbidopa on bioavailability of L-dopa.
Cedarbaum, JM; Dhar, AK; Kutt, H; McDowell, FH; Watkins, S, 1986
)
0.27
"The bioavailability of levodopa-benserazide in a standard capsule and a new dispersible tablet was compared in Parkinsonian patients, with (n = 8) and without (n = 8) swallowing difficulties."( Bioavailability and acceptability of a dispersible formulation of levodopa-benserazide in parkinsonian patients with and without dysphagia.
Bayer, AJ; Day, JJ; Finucane, P; Pathy, MS, 1988
)
0.82
" The clinical response to Madopar HBS was delayed and brief; the relative bioavailability was only 50%."( Single-dose studies of a slow-release preparation of levodopa and benserazide (Madopar HBS) in Parkinson's disease.
Jenner, P; Malcolm, SL; Marion, MH; Marsden, CD; Quinn, NP; Stocchi, F, 1987
)
0.52
" As compared with Sinemet CR4, there was a greater delay in the occurrence of peak plasma levodopa concentrations, and relative bioavailability was reduced."( Controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa. III: Sinemet CR5 treatment of response fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Cedarbaum, JM; Hoey, M; Kutt, H; McDowell, FH, 1988
)
0.82
" In comparison with standard Madopar the rate of absorption is reduced, providing lower peak concentrations of L-dopa."( Single-dose pharmacokinetics of Madopar HBS in patients and effect of food and antacid on the absorption of Madopar HBS in volunteers.
Allen, JG; Bird, H; Malcolm, SL; Marion, MH; Marsden, CD; O'Leary, CG; Quinn, NP, 1987
)
0.27
" The mean relative bioavailability (versus standard Madopar) was 58 and 67% (value normalized to dose) for one and two HBS capsules, respectively."( Bioavailability of L-dopa after Madopar HBS administration in healthy volunteers.
Crevoisier, C; Da Prada, M; Hoevels, B; Zürcher, G, 1987
)
0.27
" In nine subjects who completed the trial, the clinical response, occurrence of dyskinesias and of nausea and vomiting, were similar with both treatments, although peak plasma levodopa concentration and levodopa bioavailability were greater on levodopa-domperidone than on levodopa-carbidopa."( Comparison of levodopa with carbidopa, and levodopa with domperidone in Parkinson's disease.
Langdon, N; Malcolm, PN; Parkes, JD, 1986
)
0.82
" However, response fluctuations continued to occur, day-to-day consistency was poor, and the bioavailability of levodopa appeared less than that of standard Sinemet."( Controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa. I. Sinemet CR3 treatment of response fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Breck, L; Cedarbaum, JM; Kutt, H; McDowell, FH, 1987
)
0.81
" Using this value for clearance, it is estimated that carbidopa doubles the bioavailability of orally administered levodopa."( The effect of carbidopa on the pharmacokinetics of intravenously administered levodopa: the mechanism of action in the treatment of parkinsonism.
Anderson, JL; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1985
)
0.71
" This tablet was considered appropriate for the bioavailability tests described in this paper."( Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa VI: formulation of effervescent enteric-coated tablets.
Arai, M; Ikegami, Y; Morioka, T; Nakajima, E; Nishimura, K; Nitanai, T; Sasahara, K, 1984
)
0.51
" 163, administered as their DL-racemic mixtures, produced increases in the t1/2 and bioavailability of co-administered L-DOPA comparable to that produced by a 10-fold larger dose of carbidopa administered as the active L-enantiomer; increasing the dose of MDL 72."( A comparison of the effects of reversible and irreversible inhibitors of aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase on the half-life and other pharmacokinetic parameters of oral L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine.
Haegele, KD; Huebert, ND; Palfreyman, MG,
)
0.13
"To investigate the relation between "on-off" fluctuations in symptomatology and bioavailability of dopa in patients with Parkinson's disease, five Parkinsonian patients with pronounced "on-off" symptoms were studied."( "On-off" phenomenon in Parkinson's disease: correlation to the concentration of dopa in plasma.
Carlsson, A; Eriksson, T; Granérus, AK; Linde, A; Magnusson, T, 1984
)
0.27
" Domperidone slightly increases the immediate bioavailability (over 4 h) and anti-parkinsonian response to a given dose of levodopa."( Domperidone and levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Davies, CL; Dolan, AL; Finnerty, GT; Parkes, JD; Shindler, JS; Towlson, K, 1984
)
0.82
"Various drugs have been studied in order to improve the bioavailability of L-DOPA."( Effects of 3,4-dihydroxyphenylpyruvic acid and its triacetylated derivative on DOPA decarboxylase.
Lindén, IB; Neuvonen, PJ; Vapaatalo, H, 1982
)
0.26
"Several potential mechanisms for reduced levodopa bioavailability following oral administration to dogs and humans were investigated by studying the influence of the administration route on plasma levodopa levels after intravenous, hepatoportal, and duodenal administrations to dogs."( Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa IV: Possible causes of low bioavailability of oral levodopa in dogs.
Habara, T; Kawahara, Y; Kojima, T; Morioka, T; Nakajima, E; Nitanai, T; Sasahara, K, 1981
)
0.77
"To estimate the absolute bioavailability of oral levodopa, plasma concentrations and urinary excretion of levodopa and its metabolites were determined in beagle dogs and in parkinsonian patients after intravenous and oral drug administration."( Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa II: bioavailability of marketed levodopa preparations in dogs and parkinsonian patients.
Habara, T; Morioka, T; Nakajima, E; Nitanai, T; Sasahara, K, 1980
)
0.76
" The mean bioavailability varied between 14."( Pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of rectal apomorphine in patients with Parkinson's disease: a study of five different suppositories.
Danhof, M; Jansen, EN; Neef, C; Roos, RA; van Laar, T, 1995
)
0.29
" There were no statistically significant differences in the cumulative amount absorbed of drug and the absorption rate in the presence or absence of Madopar."( Lack of an effect of Madopar on the disposition of tolcapone and its 3-O-methylated metabolite in rats.
Fukazawa, H; Funaki, T; Kuruma, I; Onodera, H; Tagami, C; Tsukamoto, Y; Ushiyama, N, 1995
)
0.29
" These findings support the notion that tolcapone has the ability to enhance striatal dopamine neurotransmission by increasing L-dopa bioavailability through peripheral and central inhibition of L-dopa O-methylation, as well as by blocking the central conversion of dopamine into 3-methoxytyramine."( Effects of tolcapone, a novel catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, on striatal metabolism of L-dopa and dopamine in rats.
Da Prada, M; Napolitano, A; Zürcher, G, 1995
)
0.29
" In animal studies, these compounds inhibit effectively the O-methylation of L-dopa, thus improving its bioavailability and brain penetration and potentiating its behavioural effects."( General properties and clinical possibilities of new selective inhibitors of catechol O-methyltransferase.
Gordin, A; Kaakkola, S; Männistö, PT, 1994
)
0.29
" The compounds examined ranged from well- to poorly-absorbed and included compounds absorbed by active and passive mechanisms."( Use of everted intestinal rings for in vitro examination of oral absorption potential.
Fix, JA; Leppert, PS, 1994
)
0.29
" There was a significantly higher extent and slower rate of absorption when levodopa was administered ip in a large volume of vehicle."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa and carbidopa in rats following different routes of administration.
Bredberg, E; Lennernäs, H; Paalzow, L, 1994
)
0.84
"Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitors may be useful in the treatment of Parkinson's disease by improving the bioavailability of levodopa and by prolonging its effects."( Effect of entacapone, a peripherally acting catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, on the motor response to acute treatment with levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Bovingdon, M; Gordin, A; Lees, AJ; Merello, M; Webster, R, 1994
)
0.7
" The relative bioavailability of levodopa in the solid preparation compared to the dispersion was in all patients 100%."( Intraduodenal infusion of a water-based levodopa dispersion for optimisation of the therapeutic effect in severe Parkinson's disease.
Aquilonius, SM; Bredberg, E; Johansson, K; Johnels, B; Nilsson, D; Nyström, C; Paalzow, L, 1993
)
0.83
"We studied the effect of entacapone, a selective catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, on the bioavailability and clinical effect of levodopa in Parkinson's disease (PD)."( Effect of entacapone, a COMT inhibitor, on clinical disability and levodopa metabolism in parkinsonian patients.
Ahtila, S; Gordin, A; Kaakkola, S; Rita, H; Teräväinen, H, 1994
)
0.73
" The L-DOPA was shown to hinder the absorption rate of glucose, whereas sulpiridinum was shown to suppress the main enzymes excepting snerase and alkaline phosphatase, to increase the monomeric and hydrolysate glucose transport."( [The role of dopamine in the mechanism of the regulation of the digestive-transport functions of the enterocyte membrane during stress].
Guska, NI; Razlovan, TA; Sheptitskiĭ, VA, 1993
)
0.29
" Due to a lower bioavailability of the slow release formulation--the latter is based on the "hydrodynamically balanced system" (HBS)--, the patients remained initially on their time schedule of drug intake but received a higher dose of L-DOPA slow release compared to the preceding L-DOPA standard therapy."( [Effectiveness of slow release L-DOPA/benserazide in treatment of end-of-dose akinesia in Parkinson disease].
Eichhorn, TE; Kohnen, R; Oertel, WH; Poewe, W; Schrag, A; Selzer, R; Trenkwalder, C, 1995
)
0.29
" Peripheral COMT inhibition with entacapone increased significantly the bioavailability of levodopa and prolonged its antiparkinsonian effect after a single dose and after repeated dosing for 4 weeks."( Effect of one month's treatment with peripherally acting catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, entacapone, on pharmacokinetics and motor response to levodopa in advanced parkinsonian patients.
Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM, 1996
)
0.71
" The relative bioavailability of levodopa in plasma was 69% for the combination of SR and IR levodopa release, for the pure SR formulations (100 mg levodopa) 54% and (200 mg levodopa) 55%, compared to the 100% of the standard form of IR release of 100 mg levodopa."( Sustained-release of levodopa: single dose study of a new formulation.
Gerlach, M; Klotz, P; Kuhn, W; Müller, T; Przuntek, H, 1996
)
0.89
" On the contrary, the [3H]mazindol tracer dose induced a marked labelling of the noradrenaline uptake complex in cerebellum; its prevention by desipramine (5 mg/kg) increased simultaneously the cerebral bioavailability and thereby the striatal labelling of the dopamine transporter."( Pharmacological modifications of dopamine transmission do not influence the striatal in vivo binding of [3H]mazindol or [3H]cocaine in mice.
Bonnet, JJ; Costentin, J; Thibaut, F; Vaugeois, JM, 1996
)
0.29
" The lead compound SDZ EAB 515 was found to inhibit L-phenylalanine uptake by the large neutral amino acid carrier in vitro and in vivo; active transport may thus confer a good bioavailability to this class of compounds."( Biphenyl-derivatives of 2-amino-7-phosphono-heptanoic acid, a novel class of potent competitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists--II. Pharmacological characterization in vivo.
Campbell, E; Fricker, G; Jenner, P; Lemaire, M; McAllister, KH; Müller, W; Neijt, HC; Park, CK; Perkins, M; Rudin, M; Sauter, A; Smith, L; Urwyler, S; Wiederhold, KH, 1996
)
0.29
" Aim of this open prospective study was to investigate (1) the efficacy of a new developed, parenteral application form of NADH on Parkinsonian symptoms and (2) the influence of bioavailability of levodopa."( Parenteral application of NADH in Parkinson's disease: clinical improvement partially due to stimulation of endogenous levodopa biosynthesis.
Danielczik, S; Gerstner, A; Häcker, R; Kuhn, W; Mattern, C; Müller, T; Przuntek, H; Winkel, R, 1996
)
0.69
"The effects of tolcapone, a catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, on the bioavailability and efficacy of levodopa were evaluated in 12 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), 8 of whom showed signs of daily motor fluctuations (wearing-off phenomenon)."( Effects of tolcapone, a catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, on motor symptoms and pharmacokinetics of levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Hattori, Y; Kanazawa, I; Kowa, H; Kuno, S; Mizuno, Y; Narabayashi, H; Tohgi, H; Tsukamoto, Y; Yamamoto, M; Yanagisawa, N; Yokochi, M, 1997
)
0.72
" Tolcapone had similar effects on plasma levodopa concentrations with the standard-release formulations: half-life and bioavailability increased approximately 2-fold compared with placebo, and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and time to Cmax (tmax) were unaffected, except for a slight increase in Cmax with the levodopa/benserazide 200/ 50 mg formulation."( The effect of COMT inhibition by tolcapone on tolerability and pharmacokinetics of different levodopa/benserazide formulations.
Aitken, J; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Nielsen, T; Schmitt, M; Zürcher, G, 1997
)
0.78
" The absorption and bioavailability of CR 25/100 are minimally greater than CR 50/200."( Controlled release levodopa/carbidopa 25/100 (Sinemet CR 25/100): pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy in untreated parkinsonian patients.
Block, GA; Cyhan, G; Gancher, ST; Hammerstad, JP; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1994
)
0.62
" Inhibition of catechol-O-methyltransferase by tolcapone has been shown to increase levodopa bioavailability and plasma elimination half life, thereby prolonging the efficacy of levodopa."( Catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibition with tolcapone reduces the "wearing off" phenomenon and levodopa requirements in fluctuating parkinsonian patients.
Baas, H; Beiske, AG; Ghika, J; Jackson, M; Oertel, WH; Poewe, W; Ransmayr, G, 1997
)
0.74
" The total daily levodopa intake was significantly greater with L-CR because of the reduced bioavailability of the L-CR."( Comparison of standard carbidopa-levodopa and sustained-release carbidopa-levodopa in Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic and quality-of-life measures.
Koller, WC; Lyons, K; McGuire, D; Pahwa, R; Robischon, M; Silverstein, P; Zwiebel, F, 1997
)
0.92
" Since this occurred following direct administration of l-DOPA into the striatum, the decrease could not be accounted for by peripheral pharmacodynamics or bioavailability of l-DOPA in the striatum."( Effects of repeated administration of l-DOPA and apomorphine on circling behavior and striatal dopamine formation.
Brannan, T; Prikhojan, A; Yahr, MD, 1998
)
0.3
"Clinical pharmacology studies have shown that the catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor tolcapone increases the bioavailability area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and the plasma elimination half-life (t1/2) of levodopa."( The effect of tolcapone on levodopa pharmacokinetics is independent of levodopa/carbidopa formulation.
Aitken, J; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Nielsen, T; Sedek, G, 1998
)
0.78
" With COMT inhibition, greater peripheral bioavailability of levodopa occurs in humans without an enhancement of peak plasma levels."( Influence of COMT inhibition on levodopa pharmacology and therapy.
Goetz, CG, 1998
)
0.83
" When given together with levodopa/DCI, tolcapone increases the relative bioavailability and plasma elimination half-life of levodopa, without affecting its peak plasma concentration."( Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and tolerability of tolcapone: a review of early studies in volunteers.
Jorga, KM, 1998
)
0.6
" Inhibition of catechol-O-methyltransferase by tolcapone has been shown to increase levodopa bioavailability and plasma elimination half life, thereby prolonging the efficacy of levodopa."( Catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibition with tolcapone reduces the "wearing off" phenomenon and levodopa requirements in fluctuating parkinsonian patients.
Baas, H; Beiske, AG; Ghika, J; Jackson, M; Oertel, WH; Poewe, W; Ransmayr, G, 1998
)
0.74
" The bioavailability was significantly increased by 40% (AUC0-infinity=6."( Comparative single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa following a new dual-release and a conventional slow-release formulation of levodopa and benserazide in healthy subjects.
Crevoisier, C; Dingemanse, J; Gasser, UE; Lankhaar, G; Ouwerkerk, M, 1998
)
0.54
"Positron emission tomography (PET) seems to be a valuable method for the understanding of intestinal absorption mechanisms, for simultaneous quantitation of absorption rate and distribution kinetics to the tissues of interest after oral drug delivery."( Absorption of L-DOPA from the proximal small intestine studied in the rhesus monkey by positron emission tomography.
Aquilonius, SM; Fasth, KJ; Hartvig, P; Långström, B; Lennernäs, H; Nilsson, D; Sundin, A; Tedroff, J, 1999
)
0.3
" Tolcapone increased the bioavailability (AUC 0-infinity) and apparent elimination half-life (t(1/2)) of levodopa by 80 and 40%, respectively, compared to placebo."( COMT inhibition by tolcapone further improves levodopa pharmacokinetics when combined with a dual-release formulation of levodopa/benserazide. A novel principle in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Crevoisier, C; Gasser, UE; Hovens, SE; Jorga, K; van Giersbergen, PL, 1999
)
0.78
" The bioavailability of oral L-DOPA appears to vary with the dose."( Renal effects of L-DOPA in heart failure.
Goldstein, DS; Grossman, E; Peleg, E; Shenkar, A; Thaler, M, 1999
)
0.3
" The absorption of the drug was shown to be rapid and concomitant food intake had only a minor effect on the relative bioavailability (10-20% reduction compared with fasting)."( Population pharmacokinetics of tolcapone in parkinsonian patients in dose finding studies.
Banken, L; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Snell, P; Steimer, JL, 2000
)
0.31
" It has been shown to improve the bioavailability of plasma levodopa and extend its clinical effect when used as an adjunct to standard levodopa preparations, but there is little experience of the effect of entacapone on controlled release levodopa preparations."( The catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitor entacapone enhances the pharmacokinetic and clinical response to Sinemet CR in Parkinson's disease.
Brooks, DJ; Gordin, A; Karlsson, M; Korpela, K; Pavese, N; Piccini, P, 2000
)
0.55
"A reliable multi-dimensional column chromatographic method employing amperometric detection using a carbon fibre microelectrode procedure was used for monitoring the plasma profiles and to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of levodopa (L-dopa) and carbidopa (C-dopa), after ingestion of oral formulations containing these drugs."( Bioavailability studies of oral dosage forms containing levodopa and carbidopa using column-switching chromatography followed by electrochemical detection.
Sagar, KA; Smyth, MR, 2000
)
0.74
" The consequent increase in levodopa bioavailability was mostly offset by reductions in levodopa dose."( Population pharmacokinetics of levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease treated with tolcapone.
Banken, L; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Snell, P; Steimer, JL, 2000
)
0.89
" In human volunteers, both entacapone and tolcapone dose-dependently inhibit the COMT activity in erythrocytes, improve the bioavailability and decrease the elimination of levodopa, and inhibit the formation of 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD)."( Clinical pharmacology, therapeutic use and potential of COMT inhibitors in Parkinson's disease.
Kaakkola, S, 2000
)
0.5
" Absorption was fast following nasal delivery of the prodrugs with bioavailability around 90%."( Enhancement of the systemic and CNS specific delivery of L-dopa by the nasal administration of its water soluble prodrugs.
Dittert, L; Hussain, A; Itoh, S; Kao, HD; Traboulsi, A, 2000
)
0.31
" In the simulated studies, up to half of the study subjects exhibited FCM, and various levels of intrasubject variability were incorporated into the absorption rate constant."( First measured plasma concentration value as C(max); impact on the C(max) confidence interval in bioequivalence studies.
Conner, D; Jackson, A; Miller, R, 2000
)
0.31
" Results indicate that the first-ever dose of oral L-Dopa is well absorbed and that pharmacokinetic mechanisms such as reduced absorption of L-Dopa probably do not play a major role in the initial delay in clinical response to oral L-Dopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease."( The pharmacokinetic profile of the "first ever" oral dose of levodopa in de novo patients with Parkinson's disease.
Djaldetti, R; Melamed, E; Rosmarin, V; Ziv, I,
)
0.37
" In addition, the choice of alternate formulations and routes of administration will not only improve on the bioavailability and overall pharmacokinetics of levodopa, but also increase compliance."( Role of integrative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic optimization strategy in the management of Parkinson"s disease patients experiencing motor fluctuations with levodopa.
Okereke, CS,
)
0.52
" The relative bioavailability (Madopar DR vs."( Comparative single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa following a new dual-release and a conventional slow-release formulation of levodopa and benserazide in healthy volunteers.
Crevoisier, C; Metzger, B; Monreal, A; Nilsen, T, 2003
)
0.56
" The absolute bioavailability of cabergoline is unknown."( Clinical pharmacokinetics of cabergoline.
Bonuccelli, U; Del Dotto, P, 2003
)
0.32
"Novel glycosyl derivatives of dopamine and L-dopa (I-IV) are synthesized in order to overcome the problem of blood-brain barrier low permeability of dopamine and of low bioavailability of its precursor L-dopa."( Glycosyl derivatives of dopamine and L-dopa as anti-Parkinson prodrugs: synthesis, pharmacological activity and in vitro stability studies.
Boatto, G; Bonina, F; Calignano, A; De Caprariis, P; La Rana, G; Melisi, D; Nieddu, M; Puglia, C; Rimoli, MG, 2003
)
0.32
"There are doubts wether generic medications have the same bioavailability and efficacy compared with the original drugs developed by pharmaceutical companies with research capabilities."( [Pharmacokinetic comparison of Sinemet and Grifoparkin (levodopa/carbidopa 250/25 mg) in Parkinson s disease: a single dose study].
Chaná, P; Fierro, A; Reyes-Parada, M; Sáez-Briones, P, 2003
)
0.57
" In conclusion, the novel COMT inhibitor BIA 3-202 was well tolerated and significantly increased the bioavailability of levodopa and reduced the formation of 3-OMD when administered with standard release levodopa/benserazide."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction between BIA 3-202, a novel COMT inhibitor, and levodopa/benserazide.
Almeida, L; Falcão, A; Loureiro, A; Machado, R; Maia, J; Silveira, P; Soares-da-Silva, P; Torrão, L; Vaz-da-Silva, M; Wright, L, 2003
)
0.75
" In switching patients who are receiving levodopa/carbidopa controlled-release (CR), it should be noted that the bioavailability of levodopa from levodopa/carbidopa CR is approximately 70-75% that of levodopa/carbidopa IR products, including Stalevo."( Levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (Stalevo).
Hauser, RA, 2004
)
2.03
" This increased duration of 'on' time was concomitant with a significant increase in levodopa bioavailability (AUC)."( Entacapone improves the pharmacokinetic and therapeutic response of controlled release levodopa/carbidopa in Parkinson's patients.
Barbato, L; Bolner, A; Caraceni, T; Nordera, G; Stocchi, F, 2004
)
0.77
" In conclusion, the novel COMT inhibitor BIA 3-202 increased the bioavailability of levodopa and reduced the formation of 3-OMD when administered with standard levodopa/carbidopa."( Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction between BIA 3-202, a novel COMT inhibitor, and levodopa/carbidopa.
Almeida, L; Falcão, A; Loureiro, A; Machado, R; Maia, J; Silveira, P; Soares-da-Silva, P; Torrão, L; Vaz-da-Silva, M; Wright, L,
)
0.58
" Long-term levodopa administration results in an increased levodopa plasma bioavailability in PD patients."( Chronic levodopa intake increases levodopa plasma bioavailability in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Przuntek, H; Twiehaus, S; Welnic, J; Woitalla, D, 2004
)
1.15
" COMT inhibitors prolong the elimination of LD, while DDC inhibitors mainly increase its absorption; both mechanisms leading to increased bioavailability of LD."( Clinical advantages of COMT inhibition with entacapone - a review.
Gordin, A; Kaakkola, S; Teräväinen, H, 2004
)
0.32
"Entacapone is a COMT inhibitor used in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, as an adjunctive therapy to L-dopa in order to prolong its bioavailability and thus its clinical effect."( Delayed administration may improve entacapone effects in parkinsonian patients non-responding to the drug.
Bassi, A; Brusa, L; Fedele, E; Lunardi, G; Pasqualetti, P; Peppe, A; Pierantozzi, M; Stanzione, P; Stefani, A, 2004
)
0.32
" To improve the bioavailability of the synthesized prodrugs, they were encapsulated in unilamellar liposomes of dimiristoylphosphatidylcholine (DMPC) and cholesterol (CHOL)."( Evaluation of rat striatal L-dopa and DA concentration after intraperitoneal administration of L-dopa prodrugs in liposomal formulations.
Braghiroli, D; Cannazza, G; Carafa, M; Di Stefano, A; Marianecci, C; Orlando, G; Pinnen, F; Ricciutelli, M; Santucci, E; Sozio, P, 2004
)
0.32
" When a levodopa or droxidopa preparation, judged as grade 3 in screening, was concomitantly administered with an iron preparation, a significant reduction in bioavailability of the test drug was observed, indicating possible drug interaction between the test drug and oral iron."( [Simple method for precognition of drug interaction between oral iron and phenolic hydroxyl group-containing drugs].
Kamimura, N; Murayama, N; Sunagane, N; Terawaki, Y; Uruno, T; Yoshinobu, E, 2005
)
0.76
" Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitors increase the half-life and bioavailability of levodopa, providing more continuous dopamine receptor stimulation."( Early administration of entacapone prevents levodopa-induced motor fluctuations in hemiparkinsonian rats.
Aguilar, E; Bonastre, M; Marin, C; Obeso, JA; Tolosa, E, 2005
)
0.81
" The use of catechol-O-methyl transferase (COMT) inhibitors likewise increases the bioavailability and brings about a smooth drug profile."( A walk through the management of Parkinson s disease.
Lim, E, 2005
)
0.33
" Entacapone increases the bioavailability and reduces the daily variation of plasma levodopa when administered with standard levodopa preparations."( Entacapone increases levodopa exposure and reduces plasma levodopa variability when used with Sinemet CR.
Gordin, A; Huupponen, R; Kultalahti, ER; Laine, K; Leinonen, M; Paija, O; Reinikainen, K,
)
0.67
" In this experimental study we have investigated whether the presence of Plantago ovata husk (water-soluble fiber) modifies in rabbits the bioavailability and other pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa (20 mg/kg) when administered by the oral route at the same time."( Hydrosoluble fiber (Plantago ovata husk) and levodopa I: experimental study of the pharmacokinetic interaction.
Calle, A; Carriedo, D; Diez, MJ; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Gonzalez, A; Sahagun, A; Sierra, M, 2005
)
0.78
" ovata husk modifies in rabbits the bioavailability and other pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa (20 mg/kg) when administered by the oral route with carbidopa (5 mg/kg)."( Hydrosoluble fiber (Plantago ovata husk) and levodopa II: experimental study of the pharmacokinetic interaction in the presence of carbidopa.
Calle, A; Carriedo, D; Diez, MJ; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Gonzalez, A; Sahagun, A; Sierra, M, 2005
)
0.81
"This study aimed to examine the effects of banana juice on levodopa bioavailability in rats."( Banana juice reduces bioavailability of levodopa preparation.
Ogo, Y; Ohta, T; Sunagane, N; Uruno, T, 2005
)
0.84
" On this pretense, attempts to reduce the bioavailability of melatonin using a melatonin receptor antagonist have been found to completely restore behavioral and regulatory function in the presence of chronically reduced levels of dopamine, without producing side effects commonly seen with traditional dopamine replacement therapy."( The role of ML-23 and other melatonin analogues in the treatment and management of Parkinson's disease.
Willis, GL, 2005
)
0.33
" The study on levodopa bioavailability showed 3-4 times differences in individual patients."( [Inter- and intraindividual pharmacokinetic variations in the treatment of Parkinson's disease].
Moritoyo, H; Moritoyo, T; Nagai, M; Nakatsuka, A; Nisikawa, N; Nomoto, M; Yabe, H, 2005
)
0.69
" These findings demonstrate that endogenous melatonin protects exogenous L-DOPA from autoxidation in the extracellular compartment of the striatum of freely moving rats; moreover, systemic co-administration of melatonin with L-DOPA markedly increases striatal L-DOPA bioavailability in control as well as in melatonin-depleted rats."( Endogenous melatonin protects L-DOPA from autoxidation in the striatal extracellular compartment of the freely moving rat: potential implication for long-term L-DOPA therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Desole, MS; Esposito, G; Marchetti, B; Miele, E; Migheli, R; Rocchitta, G; Serra, PA, 2006
)
0.33
" Individual differences in the central bioavailability of L-DOPA may provide a clue to the varying susceptibility to dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease."( Role of striatal L-DOPA in the production of dyskinesia in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned rats.
Carta, M; Cenci, MA; Fadda, F; Lindgren, HS; Lundblad, M; Stancampiano, R, 2006
)
0.33
" These results indicate that there may be some interactions between the levodopa preparation and these OTC kampo medicines when ingested together, which leads to a reduction in the bioavailability of levodopa."( [Possibility of interactions between prescription drugs and OTC drugs (2nd report)--interaction between levodopa preparation and OTC Kampo medicines for upset stomach].
Aikawa, M; Ohta, T; Sunagane, N; Uruno, T, 2006
)
0.78
"The maleic and fumaric diamides preparation of (O,O-diacetyl)-L-Dopa-methylester [(+)-4, (+)-5] are reported; they were synthesized in order to attenuate marked fluctuations of L-DOPA (LD) plasma levels and to overcome the problem of low bioavailability of LD."( Maleic- and fumaric-diamides of (O,O-diacetyl)-L-Dopa-methylester as anti-Parkinson prodrugs in liposomal formulation.
Carafa, M; Di Stefano, A; Iannitelli, A; Marianecci, C; Santucci, E; Sozio, P, 2006
)
0.33
" Monoamine oxidase type B (MAO-B) inhibitors can be used across the spectrum of disease severity, but selegiline (deprenyl), the prototype in this class, is characterised by low and erratic bioavailability of the parent drug and conversion to amphetamine metabolites that may increase the risk of adverse events."( Community and long-term care management of Parkinson's disease in the elderly: focus on monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors.
Chen, JJ; Fernandez, HH, 2007
)
0.34
" The oral disintegrating tablet formulation of selegiline allows pregastric absorption, minimizing first-pass metabolism, thereby increasing selegiline bioavailability and reducing the concentration of amphetamine metabolites."( Monoamine oxidase-B inhibition in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Chen, JJ; Fernandez, HH, 2007
)
0.34
"Methods for facilitation of pyloric passage or increase of bioavailability are discussed."( Irregular gastrointestinal drug absorption in Parkinson's disease.
Lennernäs, H; Nyholm, D, 2008
)
0.35
" The main factors responsible for the poor bioavailability and the wide range of inter- and intra-patient variations of plasma levels are the drug's physical-chemical properties: low water and lipid solubility, resulting in unfavourable partition, and the high susceptibility to chemical and enzymatic degradation."( Antiparkinson prodrugs.
Cerasa, LS; Di Stefano, A; Sozio, P, 2008
)
0.35
"The influence of treatment duration (7 or 14 days) with Plantago ovata husk/levodopa/carbidopa in the bioavailability and other pharmacokinetic parameters of levodopa were evaluated in rabbits."( The hydrosoluble fiber Plantago ovata husk improves levodopa (with carbidopa) bioavailability after repeated administration.
Diez, MJ; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Prieto, C; Sahagun, A; Sierra, M, 2008
)
0.83
" Entacapone inhibits the metabolism of levodopa therefore increases the area under the plasma concentration-time profile of levodopa; however, it may decrease the initial absorption rate of levodopa in some patients probably due to competitive absorption."( The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Hsu, A; Khor, SP, 2007
)
0.87
"The aim of the study was to explore the potential effect of the catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor entacapone coadministration on the rate of absorption and matched latency to motor response of an oral test dose of levodopa/benserazide in the treatment of Parkinson disease (PD)."( The effect of entacapone on levodopa rate of absorption and latency to motor response in patients with Parkinson disease.
Albani, F; Avoni, P; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Riva, R; Scaglione, C,
)
0.61
"Slow gastric emptying decreasing levodopa (LD) bioavailability contributes to motor fluctuations in Parkinson disease (PD)."( Clinical experiences with levodopa methylester (melevodopa) in patients with Parkinson disease experiencing motor fluctuations: an open-label observational study.
Antonini, A; Guidi, M; Mancini, F; Martignoni, E; Pacchetti, C; Sciarretta, M; Stocchi, F; Zangaglia, R,
)
0.71
"Antibiotic therapy to eradicate Helicobacter pylori, the causative agent of gastric and duodenal ulcers, has been suggested to improve L-DOPA bioavailability in Parkinson's and thereby improve patient symptomology."( Microbial endocrinology as a basis for improved L-DOPA bioavailability in Parkinson's patients treated for Helicobacter pylori.
Lyte, M, 2010
)
0.36
" However, l-DOPA's efficacy in advanced PD is significantly reduced due to metabolism, subsequent low bioavailability and irregular fluctuations in its plasma levels."( Levodopa delivery systems: advancements in delivery of the gold standard.
Choonara, Y; Du Toit, LC; Modi, G; Naidoo, D; Ndesendo, V; Ngwuluka, N; Pillay, V, 2010
)
1.8
"The ultimate aim was to assess critically the attempts made thus far directed at improving l-DOPA absorption, bioavailability and maintenance of constant plasma concentrations, including the drug delivery technologies implicated."( Levodopa delivery systems: advancements in delivery of the gold standard.
Choonara, Y; Du Toit, LC; Modi, G; Naidoo, D; Ndesendo, V; Ngwuluka, N; Pillay, V, 2010
)
1.8
" With the aim to increase the bioavailability after oral administration, we designed a multi-protected L-DOPA prodrugs able to release the drug by both spontaneous chemical or enzyme catalyzed hydrolysis."( Design, synthesis, and preliminary pharmacological evaluation of new imidazolinones as L-DOPA prodrugs.
Cerasa, LS; Chiavaroli, A; Claudi, F; Di Stefano, A; Ferrante, C; Giorgioni, G; Glennon, RA; Orlando, G; Palmieri, GF; Ricciutelli, M; Ruggieri, S; Sozio, P, 2010
)
0.36
" One time addition of EN to LD/CD showed no increase of maximum LD concentration, but repeat EN supplementation to LD/CD elevated LD bioavailability and peaks."( Entacapone.
Müller, T, 2010
)
0.36
"The absorption rate was significantly delayed at nighttime dosing."( Circadian rhythmicity in levodopa pharmacokinetics in patients with Parkinson disease.
Aquilonius, SM; Estrada, M; Johansson, A; Lennernäs, H; Nyholm, D, 2010
)
0.66
"There is a slower absorption rate of levodopa during nighttime, probably related to delayed gastric emptying."( Circadian rhythmicity in levodopa pharmacokinetics in patients with Parkinson disease.
Aquilonius, SM; Estrada, M; Johansson, A; Lennernäs, H; Nyholm, D, 2010
)
0.94
" Studies have shown that concomitant use of a COMT inhibitor is highly beneficial in controlling the wearing-off phenomenon by improving L-DOPA bioavailability as well as brain entry."( Dual beneficial effects of (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate on levodopa methylation and hippocampal neurodegeneration: in vitro and in vivo studies.
Bishop, SC; Fukui, M; Kang, KS; Wen, Y; Yamabe, N; Zhu, BT, 2010
)
0.6
" The oral bioavailability of D-phenylglycine-L-dopa was 31."( Evidence of D-phenylglycine as delivering tool for improving L-dopa absorption.
Fan, YB; Lu, HH; Tsai, MC; Tsai, TH; Wang, CL; Wang, HP, 2010
)
0.36
" The higher jejunal permeability and the improved systemic bioavailability of D-phenylglycine-L-dopa in comparison to that of l-dopa suggested that D-phenylglycine is an effective delivery tool for improving the oral absorption of drugs like L-dopa with unsatisfactory pharmacokinetics."( Evidence of D-phenylglycine as delivering tool for improving L-dopa absorption.
Fan, YB; Lu, HH; Tsai, MC; Tsai, TH; Wang, CL; Wang, HP, 2010
)
0.36
"The aim of the study was to investigate the potential effect of short, moderate intensity (≤70% maximum heart rate) cyclette exercise on levodopa (LD)/dopa decarboxylase inhibitor bioavailability and motor response in a subgroup of Parkinson disease (PD) patients presenting a moderate-to-severe delay in fasting morning LD dose absorption and matched motor response."( The effect of a clinically practical exercise on levodopa bioavailability and motor response in patients with Parkinson disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Lopane, G; Martinelli, P; Scaglione, C,
)
0.59
" Levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (LCE) provides higher bioavailability of levodopa compared with levodopa/carbidopa formulations and has been shown to be effective in PD patients with wearing-off symptoms."( Night-time bioavailability of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone is higher compared to controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa.
Ellmén, J; Kailajärvi, M; Korpela, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Lehtinen, T; Sauramo, A; Vahteristo, M, 2010
)
1.56
"A single evening dose of LCE 200 was associated with significantly better bioavailability compared with CR-LC 200."( Night-time bioavailability of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone is higher compared to controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa.
Ellmén, J; Kailajärvi, M; Korpela, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Lehtinen, T; Sauramo, A; Vahteristo, M, 2010
)
0.65
"The results of this study demonstrate that a single bedtime dose of LCE 200 provides higher bioavailability of levodopa compared to CR-LC 200."( Night-time bioavailability of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone is higher compared to controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa.
Ellmén, J; Kailajärvi, M; Korpela, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Lehtinen, T; Sauramo, A; Vahteristo, M, 2010
)
0.86
" With the aim of increasing the bioavailability of L: -dopa (LD) after oral administration and of overcoming the pro-oxidant effect associated with LD therapy, we designed a peptidomimetic LD prodrug (1) able to release the active agent by enzyme catalyzed hydrolysis."( CNS delivery of L-dopa by a new hybrid glutathione-methionine peptidomimetic prodrug.
Cacciatore, I; Cerasa, LS; Cornacchia, C; Di Stefano, A; Fontana, A; Iannitelli, A; Mollica, A; Nasuti, C; Pinnen, F; Sozio, P, 2012
)
0.38
"The controlled-release preparations of levodopa or newer soluble preparations of levodopa may improve levodopa bioavailability and tolerability and help managing (or even preventing) motor complications."( Soluble and controlled-release preparations of levodopa: do we really need them?
Berardelli, A; Bloise, M; Di Stasio, F; Fabbrini, G, 2010
)
0.89
" MRZ-8676 (6,6-dimethyl-2-phenylethynyl-7,8-dihydro-6H-quinolin-5-one) is a novel proprietary, selective, orally bioavailable mGluR5 NAM."( Pharmacological characterization of MRZ-8676, a novel negative allosteric modulator of subtype 5 metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR5): focus on L: -DOPA-induced dyskinesia.
Danysz, W; Dekundy, A; Gravius, A; Hechenberger, M; Mela, F; Nagel, J; Parsons, CG; Pietraszek, M; Tober, C; van der Elst, M, 2011
)
0.37
" It has been reported that the bioavailability of LD is higher in elderly patients than in young patients; however, it is not known how ageing changes the bioavailability of LD among elderly patients."( Influence of ageing on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in elderly patients with Parkinson's disease.
Hamamoto, M; Katayama, Y; Kumagai, T; Nagayama, H; Nishimura, S; Nishiyama, Y; Tsukamoto, K; Ueda, M, 2011
)
0.63
"Absorption of the levodopa/carbidopa gel can be adequately described with first-order absorption with bioavailability and lag time."( A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model for duodenal levodopa infusion.
Dougherty, M; Groth, T; Karlsson, MO; Nyholm, D; Pålhagen, S; Westin, J; Willows, T,
)
0.71
" Levodopa bioavailability was higher on day 2 due to the COMT inhibition."( Inhibition of catechol-O-methyltransferase modifies acute homocysteine rise during repeated levodopa application in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Woitalla, D, 2011
)
1.5
"Levodopa moderately increased bioavailability of nerve growth factor and growth hormone combined with the rise of levodopa."( Levodopa induces synthesis of nerve growth factor and growth hormone in patients with Parkinson disease.
Hellwig, R; Muhlack, S; Müller, T,
)
3.02
"The aim of this study was to evaluate the fasting bioavailability of a new generic formulation of levodopa 200 mg/benserazide 50 mg tablets (test) and compare this generic formulation with the branded formulation (reference) to meet regulatory criteria for marketing the test product in Argentina."( Comparative bioavailability of 2 tablet formulations of levodopa/benserazide in healthy, fasting volunteers: a single-dose, randomized-sequence, open-label crossover study.
Assefi, AR; Bertuola, R; Czerniuk, P; Di Girolamo, G; Keller, GA; Spatz, JG, 2011
)
0.83
" The main factors responsible for the poor bioavailability are the drug's physical-chemical properties: low water and lipid solubility, resulting in unfavorable partition, and the high susceptibility to chemical and enzymatic degradation."( L-Dopa prodrugs: an overview of trends for improving Parkinson's disease treatment.
Cerasa, LS; Di Stefano, A; Iannitelli, A; Sozio, P, 2011
)
0.37
" Thus, to the extent that somatodendritic DA release affects behavior, TH regulation in the midbrain may be critical for DA bioavailability to influence behavior."( Dichotomy of tyrosine hydroxylase and dopamine regulation between somatodendritic and terminal field areas of nigrostriatal and mesoaccumbens pathways.
Pruett, BS; Salvatore, MF, 2012
)
0.38
"To compare bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of single doses of 3 different levodopa formulations given orally in healthy volunteers."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets versus levodopa/benserazide and levodopa/carbidopa in healthy volunteers.
Aquilonius, SM; Bäckström, T; Ehrnebo, M; Gomes-Trolin, C; Lewander, T; Nyholm, D; Nyström, C; Panagiotidis, G,
)
0.68
" However, bioavailability of drugs varies between species and it is unknown how plasma L-DOPA levels providing therapeutic benefit in the non-human primate compare to those having similar actions in PD patients."( L-DOPA pharmacokinetics in the MPTP-lesioned macaque model of Parkinson's disease.
Brotchie, JM; Fox, SH; Huot, P; Johnston, TH; Koprich, JB, 2012
)
0.38
"The results demonstrate that coadministration of domperidone increased the bioavailability of levodopa."( Coadministration of domperidone increases plasma levodopa concentration in patients with Parkinson disease.
Iwaki, H; Nagai, M; Nishikawa, N; Nomoto, M; Tsujii, T; Yabe, H,
)
0.6
" The low bioavailability of L-Dopa may cause a wide variation in clinical response between patients."( Protective effects of L-dopa and carbidopa combined treatments on human catecholaminergic cells.
Colamartino, M; Cornetta, T; Cozzi, R; Leone, S; Meneghini, C; Padua, L; Testa, A, 2012
)
0.38
" It is anticipated that the recent development of mGlu4 PAMs with improved systemic bioavailability will facilitate progression of these agents into the primate model of PD where their potential can be further explored."( Targeting glutamate receptors to tackle the pathogenesis, clinical symptoms and levodopa-induced dyskinesia associated with Parkinson's disease.
Duty, S, 2012
)
0.61
" The stronger in vivo effect of (+)-catechin on L-DOPA methylation compared to the other dietary compounds is due to its better bioavailability in vivo."( Beneficial effects of natural phenolics on levodopa methylation and oxidative neurodegeneration.
Fukui, M; Kang, KS; Wen, Y; Yamabe, N; Zhu, BT, 2013
)
0.65
" In the present study, poly(butylene succinate) (PBSu) microspheres-based drug delivery system to improve the bioavailability of the drug levodopa was evaluated for the first time."( Development of poly(butylene succinate) microspheres for delivery of levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Krishnan, UM; Mohanraj, K; Sethuraman, S, 2013
)
0.83
" Overall, results from this study have shown that the IPEC-based matrix has the potential to improve the absorption and subsequent bioavailability of narrow absorption window drugs, such as levodopa with constant and sustained drug delivery."( Design of an interpolyelectrolyte gastroretentive matrix for the site-specific zero-order delivery of levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Choonara, YE; du Toit, LC; Kumar, P; Modi, G; Ndesendo, VM; Ngwuluka, NC; Pillay, V, 2013
)
0.8
"Orally LD-treated patients with Parkinson disease had a lower LD dose compared with the ones on an LD infusion, but LD, 3-OMD, and homocysteine bioavailability was not different."( Methyl group-donating vitamins elevate 3-O-methyldopa in patients with Parkinson disease.
Jugel, C; Klostermann, F; Muhlack, S; Müller, T,
)
0.13
" It is characterized by improved bioavailability allowing dose reduction and a lower exposure to amphetamine metabolites."( The pharmacokinetic evaluation of selegiline ODT for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Magyar, K; Szökő, E; Tábi, T; Vécsei, L, 2013
)
0.39
"Levodopa is the drug of choice in the treatment of Parkinson's disease but it exhibits low oral bioavailability (30%) and very low brain uptake due to its extensive metabolism by aromatic amino acid decarboxylase in the peripheral circulation."( Formulation and characterization of intranasal mucoadhesive nanoparticulates and thermo-reversible gel of levodopa for brain delivery.
Lohan, S; Murthy, RS; Sharma, S, 2014
)
2.06
" On the other hand, it has been recently reported that impaired arginine transport contributes to low renal nitric oxide bioavailability observed in the SHR renal medulla."( Renal amino acid transport systems and essential hypertension.
Pinho, MJ; Pinto, V; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2013
)
0.39
"Entacapone increases the bioavailability of levodopa and simultaneously alleviates partially its resulting hyperhomocysteinemia."( [Effects of entacapone on plasma homocysteine in Parkinson's disease patients on levodopa].
Li, Q; Liu, W; Sun, YN; Wang, Y; Yang, JF; Zhang, BS; Zhang, W; Zhao, P, 2013
)
0.88
" The pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated relatively low bioavailability for L-dopa and adequate plasma levels of pramipexole, even at baseline, on a stable daily dose."( Therapeutic response to pramipexole in a patient with multiple system atrophy with predominant parkinsonism: positron emission tomography and pharmacokinetic assessments.
Ishii, K; Katayama, Y; Nagayama, H; Nakajima, N; Nishiyama, Y; Ueda, M, 2013
)
0.39
" Entacapone, a catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, can also be used to improve the bioavailability of levodopa, especially when used in conjunction with a DDCI."( Levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: current status and new developments.
Salat, D; Tolosa, E, 2013
)
2.05
"The present study aimed at evaluating the effect of opicapone, a third generation nitrocatechol catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitor, on the systemic and central bioavailability of 3,4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine (levodopa) and related metabolites in the cynomolgus monkey."( Brain and peripheral pharmacokinetics of levodopa in the cynomolgus monkey following administration of opicapone, a third generation nitrocatechol COMT inhibitor.
Bonifácio, MJ; Soares-da-Silva, P; Sutcliffe, JS; Torrão, L; Wright, LC, 2014
)
0.85
" This effort led to the discovery of 1-methyl-3-(4-methylpyridin-3-yl)-6-(pyridin-2-ylmethoxy)-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyrazine (PF470, 14) as a highly potent, selective, and orally bioavailable mGluR5 NAM."( Discovery and preclinical characterization of 1-methyl-3-(4-methylpyridin-3-yl)-6-(pyridin-2-ylmethoxy)-1H-pyrazolo-[3,4-b]pyrazine (PF470): a highly potent, selective, and efficacious metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) negative allosteric modulat
Balan, G; Barreiro, G; Boscoe, BP; Chen, L; Chenard, LK; Cianfrogna, J; Claffey, MM; Coffman, KJ; Drozda, SE; Dunetz, JR; Fonseca, KR; Galatsis, P; Grimwood, S; Lazzaro, JT; Mancuso, JY; Miller, EL; Reese, MR; Rogers, BN; Sakurada, I; Shaffer, CL; Skaddan, M; Smith, DL; Stepan, AF; Trapa, P; Tuttle, JB; Verhoest, PR; Walker, DP; Wright, AS; Zaleska, MM; Zasadny, K; Zhang, L, 2014
)
0.4
" Available controlled release levodopa formulations produce more sustained plasma levels but also show lower bioavailability and slower time to peak, resulting in poor clinical outcome especially in advanced patients."( Novel levodopa formulations in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Antonini, A; Pilleri, M, 2014
)
1.17
"LCIG administration results in faster absorption, comparable levodopa bioavailability and significantly reduced intra-subject variability in levodopa concentrations relative to LC-oral administration."( Population pharmacokinetics of levodopa in subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion vs. oral tablets.
Dutta, S; Othman, AA, 2014
)
0.93
" Development of COMT inhibitors can efficiently increase the bioavailability of L-dopa."( Inhibition of catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT) by myricetin, dihydromyricetin, and myricitrin.
Jia, YH; Zhu, X, 2014
)
0.4
" Maximum concentration, time to maximum level and bioavailability of levodopa did not differ between all conditions each with 200 mg levodopa application as a whole."( Fewer fluctuations, higher maximum concentration and better motor response of levodopa with catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibition.
Herrmann, L; Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Salmen, S, 2014
)
0.87
"Opicapone, a novel third generation COMT inhibitor, when compared to entacapone, provides a superior response upon the bioavailability of levodopa associated to more pronounced, long-lasting, and sustained COMT inhibition."( Effect of opicapone and entacapone upon levodopa pharmacokinetics during three daily levodopa administrations.
Falcão, A; Lopes, N; Nunes, T; Pinto, R; Rocha, JF; Santos, A; Soares-da-Silva, P; Vaz-da-Silva, M; Wright, LC, 2014
)
0.87
" Aim of this study was to test the efficacy of liquid levodopa with higher bioavailability in patients with SIBO."( Liquid melevodopa versus standard levodopa in patients with Parkinson disease and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth.
Bentivoglio, AR; Bove, F; Fasano, A; Fortuna, S; Gabrielli, M; Gasbarrini, A; Marconi, S; Ragazzoni, E; Tortora, A; Zocco, MA,
)
0.8
"L-DOPA has long been the 'gold standard' treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD), but suffers from poor oral bioavailability and rapid pharmacokinetic elimination."( IPX066 , a mixed immediate/sustained-release levodopa preparation for Parkinson's disease.
Ondo, W, 2014
)
0.66
" Limitations in its bioavailability and tolerability led to the search for drugs that could improve its pharmacokinetics and safety profile."( Improving L-dopa therapy: the development of enzyme inhibitors.
Gershanik, OS, 2015
)
0.42
" Sex differences in the bioavailability of LD have been shown previously."( Sex differences in the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in elderly patients with Parkinson disease.
Kumagai, T; Mishina, M; Nagayama, H; Nishiyama, Y; Ota, T; Ueda, M,
)
0.39
"Even in the elderly cohort, the women had a significantly greater bioavailability of LD."( Sex differences in the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in elderly patients with Parkinson disease.
Kumagai, T; Mishina, M; Nagayama, H; Nishiyama, Y; Ota, T; Ueda, M,
)
0.39
"Opicapone has a prolonged inhibitory effect on peripheral COMT, which extends the bioavailability of levodopa, without inducing toxicity."( Pharmacological profile of opicapone, a third-generation nitrocatechol catechol-O-methyl transferase inhibitor, in the rat.
Bonifácio, MJ; Loureiro, AI; Palma, PN; Soares-da-Silva, P; Torrão, L; Wright, LC, 2015
)
0.63
" In this work, the combined use of l-DOPA methylester hydrochloride prodrug (LDME) with transbuccal drug delivery was supposed as a good alternative method to optimize the bioavailability of l-DOPA, to maintain constant plasma levels and to decrease the drug unwanted effects."( Potential transbuccal delivery of l-DOPA methylester prodrug: stability in the environment of the oral cavity and ability to cross the mucosal tissue.
Campisi, G; De Caro, V; Giannola, LI; Scaturro, AL, 2016
)
0.43
" Bioavailability of LD from ER CD-LD was 83."( Comparison of the pharmacokinetics of an oral extended-release capsule formulation of carbidopa-levodopa (IPX066) with immediate-release carbidopa-levodopa (Sinemet(®)), sustained-release carbidopa-levodopa (Sinemet(®) CR), and carbidopa-levodopa-entacapo
Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Modi, NB; Yao, HM, 2015
)
0.64
" Levodopa bioavailability was 99 % for LCIG relative to LC-oral."( Jejunal Infusion of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel versus oral administration of levodopa-carbidopa tablets in japanese subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetics and pilot efficacy and safety.
Benesh, J; Chatamra, K; Dutta, S; Mohamed, ME; Nagai, M; Othman, AA; Yanagawa, M, 2015
)
1.65
" Adjusting for 70 % bioavailability relative to immediate-release (IR) carbidopa-levodopa, the median dosages correspond to ~500 and ~1015 mg/day of IR levodopa in early and advanced PD, respectively."( Long-Term Treatment with Extended-Release Carbidopa-Levodopa (IPX066) in Early and Advanced Parkinson's Disease: A 9-Month Open-Label Extension Trial.
Dzyak, L; Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Nausieda, P; Rudzinska, M; Silver, DE; Spiegel, J; Tsurkalenko, ES; Waters, CH, 2015
)
0.89
"Our results show an impaired LD bioavailability from Mucuna preparation, as expected by the lacking aromatic amino acid decarboxylase inhibitors coadministration, which might explain the suggested lower dyskinetic potential of Mucuna compared with standard LD formulations."( Mucuna pruriens in Parkinson Disease: A Kinetic-Dynamic Comparison With Levodopa Standard Formulations.
Contin, M; Guarino, M; Iannello, C; Lopane, G; Passini, A; Poli, F,
)
0.36
"Adequate treatment of Parkinson's patients in off periods with orally administered levodopa is hindered by a poor bioavailability and a slow onset of action."( A levodopa dry powder inhaler for the treatment of Parkinson's disease patients in off periods.
de Boer, AH; Frijlink, HW; Grasmeijer, F; Hagedoorn, P; Luinstra, M; Moes, JR, 2015
)
1.36
" These results indicate that soy partly increased the bioavailability of levodopa and suppressed levodopa degradation through COMT."( Effects of soybean ingestion on pharmacokinetics of levodopa and motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease--In relation to the effects of Mucuna pruriens.
Ito, H; Koh, J; Kondo, T; Nagashima, Y; Sakata, M, 2016
)
0.92
"Parkinson's disease is a motor dysfunction that has been widely studied but many of the reports on commercial drugs for the treatment of this disease have afforded some undesirable side effects that generate an extensive and unviable treatment by economic costs and due to the bioavailability of the assayed compounds."( Aporphines and Parkinson's Disease: Medical Tools for the Future.
Fazel Nabavi, S; Modak, B; Rastrelli, L; Sobarzo-Sánchez, E; Uriarte, E, 2016
)
0.43
" The water solubility and improved bioavailability may help reduce medication frequency associated with l-DOPA treatment of PD."( DopAmide: Novel, Water-Soluble, Slow-Release l-dihydroxyphenylalanine (l-DOPA) Precursor Moderates l-DOPA Conversion to Dopamine and Generates a Sustained Level of Dopamine at Dopaminergic Neurons.
Atlas, D, 2016
)
0.43
" Efforts have been made recently to improve levodopa bioavailability either by developing more effective oral formulations or by innovating routes of administration (intestinal infusion, transcutaneous or inhaled levodopa)."( Novel Levodopa Formulations for Parkinson's Disease.
Fox, SH; Freitas, ME; Ruiz-Lopez, M, 2016
)
1.18
"Opicapone, as once-daily oral evening regimen and/or 1 h apart from levodopa therapy, increases the bioavailability of levodopa associated with its pronounced, long-lasting and sustained catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibition."( Effect of opicapone multiple-dose regimens on levodopa pharmacokinetics.
Almeida, L; Bonifácio, MJ; Falcão, A; Fauchoux, N; Loureiro, AI; Nunes, T; Pinto, R; Rocha, JF; Santos, A; Sicard, É; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2017
)
0.95
"Opicapone is a third generation, highly potent and effective catechol O‑methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitor that optimizes the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of L-DOPA therapy."( Opicapone for the management of end-of-dose motor fluctuations in patients with Parkinson's disease treated with L-DOPA.
Ferreira, J; Lees, AJ; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Reichmann, H; Stocchi, F; Tolosa, E, 2017
)
0.46
"Levodopa bioavailability is enhanced by adding entacapone."( Levodopa dose maintenance or reduction in patients with Parkinson's disease transitioning to levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone.
Baik, JS; Cho, JW; Kim, Y; Koh, SB; Lee, JY; Lee, PH; Park, J; Sohn, YH; Youn, J,
)
3.02
" The challenges are to increase the therapeutic efficiency, the bioavailability and decreasing the unfavourable side effects of Levodopa drug."( Nanocarrier for levodopa Parkinson therapeutic drug; comprehensive benserazide analysis.
Etminan, N; Rahmanifar, E; Yoosefian, M, 2018
)
1.03
" Peripheral catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibition improves the bioavailability of levodopa and results in a prolonged response."( Are There Benefits in Adding Catechol-O Methyltransferase Inhibitors in the Pharmacotherapy of Parkinson's Disease Patients? A Systematic Review.
Katsaiti, I; Nixon, J, 2018
)
0.7
" At the same time, measurements of LD and dopamine of mice administered with this formulation showed enhanced bioavailability of LD."( Improved Bioavailability of Levodopa Using Floatable Spray-Coated Microcapsules for the Management of Parkinson's Disease.
Baek, JS; Ho, HK; Lim, KL; Loo, SCJ; Pang, YY; Tan, EY; Tee, JK, 2018
)
0.77
" Current research aims to increase drug bioavailability and to deliver it to the brain continuously."( Long-term management of Parkinson's disease using levodopa combinations.
Möhr, JD; Müller, T, 2018
)
0.73
" The most widely used MAO-B inhibitor to maintain the bioavailability of dopamine in the brain of PD patients is L-deprenyl, despite of its potential side-effects."( Garcinol, an effective monoamine oxidase-B inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Bhattacharya, P; Borah, A; Chakrabarty, J; Dutta, A; Mazumder, MK; Paul, R; Phukan, BC, 2018
)
0.48
" Expert opinion: CVT-301 may offer several potential advantages including increased systemic bioavailability through pulmonary absorption, rapid onset of action, avoidance of first-pass drug metabolism and less plasma-level variability."( Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of CVT-301 for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Stirpe, P; Stocchi, F; Torti, M; Vacca, L, 2018
)
0.48
"Levodopa (LEVO) as the gold standard in the treatment of Parkinson's disease is usually administrated per os but its bioavailability is low."( Interaction Studies Between Levodopa and Different Excipients to Develop Coground Binary Mixtures for Intranasal Application.
Alapi, T; Ambrus, R; Bartos, C; Katona, G; Kiss, T; Szabó-Révész, P; Varga, G, 2019
)
2.25
" The common reasons behind variations in the plasma levels include delayed gastric emptying, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, protein interaction with levodopa absorption, and limited oral bioavailability of levodopa."( Old Drugs, New Delivery Systems in Parkinson's Disease.
Gupta, HV; Lyons, KE; Pahwa, R, 2019
)
0.71
" Amantadine ER provides higher and more continuous amantadine plasma bioavailability than conventional immediate-release formulations, which require administration up to three times daily."( Recent Clinical Advances in Pharmacotherapy for Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia.
Möhr, JD; Müller, T, 2019
)
0.77
"The ATP-binding cassette transporter P-glycoprotein (P-gp) is known to limit both brain penetration and oral bioavailability of many chemotherapy drugs."( A High-Throughput Screen of a Library of Therapeutics Identifies Cytotoxic Substrates of P-glycoprotein.
Ambudkar, SV; Brimacombe, KR; Chen, L; Gottesman, MM; Guha, R; Hall, MD; Klumpp-Thomas, C; Lee, OW; Lee, TD; Lusvarghi, S; Robey, RW; Shen, M; Tebase, BG, 2019
)
0.51
"Both the ODE and the SDE models estimated bioavailability to be approximately 75%."( Investigating Stochastic Differential Equations Modelling for Levodopa Infusion in Patients with Parkinson's Disease.
Alam, M; Rönnegård, L; Saqlain, M; Westin, J, 2020
)
0.8
" Levodopa is the drug of choice in the treatment of PD but it exhibits low oral bioavailability (30%) and very low brain uptake due to its extensive metabolism by aromatic amino acid decarboxylase in the peripheral circulation."(
Arisoy, S; Atalay, O; Comoglu, T; Onal, D; Pehlivanoglu, B; Sayiner, O, 2020
)
1.47
" Opicapone is a recent and selective third-generation COMT inhibitor which achieves marked increase in the bioavailability of levodopa."( Optimized clinical management of Parkinson's disease with opicapone. Recommendations from Spanish experts.
García Ruiz-Espiga, P; Linazasoro-Cristóbal, G; López Del Val, LJ; López-Manzanares, L; Luquin-Piudo, MR; Martínez-Castrillo, JC; Mir, P; Pagonabarraga-Mora, J, 2020
)
0.76
" The final model was a one compartment model with a high fixed absorption rate constant, and a first order elimination, with estimated apparent clearances (CL/F), of 27."( Population pharmacokinetics of levodopa gel infusion in Parkinson's disease: effects of entacapone infusion and genetic polymorphism.
Nielsen, EI; Nyholm, D; Senek, M, 2020
)
0.84
" It is widely accepted that levodopa needs to be administered using formulations that result in good and consistent bioavailability and the physiologically relevant and continuous formation of dopamine in the brain to maximise its efficacy while avoiding and reversing 'wearing off' and dyskinesia."( Improving the Delivery of Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease: A Review of Approved and Emerging Therapies.
Chaudhuri, KR; Jenner, P; Qamar, MA; Urso, D, 2020
)
1.15
" Eradication of the infection improves levodopa response in Parkinson's disease, likely as a consequence of an increased oral pre-systemic bioavailability of levodopa, likely to be explained by reduced Helicobacter-dependent levodopa consumption in the stomach."( Effects of Helicobacter pylori on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics.
Hellström, PM; Nyholm, D, 2021
)
1.17
"Eradication of Helicobacter pylori improves levodopa bioavailability resulting in improved motor control."( Effects of Helicobacter pylori on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics.
Hellström, PM; Nyholm, D, 2021
)
1.16
" Pharmacokinetic parameters including bioavailability of 75 and 85% with mean residence time of 78 and 94 min were estimated for intranasal solution and thermosensitive gel using the validated HPLC method, which indicated that levodopa nasal gel may be a good alternative with appropriate pharmacokinetic outcome."( Rapid High-Performance Liquid Chromatography Method for Levodopa Quantitation at Low UV Wavelength: Application of Pharmacokinetics Study in Rat Following Intranasal Delivery.
Alipour, S; Mohammadi, Z; Parhizkar, E, 2021
)
1.05
"The presence of carbidopa increases the bioavailability of levodopa within the eye, enhancing its antimyopic effects, with topical application showing the greatest efficacy."( Coadministration With Carbidopa Enhances the Antimyopic Effects of Levodopa in Chickens.
Ashby, R; Karouta, C; Kelly, T; Morgan, I; Thomson, K, 2021
)
1.1
"Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors are widely used hypoglycaemic agents and improve glucose metabolism by enhancing the bioavailability of active glucagon-like peptide-1."( Beneficial effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in diabetic Parkinson's disease.
Baik, K; Chung, SJ; Hong, N; Jeong, SH; Jung, JH; Lee, PH; Lee, YH; Sohn, YH; Yoo, HS, 2021
)
0.62
" Here, a microstirring pill technology is reported with built-in mixing capability for oral drug delivery that greatly enhances bioavailability of its therapeutic payload."( A Microstirring Pill Enhances Bioavailability of Orally Administered Drugs.
Esteban-Fernández de Ávila, B; Fang, RH; Karshalev, E; Litvan, I; Mundaca-Uribe, R; Nguyen, B; Wang, J; Wei, X; Zhang, L, 2021
)
0.62
" However, oral L-DOPA exhibits low oral bioavailability, limited brain uptake, peripheral DA-mediated side effects and its poor brain bioavailability can lead to long-term complications."( Particulate levodopa nose-to-brain delivery targets dopamine to the brain with no plasma exposure.
Akcan, O; Dimiou, S; Huang, H; Kubajewska, I; Lopes, RM; Mellor, RD; Schätzlein, AG; Schlosser, CS; Shet, MS; Uchegbu, IF; Whiteside, GT, 2022
)
1.1
" Levodopa bioavailability and its maximum concentration were higher with opicapone."( Effects of One-Day Application of Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone versus Levodopa/Carbidopa/Opicapone in Parkinson's Disease Patients.
Müller, T; Schlegel, E; Thiede, HM; Zingler, S, 2022
)
1.91
"AsA can mitigate the degradation of carbidopa induced by MgO and may contribute to improving the bioavailability of levodopa in patients with PD."( Ascorbic acid can alleviate the degradation of levodopa and carbidopa induced by magnesium oxide.
Kubo, M; Miyaue, N; Nagai, M, 2022
)
1.19
"Combining opicapone 50 mg with a 100 mg lower daily dose of levodopa provides higher levodopa bioavailability with avoidance of trough levels."( Effect of Opicapone on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease.
Antonini, A; Ferreira, JJ; Guimarães, B; Moreira, J; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P; Stocchi, F, 2022
)
1.27
" The metabolism of levodopa in the periphery not only decreases its bioavailability but also affects its efficacy."( Relationship Between Gut Bacteria and Levodopa Metabolism.
Sheng, S; Xu, K; Zhang, F, 2023
)
1.51
" To show that generic drugs are equivalent to the originator drug, regulations usually refer to the bioavailability of active ingredients, which is influenced by the selected dosage form and the chosen excipients."( Different dissolution conditions affect stability and dissolution profiles of bioequivalent levodopa-containing oral dosage forms.
Langer, K; Rose, O; Weitzel, J; Wünsch, A, 2022
)
0.94
" The implementation of drug delivery systems allows to bypass problems related to irregular and often unpredictable intestinal absorption of oral levodopa, which significantly affects its bioavailability and contributes to the development and persistence of motor complications."( Current and novel infusion therapies for patients with Parkinson's disease.
Antonini, A; D'Onofrio, V; Guerra, A, 2023
)
1.11
" Analysis of experimental results using the model revealed that levodopa is well absorbed throughout the entire small intestine (i."( Model-based optimization of controlled release formulation of levodopa for Parkinson's disease.
Arav, Y; Zohar, A, 2023
)
1.39

Dosage Studied

Low levodopa dosing and antioxidants in the rotigotine patch matrix prevented cysteinyl-glycine fall. abundance of bacterial tyrosine decarboxylase in the proximal small intestine can explain the increased dosage regimen. Tolerance to levodOPA should be considered in establishing oral dosing regimens.

ExcerptRelevanceReference
" In 5 previously untreated patients, (-)-deprenyl alone gave no benefit, but when it was used with levodopa and carbidopa a mean dosage reduction of 200 mg levodopa daily was possible."( Deprenyl in Parkinson's disease.
Elsworth, JD; Kohout, LJ; Lees, AJ; Sandler, M; Shaw, KM; Stern, GM; Youdim, MB, 1977
)
0.47
" The main problems were psychiatric disturbance (8 patients) and erythromelalgia (7 patients); these effects tended to occur late (mean 6 months and 10 months, respectively) and with high dosage (mean 66 mg and 115 mg daily)."( Long-term treatment of parkinsonism with bromocriptine.
Calne, DB; Neophytides, A; Nutt, JG; Plotkin, C; Teychenne, PF; Williams, AC, 1978
)
0.26
"Gamma hydroxybutyrate (GHB) was administered intravenously to monkeys that had been pretreated orally for 2 weeks with various anticonvulsant drugs or with L-DOPA at different dosage levels."( Gamma hydroxybutyrate in the monkey. II. Effect of chronic oral anticonvulsant drugs.
Snead, OC, 1978
)
0.26
" Dosage is the only other factor differentiating the two groups of Parkinsonians treated."( Plasmatic renin activity in patients treated with L-dopa and inhibitor of dopa decarboxylase (IDC).
Allain, H; Bentue-Ferrer, D; Madigand, M; Pape, D; Reymann, JM; Van den Driessche, J, 1979
)
0.26
" FS-32 showed anti-reserpine activity in a dose-dependent manner, whereas imipramine exhibited a bell-shaped dose-response pattern."( Pharmacological studies on a new thymoleptic antidepressant, 1-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]-5-methyl-3-phenyl-1H-indazole (FS-32).
Fujimura, Y; Ikeda, Y; Iwasaki, T; Koide, T; Matsushita, H; Nagashima, R; Shindo, M; Shiraki, Y; Suzuki, S; Takano, N, 1979
)
0.26
" The increase was blocked by phenoxybenzamine at a dosage level of 20 mg/kg which did not, of itself, reduce flexor reflex amplitude."( A system for measuring the noradrenaline receptor contribution to the flexor reflex.
Austin, JH; Fuxe, K; Nygren, LG, 1976
)
0.26
" With l-dopa it was antogonised when the dose of morphine was minimal but with increased dosage of morphine, there was no significant effect."( Morphine analgesia and its modification by drugs altering serotonin (5-HT) and dopamine levels in the brain.
Gupta, SK; Shinde, S,
)
0.13
"Radioimmunological methods have been used to assay the plasma concentrations of gonadotropins, androgens (expressed as the sum of testosterone and dihydrotestosterone) and 17beta-oestradiol in 98 patients suffering from dysspermia of variable etiology, after stimulation with GnRH, Clomiphene, L-Dopa, Cyclophenyl, HCG in various dosage schemes, and HMG."( [Dynamic tests with GnRH, L-dopa, clomiphene, cyclophenyl, HCG and HMG in 98 cases of dysspermia due to a variety of causes].
De Aloysio, D; Farello, P; Flamigni, C; Fronticelli, A; Nardi, M; Venturoli, S, 1977
)
0.26
" The dosage of nomifensine started at 50 mg, was increased to 150 mg daily, and other medication was continued unchanged."( Nomifensine in Parkinson's disease.
Bedard, P; Marsden, CD; Parkes, JD, 1977
)
0.26
" By the use of the combination preparation, the daily dosage of levodopa could be reduced by 77%."( A comparative clinical investigation of the therapeutic effect of levodopa alone and in combination with a decarboxylase inhibitor (carbidopa) in cases of Parkinson's disease.
Dorner, A; Wajsbort, E; Wajsbort, J, 1978
)
0.73
" Mean daily maintenance dosage was 612."( Levodopa/benserazide ('Madopar') combination therapy in elderly patients with parkinsonism.
Carlyle, D; Williams, BO, 1979
)
1.7
" Reduction of levodopa dosage to one sixth with the aid of a peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor (benserazide) largely eliminated autoimmune haemolysis while maintaining adequate control of neurologic symptoms."( Dose-related levodopa-induced haemolytic anaemia.
Enström, MS; Liedén, G; Linström, FD, 1977
)
0.99
" Frequent adjustment of levodopa dosage was necessary in view of continuing "on-off" fluctuations."( Parkinsonism with 'on-off' phenomena. Intravenous treatment with levodopa after major abdominal surgery.
Calne, DB; Devereux, D; Eng, N; Rosin, AJ, 1979
)
0.8
" This abnormal involuntary posture was unaffected by manipulations of daily levodopa dosage and schedule, completely disappeared after withdrawal of drug therapy, and recurred following its readministration."( Early-morning dystonia. A late side effect of long-term levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Melamed, E, 1979
)
0.74
" With both drugs, Madopar or Sinemet, an optimum therapeutic result was obtained with relatively small doses of L-dopa (the reduction in L-dopa dosage amounting to about 80%)."( [The combined treatment of Parkinson's disease with L-dopa plus decarboxylase inhibitors (carbidopa, benserazide) (author's transl)].
Birkmayer, W; Mentasti, M; Podiwinsky, F; Riederer, P, 1979
)
0.26
" Of 10 females dosed during pregnancy, 6 failed to deliver and lost substantially in body weight."( Short- and long-term effects of a massive dose of 6-OH-DA upon marsh mice.
Bischoff, F; Bryson, G, 1977
)
0.26
" The treatment periods were 12 weeks; similar dosage schedules were used, with doses that induced equal levels of plasma levodopa in both combinations."( Levodopa with benserazide or carbidopa in Parkinson disease.
Mölsä, P; Rinne, UK, 1979
)
1.91
" At both low (50 mg daily) and high (150 mg daily) dosage there was a similar but not identical profile of response."( Comparison between lergotrile and bromocriptine in parkinsonism.
Bern, SM; Calne, DB; McInturff, D; Pfeiffer, RF; Teychenne, PF, 1978
)
0.26
" Paired ion chromatography also was tried successfully for the quantitative determinations of isoproterenol, levodopa, methyldopa, and phenylephrine in some dosage forms."( Applications of paired ion high-pressure liquid chromatography to catecholamines and phenylephrine.
Das Gupta, D; Ghanekar, AG, 1978
)
0.47
" Chlorpromazine showed only a modest advantage over L-dopa and only on some Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale factor scores, and at maximum dosage the thought disturbance factor score in the L-dopa-treated group was not worse than at baseline."( Paradoxical reaction to L-dopa in schizophrenic patients.
Alpert, M; Diamond, F; Friedhoff, AJ; Marcos, LR, 1978
)
0.26
" When a similar dosage regimen was employed with pregnant rats beginning on day 16 of gestation, levodopa plus carbidopa delayed the average delivery time 12 hr."( Investigation of a dopaminergic mechanism for regulating oxytocin release.
Lewis, PR; Miller, JW; Seybold, VS, 1978
)
0.48
" The dosage was then increased until a consistent response was observed."( The L-dopa on-off effect in Parkinson disease: treatment by transient drug withdrawal and dopamine receptor resensitization.
Direnfeld, L; Marotta, J; Seeman, P; Spero, L, 1978
)
0.26
" The combined administration of monoamine oxidase inhibitors with indirectly acting sympathomimetic amines will increase arterial pressure, but must be considered quite risky in light of inherently poor ability to regulate dose-response relationships and prior clinical experience with excessive arterial pressure elevation."( Effect of selected drugs on arterial pressure response to upright posture.
McNay, JL, 1976
)
0.26
" Even so, plasma levodopa concentration correlates significantly with dosage size in a large parkinsonian population and also coincides with therapeutic response in many, but not all, patients."( Clinical pharmacokinetics of levodopa in parkinson's disease.
Bianchine, JR; Shaw, GM, 1976
)
0.89
", circling behavior) in a spherical "rotometer" and dose-response relationships were generated using d-amphetamine, apomorphine, L-Dopa, haloperidol, and scopolamine."( Drug-induced rotation in rats without lesions: behavioral and neurochemical indices of a normal asymmetry in nigro-striatal function.
Glick, SD; Jerussi, TP, 1976
)
0.26
" En 1974 nous avons proposé une méthode de dosage radio-immunologique homologue (A."( [Dosage of prolactin in normal and pathological subjects (author's transl)].
Colin, C; Dourcy, C; Franchimont, P; Gaspard, U; Legros, JJ; Remacle, P; Reuter, A; van Cauwenberge, JR; Vrindts-Gevaert, Y,
)
0.13
" The study was designed as paired series of growth hormone stimulation tests in which the effect of L-dopa alone, in different dosage schedules, was compared with the same dose level of L-dopa plus carbidopa, When L-dopa was given in full dose (125-500 mg), there was no significant difference in the serum GH concentrations at any time of sampling."( The effect of L-dopa with and without decarboxylase inhibitor on growth hormone secretion in children with short stature.
Aarskog, D; Fevang, FO; Stoa, RF; Thorsen, T, 1977
)
0.26
" Level of dosage was hypothesized to have no differential effect on memory functioning."( Levodopa, parkinsonism, and recent memory.
Halgin, R; Misiak, H; Riklan, M, 1977
)
1.7
" Generally the dosage range was up to a maximum of one tablet three times daily."( [Treatment of Parkinson's disease with the combination drug L-carbidopa/L-dopa. Report on a 2 years study].
Hayek, J, 1977
)
0.26
"A biphasic dose-response pattern is generated by the isoquinoline, 3-carboxysalsolinol, in analgesia tests conducted in mice."( Analgesic effects of 3-carboxysalsolinol alone and in combination with morphine.
Blum, K; Hirst, M; Marshall, A, 1977
)
0.26
" The dose-response curves for the two last-mentioned dopamine metabolites closely follow those for MAO A and dopamine-deaminating activity, whether clorgyline or deprenil was used as MAO inhibitor."( Preferential deamination of dopamine by an A type monoamine oxidase in rat brain.
Delini-Stula, A; Maître, L; Waldmeier, PC, 1976
)
0.26
" Within the dosage range studied, non-linear pharmacokinetics were observed for unchanged laevodopa, non-amino phenolic acids and dopamine but not for 3-O-methyldopa."( Dose-dependent pharmacokinetics of laevodopa and its metabolites in the rat.
Cheng, LK; Fung, HL, 1976
)
0.26
" Side effects (hallucinations, confusion, dyskinesias) were frequent, but were usually reversible by lowering the dosage of levodopa or the accompanying anticholinergic medication."( Piribedil: its synergistic effect in multidrug regimens for parkinsonism.
Feigenson, JS; McDowell, FH; Sweet, RD, 1976
)
0.46
" A reduced mean L-Dopa dosage was ruled out as the cause of this deterioration."( Study of deterioration in long-term treatment of parkinsonism with L-dopa plus decarboxylase inhibitor.
Bass-Verrey, F; Ludin, HP, 1976
)
0.26
" The excitability of the superior cervical ganglion of the rat was not diminished after a three-day treatment with L-Dopa, Benseraside (Ro 4-4602/1) and Iproniazid, at a dosage below the toxic level (table I)."( [Endogenous catecholamines and excitability of the superior cervical ganglion of the rat (author's transl)].
Burlet, DB, 1976
)
0.26
" Although directly related to daily dosage of levodopa, the myoclonus was specifically blocked by the serotonin antagonist, methysergide."( Levodopa-induced myoclonus.
Bergen, D; Goetz, C; Klawans, HL, 1975
)
1.96
" Dextroamphetamine in lower dosage also reduced disability by some 17 percent."( Amphetamines in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Asselman, P; Bovill, KT; Marsden, CD; Parkes, JD; Phipps, JA; Rose, P; Tarsy, D, 1975
)
0.25
" Combination therapy resulted in a reduction in L-dopa dosage to 1/3 of the amount required during the baseline."( Alpha methyldopahydrazine as an adjunct to levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Jaatoul, N; Kertesz, A; McInnis, W; Paty, DW, 1975
)
0.52
" Severe orthostatic light-headedness and frequent syncope had previously been alleviated only be reducing the dosage of levodopa to levels producing less than optimal antiparkinsonian benefits."( Levodopa-induced postural hypotension. Treatment with fludrocortisone.
Hoehn, MM, 1975
)
1.91
" Second, dose-response relationships were established for the amphetamine enantiomers."( Differences between (+)- and (-)-amphetamine in effects on locomotor activity and L-dopa potentiating action in mice.
Strömberg, U; Svensson, TH, 1975
)
0.25
" Clinical pharmacological studies disclosed that a 1 : 10 ratio of MK-486 to L-dopa in dosage was preferable."( L-dopa therapy combined with peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor (MK-486) in Parkinsonism.
Kishikawa, H; Ohmoto, T, 1975
)
0.25
" Dose-response curves for apomorphine- and L-dopa-induced circling rates shifted to the left as the duration between the time of the 6-hydroxydopamine injection and the time of testing increased from 2 to 30 days."( Supersensitivity to dopamine agonists following unilateral, 6-hydroxydopamine-induced striatal lesions in mice.
Moore, KE; Thornburg, JE, 1975
)
0.25
" Prolonged pretreatment with suprathreshold doses of amphetamine decreased the threshold dosage of both amphetamine and apomorphine necessary to elicit stereotyped behavior."( Effect of chronic amphetamine exposure on stereotyped behavior: implications for pathogenesis of l-dopa-induced dyskinesias.
Crossett, P; Dana, N; Klawans, HL, 1975
)
0.25
" Time- and dose-response data with all three drugs suggest a direct inhibitory action on the caudate nucleus consistent with their proposed mechanism for treatment of Parkinson symptomatology."( Head-turning induced by electrical stimulation of the caudate nucleus and its antagonism by anti-parkinson drugs.
Barnett, A; Goldstein, J, 1975
)
0.25
" These are predominantly involuntary movements and confusion, which can be eliminated by lowering the dosage of Deprenil."( The potentiation of the anti akinetic effect after L-dopa treatment by an inhibitor of MAO-B, Deprenil.
Birkmayer, W; Linauer, W; Riederer, P; Youdim, MB, 1975
)
0.25
", were much higher in chronically dosed animals."( Effects of chronic oral administration on the disposition of laevodopa and its major metabolites in the plasma of the rat.
Cheng, LK; Fung, HL, 1975
)
0.25
" At dosage with short intervals, the delay may cause an additive effect of two doses."( Intestinal decarboxylation of orally administered L-dopa. Influence of pharmacological preparations, dose magnitude, dose sequence and food intake.
Andersson, I; Granerus, AK; Jagenburg, R; Svanborg, A, 1975
)
0.25
" Intraventricular injection of phenylephrine produced a dose-dependent hypothermia, whereas no dose-response relationship was obtained by isoproterenol."( [Role of brain biogenic amines in the central thermoregulatory mechanism of the rat (author's transl)].
Fukushima, N, 1975
)
0.25
" Observations were repeated with varying dosage patterns, showing variations but no substantial changes or disappearance of the symptoms described."( [Long-term syndrome in the treatment of parkinsonism with L-dopa].
Chouza, C; Gomensoro, JB; Romero, S, 1975
)
0.25
" Patients were allocated at random to treatment with either levodopa + benserazide ratio 4:1 (Madopar) or levodopa + carbidopa ratio 10:1 (Sinemet) using dosage schedules recommended by the manufacturers which they had to adhere to for 6 months."( Parkinson's disease treated with Sinemet or Madopar. A controlled multicenter trial.
Birket-Smith, E; Dupont, E; Hansen, E; Mikkelsen, B; Pakkenberg, H; Presthus, J; Rautakorpi, I; Riman, E; Rinne, UK, 1976
)
0.5
" There was no difference between any of the groups as far as dosage of L-Dopa and clinical features."( L-dopa in hepatic coma.
Falcao, HA; Fischer, JE; Funovics, FJ; Wesdorp, RI, 1976
)
0.26
"Observation of a 34-year-old woman receiving levodopa for familial torsion dystonia over a four-year period revealed that severe side effects (gastrointestinal problems, dyskinesias, cramps, anxiety) occurred with maximal dosage schedules during the first ten months of treatment."( Long-term levodopa therapy for torsion dystonia.
Herberg, KP; Still, CN, 1976
)
0.92
" Animals were administered levodopa (levodopa with one-tenth dosage of carbidopa), carbachol or thrihexyphenidyl alone or administered in combination as levodopa (100 mg/kg) + carbachol, or levodopa+trihexyphenidyl given as a single bolus."( Muscarinic cholinergic receptor-mediated modulation on striatal c-fos mRNA expression induced by levodopa in rat brain.
Asanuma, M; Chou, H; Hirata, H; Mori, A; Ogawa, N, 1992
)
0.8
" Abnormal movements accompany an overdose but regress when the dosage is decreased."( [Dopa-sensitive dystonia].
Aicardi, J; Goutières, F; Rondot, P; Ziegler, M, 1992
)
0.28
" Actual total daily levodopa dosage in patients treated with Sinemet CR was increased by 33%; however, the plasma level of this dosage is calculated to be similar to that of the previous dosage of Sinemet-STD (bio-availability of Sinemet CR is 71%)."( Clinical efficacy of Sinemet CR 50/200 versus Sinemet 25/100 in patients with fluctuating Parkinson's disease. An open, and a double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter treatment evaluation. The Dutch Sinemet CR Study Group.
Horstink, MW; Jansen, EN; Roos, RA; Wolters, EC, 1992
)
0.61
" Verapamil, given for 1 week at a dosage of 240 mg orally to eight healthy volunteers, induced a significant elevation of basal PRL levels (17."( Effects of calcium channel blockade with verapamil on the prolactin responses to TRH, L-dopa, and bromocriptine.
Kamal, TJ; Molitch, ME, 1992
)
0.28
"Irreversible inactivation of striatal D2 dopamine (DA) autoreceptors with N-ethoxycarbonyl-2-ethoxy-1,2-dihydroquinoline (EEDQ) or inactivation of striatal guanine nucleotide binding proteins (G proteins) with pertussis toxin (PT) shifted the dose-response curve for N-n-propylnorapomorphine (NPA)-mediated inhibition of gamma-butyrolactone (GBL)-induced elevation of L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) to the right, with a decrease in the maximum response."( The effects of pertussis toxin on dopamine D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A autoreceptor-mediated inhibition of neurotransmitter synthesis: relationship to receptor reserve.
Bohmaker, K; Bordi, F; Meller, E, 1992
)
0.28
" The results of the substitution phase show that combined treatment permitted a mean reduction of the levodopa dosage by 40%, without deterioration of therapeutic response."( Primary combination therapy of early Parkinson's disease. A long-term comparison between the combined regimen bromocriptine/levodopa and levodopa monotherapy--first interim report.
Kraus, PH; Letzel, H; Przuntek, H; Schwarzmann, D; Welzel, D, 1992
)
0.71
" The women continue on a low dosage of levodopa after 9 and 13 years of treatment, with a stable, nearly complete, symptomatic response."( Long-term treatment response and fluorodopa positron emission tomographic scanning of parkinsonism in a family with dopa-responsive dystonia.
Calne, DB; Fahn, S; Heiman, GA; Nygaard, TG; Snow, BJ; Takahashi, H, 1992
)
0.55
" Also this result differs from what most authors have observed: they maintain that Horton's arteritis has become rather resistant to the cortisone therapy and required high dosage for a very long time."( [Horton's bitemporal arteritis. A case report].
Carmenini, G; Di Maio, F; Martusciello, S; Meloni, F; Nicoletti, M; Scioli, A, 1992
)
0.28
" dosage schedule."( Comparative multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of controlled-release levodopa products.
Collin, C; Eckernäs, SA; Grahnén, A; Ling-Andersson, A; Nilsson, M; Tiger, G, 1992
)
0.52
" Following the initial period of therapy, emerging difficulties require a reassessment of therapeutic approaches, such as dosage adjustment or introduction of a dopamine agonist."( Optimization of levodopa therapy.
Pfeiffer, R, 1992
)
0.63
" Bioavailability of Sinemet CR levodopa is less than that of standard Sinemet, so a slightly higher total daily levodopa dose is required to achieve a comparable effect; but because Sinemet CR is absorbed much more slowly than is the standard preparation, dosing frequency can be reduced by up to half."( The use of Sinemet CR in the management of mild to moderate Parkinson's disease.
Rodnitzky, RL, 1992
)
0.57
" Regular dosing with levodopa or apomorphine reliably resulted in peak dose dyskinesia."( The use of thalamotomy in the treatment of levodopa-induced dyskinesia.
Page, RD, 1992
)
0.87
"Previous reports have shown that tolerance or sensitization to apomorphine depends on the dosage interval."( Apomorphine lowers dopamine synthesis for up to 48 h: implications for drug sensitization.
Castro, R; Rodriguez, M, 1991
)
0.28
" Thirteen such patients, of mean age 78 y, without overt fluctuations in motor control in temporal relation to dosing with a levodopa/decarboxylase inhibitor combination, were studied."( Effect of duration of levodopa/decarboxylase inhibitor therapy on the pharmacokinetic handling of levodopa in elderly patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease.
Bowes, SG; Deshmukh, AA; Dobbs, RJ; Dobbs, SM; Leeman, AL; Nicholson, PW; O'Neill, CJ, 1991
)
0.8
" The observed, age-mediated differences in levodopa pharmacokinetics, albeit statistically significant, were moderate and were likely to be of only minor importance for the dosing schedule."( Effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of oral levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Riva, R, 1991
)
0.8
" We have studied the effects of multiple dosing of levodopa on gastric emptying and levodopa absorption in eight healthy young volunteers in a randomised two-way cross-over study."( Gastric emptying in healthy volunteers after multiple doses of levodopa.
George, CF; Macklin, B; Renwick, AG; Roseveare, C; Waller, DG, 1991
)
0.77
" It is suggested that chlormethiazole is safe to use as a hypnotic at this dosage in this group of patients with Parkinson's disease, while temazepam did not appear to be effective as a hypnotic at this dosage."( A single-dose study of the pharmacodynamic effects of chlormethiazole, temazepam and placebo in elderly parkinsonian patients.
Ashwood, TJ; Bateman, DN; Tulloch, JA; Woodhouse, KW, 1991
)
0.28
" The average daily levodopa dosing frequency did not change significantly during long-term treatment."( Long-term evaluation of Sinemet CR in parkinsonian patients with motor fluctuations.
Hutton, JT; Morris, JL, 1991
)
0.61
" After 12 months, the mean dosage of levodopa was higher in the placebo group than in the lisuride group (318 +/- 121 and 274 +/- 74 mg daily respectively)."( [Randomized study during a year of early combination of L-dopa/lisuride in Parkinson disease].
Fondarai, J; Petit, H; Vermersch, P,
)
0.4
"Almost all patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease respond to levodopa and progress steadily, requiring an increased overall dosage with time."( Sinemet (CR4): an open-label study in moderately severe Parkinson's disease.
Fritz, VU; Ming, A; Temlett, JA, 1991
)
0.52
" Seven patients benefited after their dosing schedules were rearranged as a result of information gained from monitoring."( Benefits of monitoring plasma levodopa in Parkinson's disease patients with drug-induced chorea.
Mark, MH; McHale, DM; Sage, JI; Sonsalla, PK; Vitagliano, D, 1991
)
0.57
" The IR dosage forms were found to disperse soon after administration and to empty rapidly from both fasted and fed stomachs."( Characterisation of the in vivo behaviour of a controlled-release formulation of levodopa (Sinemet CR).
Davis, SS; Evans, DF; Hardy, JG; Melia, CD; Short, AH; Sparrow, RA; Wilding, IR; Yeh, KC, 1991
)
0.51
" Overall 'Sinemet CR4' allowed a longer dosage interval and provided more stable control of disease manifestations than conventional 'Sinemet'."( Controlled release levodopa/carbidopa (Sinemet CR4) in Parkinson's disease--an open evaluation of efficacy and safety.
Bulling, MT; Burns, RJ; Wing, LM, 1991
)
0.61
" dosing (65 min), and bioavailability was 40%."( Pharmacokinetics, bioavailability, metabolism, tissue distribution and urinary excretion of gamma-L-glutamyl-L-dopa in the rat.
Cummings, J; Matheson, LM; Maurice, L; Smyth, JF, 1990
)
0.28
" Using a MPTP dosing regimen a reversible parkinsonian-like syndrome was produced in the marmoset."( Effects of classical and novel agents in a MPTP-induced reversible model of Parkinson's disease.
Close, SP; Elliott, PJ; Hayes, AG; Marriott, AS, 1990
)
0.28
" The dosage of agonist was gradually increased over 12 weeks to a maximum tolerated level of up to 60 mg/day, and that of Sinemet was reduced concurrently."( Sustained-release (+)-PHNO [MK-458 (HPMC)] in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: evidence for tolerance to a selective D2-receptor agonist administered as a long-acting formulation.
Cedarbaum, JM; Clark, M; Green-Parsons, A; Toy, LH, 1990
)
0.28
" However significantly less frequent dosing was necessary with Sinemet CR."( Sinemet CR in Parkinson's disease.
Glaeske, CS; Hofman, R; Pfeiffer, RF; Wilken, KE, 1991
)
0.28
" We carried out an oral levodopa dose-response study in two rhesus monkeys whose left hemiparkinsonism was induced by intracarotid administration of MPTP."( Oral levodopa dose-response study in MPTP-induced hemiparkinsonian monkeys: assessment with a new rating scale for monkey parkinsonism.
Gash, DM; Kim, MH; Kurlan, R, 1991
)
1.1
" The methods have been utilized to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of oral dosage forms containing levodopa and carbidopa."( Simultaneous high-performance liquid chromatographic analysis of carbidopa, levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa in plasma and carbidopa, levodopa and dopamine in urine using electrochemical detection.
August, TF; Bayne, WF; Eisenhandler, R; Musson, DG; Titus, DC; Yeh, KC, 1990
)
0.72
" When levodopa alone, or levodopa plus benserazide, was given as an acute challenge to animals receiving the same treatment chronically, it was found that levodopa alone still produced increases in striatal dopamine, DOPAC and HVA in those animals dosed chronically on levodopa, but it was less effective in this respect when given with benserazide to the animals dosed with levodopa plus benserazide."( The effect of benserazide on the peripheral and central distribution and metabolism of levodopa after acute and chronic administration in the rat.
Kent, AP; Stern, GM; Webster, RA, 1990
)
0.98
" The negative aspects of Madopar HBS are a lower bioavailability that means a dosage increase and a longer latency for the therapeutic response in the morning."( Long-term treatment with Madopar HBS in parkinsonians with fluctuations.
Aljanati, R; Buzó, R; Caamaño, JL; Chouza, C; De Medina, O; Fernandez, A; Plachín, V; Romero, S; Scaramelli, A, 1990
)
0.28
" The equivalent L-dopa dosage had to be increased by 56% (29-100%) with Madopar HBS while mean dopamine levels increased in four patients (by 47-257%) without the occurrence of peripheral side-effects."( Controlled-release levodopa/benserazide (Madopar HBS): clinical observations and levodopa and dopamine plasma concentrations in fluctuating parkinsonian patients.
Ceballos-Baumann, AO; Eckert, W; von Kummer, R; Weicker, H, 1990
)
0.61
" The mean BP was reduced between 60 and 180 min after dosing in the patients, whereas such a reduction was not observed in 5 patients from whom L-dopa was withheld and in controls who showed a high ratio of plasma dopamine compared to plasma L-dopa after dosing."( Hypotensive effect of long-term levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Hamaguchi, K; Iwasaki, A; Iwasaki, S; Narabayashi, Y; Takakusagi, M, 1990
)
0.56
" In 13 patients a considerable diminution in nocturnal akinesia and in the frequency of waking up was reached with a mean dosage of 308 mg of Madopar HBS."( Madopar HBS in nocturnal symptoms of Parkinson's disease.
Jansen, EN; Meerwaldtt, JD, 1990
)
0.28
" Increased effectiveness in these patients was not associated with increased dosage beyond 25-30 mg daily."( Adjunctive therapy with bromocriptine in Parkinson's disease.
Becker, AL; Bilchik, TR; Blumenfeld, A; Fourie, PB; Fritz, VU; Ming, A; Reef, HE; Saling, M; Temlett, JA, 1990
)
0.28
" The degree of increase in the norepinephrine (NE) concentrations was closely correlated to the dosage of L-threo-DOPS."( Effect of a synthetic norepinephrine precursor, L-threo-3,4- dihydroxyphenylserine on the total norepinephrine concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid of parkinsonian patients.
Abe, T; Nozaki, Y; Takahashi, J; Takahashi, S; Tohgi, H; Ueno, M, 1990
)
0.28
" However, the dose-response curves showed a marked (three- to fourfold) shift to the left in lesioned animals, indicating behavioural supersensitivity."( Nigrostriatal damage is required for induction of dyskinesias by L-DOPA in squirrel monkeys.
Boyce, S; Iversen, SD; Rupniak, NM; Steventon, MJ, 1990
)
0.28
" Clinical improvement was associated with changes in several pharmacological indices: Acute dose-response studies of intravenous levodopa showed a shift of the curve to the right in the immediate postinfusion phase compared to preinfusion studies; the therapeutic index improved significantly as patients demonstrated about 76% increased beneficial antiparkinsonian response with an equal degree of toxic dyskinetic effects; and the duration of action of levodopa was prolonged by 30%."( Modification of central dopaminergic mechanisms by continuous levodopa therapy for advanced Parkinson's disease.
Baronti, F; Chase, TN; Heuser, IJ; Mouradian, MM, 1990
)
0.72
"The acute dose-response profile of a standard oral levodopa dose was followed, over a maximum 8-h period, in 13 patients with and 10 patients without motor fluctuations using a battery of motor quantitative tests (tapping and walking speed, and multiple choice reaction and movement times)."( Response to a standard oral levodopa test in parkinsonian patients with and without motor fluctuations.
Avoni, P; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Martinelli, P; Procaccianti, G; Riva, R, 1990
)
0.82
" Simultaneous clinical observation and determinations of plasma LD concentrations were often necessary to find the most efficacious dosing schedule for these patients."( Complex dystonia of Parkinson's disease: clinical features and relation to plasma levodopa profile.
McHale, DM; Sage, JI; Sonsalla, PK; Vitagliano, D, 1990
)
0.5
" Linear calibration curves have been constructed by integrating the protonated molecular ion to silver ion peak area ratios over a known ion dosage and plotting versus the original sample concentration."( Quantitative static secondary ion mass spectrometry of molecular ions from 1-beta-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-dopa) and indolic derivatives.
Clark, MB; Gardella, JA, 1990
)
0.28
" These included the age at onset, the presenting symptom, the duration of illness, and the stage of the disease at the time of initiation of levodopa treatment as time-independent covariates, and the mean and last dosage of levodopa as time-dependent covariates."( Response fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Roos, RA; van der Velde, EA; Vredevoogd, CB, 1990
)
0.48
" Dose-response curves for chorea and dystonia revealed that the same dose of L-dopa (30 mg/kg) induced the highest score for both dyskinesias: however, the severity was much greater for chorea."( Characterisation of dyskinesias induced by L-dopa in MPTP-treated squirrel monkeys.
Boyce, S; Iversen, SD; Rupniak, NM; Steventon, MJ, 1990
)
0.28
" L-DOPA administration, consisting of a daily dosage of 600 mg plus 150 mg aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase inhibitor was continued in all cases for at least 3 months."( Unresponsiveness to L-DOPA in parkinsonian patients: a study of homovanillic acid concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid.
Araki, H; Kondo, T; Muramoto, S; Narabayashi, H; Nishi, K; Takubo, H, 1989
)
0.28
" The results suggest, the BH4 in the dosage used, is not effective in the treatment of Parkinson's disease."( Tetrahydrobiopterin and Parkinson's disease.
Dissing, IC; Gerdes, AM; Güttler, F; Lou, H; Lykkelund, C; Pakkenberg, H; Rasmussen, V, 1989
)
0.28
" Thereafter, selegiline was added in a progressively increasing dosage up to a maximum of 10 mg/day during 4 months, with the aim of a) further improving the long-term results and b) reducing the doses of the new formula of L-DOPA."( Combination of selegiline and controlled release levodopa in the treatment of fluctuations of clinical disability in parkinsonian patients.
Aljanati, R; Buzo, R; Caamaño, JL; Chouza, C; De Medina, O; Fernandez, A; Romero, S; Scaramelli, A, 1989
)
0.53
" Selegiline treatment allowed a significant reduction of the necessary daily levodopa dose in both parts of the study and of the daily dosing frequency in the long-term investigation."( Selegiline and levodopa in early or moderately advanced Parkinson's disease: a double-blind controlled short- and long-term study.
Boesen, F; Dupont, E; Heinonen, E; Mikkelsen, B; Mogensen, P; Rasmussen, C; Sivertsen, B, 1989
)
0.86
" Its administration with levodopa, as initial therapy, allows for use of lower dosage and less side-effects of the latter agent."( Selegiline in the treatment of Parkinson's disease--long term experience.
Elizan, TS; Moros, D; Yahr, MD, 1989
)
0.58
" A daily levodopa dosage of at least 4 g appears to a prerequisite for long-term response to the drug."( Clinical relevance of long-term therapy with levodopa and orally active dopamine analogues in patients with chronic congestive heart failure.
Hasenfuss, G; Just, H, 1989
)
0.95
" We performed a dosage ranging and placebo crossover study in six patients to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of CV when used as an adjunct to Sinemet in patients with Parkinson's disease."( CV 205-502: safety, tolerance to, and efficacy of increasing doses in patients with Parkinson's disease in a double-blind, placebo crossover study.
Gauger, LL; Olanow, CW; Werner, EG, 1989
)
0.28
" Twelve patients in each treatment group were pair-matched for age, PD duration, duration of levodopa therapy, dosage of Sinemet, PD disability, and side-effect prevalence at study entry."( Development and progression of motor fluctuations and side effects in Parkinson's disease: comparison of Sinemet CR versus carbidopa/levodopa.
Gilley, DW; Goetz, CG; Klawans, HL; Tanner, CM, 1989
)
0.7
" The daily dosage after 1 year, 766 mg +/- 250 mg, was increased by 23% compared with standard Sinemet dosage, without additional secondary effects."( Effect of controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa on motor performance in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Aymard, N; Rondot, P; Teinturier, A; Ziegler, M, 1989
)
0.55
" The optimal therapeutic dosage of Sinemet CR was equal to that of Madopar HBS but 12% higher than that of standard Madopar."( Treatment of early Parkinson's disease with controlled-release levodopa preparations.
Rinne, JO; Rinne, UK, 1989
)
0.52
" The mean daily dosage of levodopa was 662."( Sinemet CR in the treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease already on long-term treatment with levodopa.
Aarli, JA; Gilhus, NE, 1989
)
0.79
" For optimal results, a higher dosage is needed (mean = 33%), but the number of doses per day can be reduced (mean = 30%)."( Experiences with Sinemet CR in the Paracelsus-Elena-Klinik.
Gerdes, U; Haagen, K; Ulm, G, 1989
)
0.28
" Daily "on" time, dyskinesia time, disability score, levodopa dosage requirement, and dosing frequency on Sinemet CR were compared with baseline values on standard Sinemet therapy."( Long-term clinical efficacy of Sinemet CR in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Dickins, QS; Dobson, J; Rodnitzky, RL, 1989
)
0.53
" For the control of PDFR most important thing was the reduction of dosage of levodopa."( [Clinical characteristics of painful dystonic foot response in patients with Parkinson's disease].
Hara, H; Kawase, J; Wakayama, Y, 1989
)
0.51
" The dose-response curve for NB-355 was shifted to the right such that approximately twice the dopa equivalent dose of NB-355 was required to stimulate locomotor activity to the same level observed for L-DOPA."( NB-355: a novel prodrug for L-DOPA with reduced risk for peak-dose dyskinesias in MPTP-treated squirrel monkeys.
Iversen, SD; Miyaji, M; Naruse, T; Rupniak, NM; Tye, SJ, 1989
)
0.28
" The effect of NADH was dependent on the dosage and the severity of the case."( Nicotinamidadenindinucleotide (NADH): the new approach in the therapy of Parkinson's disease.
Birkmayer, GJ; Birkmayer, W,
)
0.13
" Although the total number of tablets and doses per day of CR-4 was reduced during the C/S period, total levodopa dosage per day was not significantly changed from either of the previous periods."( Controlled-release carbidopa-levodopa (Sinemet) in combination with standard Sinemet in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Mark, MH; Sage, JI,
)
0.64
" Re-distribution of levodopa dosage which may mean smaller, more frequent doses, or larger less frequent increments, may be helpful in controlling oscillations in some patients."( The on-off phenomenon.
Lees, AJ, 1989
)
0.6
"Many different formulation techniques are available for designing controlled-release dosage forms."( Pharmaceutical design and development of a Sinemet controlled-release formulation.
Dempski, RE; Oberholtzer, ER; Scholtz, EC; Yeh, KC, 1989
)
0.28
" These patients required a higher total daily dosage of Sinemet CR than of Sinemet for control of parkinsonian symptoms, but less frequent dosing was required during chronic therapy."( Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of Sinemet CR: a summary of human studies.
August, TF; Bush, DF; Lasseter, KC; Musson, DG; Schwartz, S; Smith, ME; Titus, DC; Yeh, KC, 1989
)
0.28
" In 19 parkinsonians with prominent dose-by-dose fluctuations, double-blind crossover trials comparing 8-week regimens of standard carbidopa/levodopa (25/100) to Sinemet CR (50/200) showed comparable clinical outcomes, with mean daily dosing for optimal control reduced from 10."( Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (Sinemet 50/200 CR4): clinical and pharmacokinetic studies.
Berchou, RC; Galloway, MP; Kareti, D; Kesaree, N; LeWitt, PA; Nelson, MV; Schlick, P, 1989
)
0.77
" The standard dosage forms were found to disperse soon after administration and to empty rapidly from both the fasting and the "fed" stomach."( Gastrointestinal transit of Sinemet CR in healthy volunteers.
Davis, SS; Evans, DF; Hardy, JG; Melia, CD; Short, AH; Sparrow, RA; Wilding, IR, 1989
)
0.28
" Daily dosing frequency was 33% less with Sinemet CR, while daily intake of levodopa required was increased by 25%."( Multicenter controlled study of Sinemet CR vs Sinemet (25/100) in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Bush, DF; Hutton, JT; Liss, CL; Morris, JL; Reines, S; Smith, ME, 1989
)
0.51
" With continuous levodopa treatment, however, the threshold for dyskinesias begins to rise and the dose-response relation shifts to the right; clinically, the severity of both dyskinesias and on-off fluctuations tends to diminish."( Rationale for continuous dopaminomimetic therapy of Parkinson's disease.
Baronti, F; Chase, TN; Fabbrini, G; Heuser, IJ; Juncos, JL; Mouradian, MM, 1989
)
0.62
" Total levodopa dosage was not significantly changed over the year."( Long-term efficacy of controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Mark, MH; Sage, JI,
)
0.84
" No serious side effects were found within the therapeutic dosage of 50-225mg/day The results showed that L-SPD is a new type of anti-dyskinesia agent deserving further pharmacological investigation."( [Clinical study on the treatment of dyskinesia by L-stepholidine].
Le, W, 1989
)
0.28
" Memory scores were correlated with age, sex, education, marital status, length of illness, age at onset of illness, dosage and time on medication, functional status, and the major symptoms of parkinsonism."( Correlates of memory in Parkinson's disease.
Reynolds, CM; Riklan, M; Stellar, S, 1989
)
0.28
" The effects of L-Dopa dosage adjustments after hospitalization were particularly considered."( [The problems of L-dopa therapy in the course of Parkinson syndrome].
Emskötter, T; Heidenreich, C; Lachenmayer, L, 1989
)
0.28
" Only in 11% of cases, an augmentation of the dopa medication was found to be effective in improving the clinical syndrome, whereas in 43%, a substantial reduction of dosage was necessary and resulted in a marked improvement of the clinical syndrome."( [The problems of L-dopa therapy in the course of Parkinson syndrome].
Emskötter, T; Heidenreich, C; Lachenmayer, L, 1989
)
0.28
" Plasma ALAAD 2 hours after dosing was normal in Groups I and II."( Induction of aromatic-L-amino acid decarboxylase by decarboxylase inhibitors in idiopathic parkinsonism.
Boomsma, F; Hovestadt, A; Man in 't Veld, AJ; Meerwaldt, JD; Schalekamp, MA, 1989
)
0.28
" The total daily dose of L-DOPA was not significantly changed, but dosing frequency was almost halved."( An open trial of controlled release carbidopa/L-dopa (sinemet CR) for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Parkinson's disease.
Friedman, JH; Lannon, MC, 1989
)
0.28
" When the dose-response curves to different dosages of L-DOPA were examined in normal rats without striatal lesions, it was found to exhibit a steeper rise than that of DA."( Effect of exogenous L-dopa on behavior in the rat: an in vivo voltammetric study.
Akiyama, A; Nakazato, T, 1989
)
0.28
" Regardless of hormonal treatment condition, a clear dose-response increase in DA and 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), but not 5-HIAA, output was observed in response to the increasing doses of L-DOPA infusion."( Progesterone enhances L-dopa-stimulated dopamine release from the caudate nucleus of freely behaving ovariectomized-estrogen-primed rats.
Dluzen, DE; Ramirez, VD, 1989
)
0.28
" In this study, the acute dose-response profile of intravenously administered levodopa for both inducing dyskinesia and alleviating parkinsonism, and its duration of action on these motor manifestations were evaluated in 52 parkinsonian patients."( Pathogenesis of dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease.
Baronti, F; Chase, TN; Fabbrini, G; Heuser, IJ; Juncos, JL; Mouradian, MM, 1989
)
0.51
" For remoxipride, the dose-response curve for antagonism of GBL-reversal was superimposable over that for antagonism of apomorphine-induced stereotypies, with an ED50 value about 12 times higher than that for antagonism of apomorphine-induced hyperactivity."( Comparison of the effects of haloperidol, remoxipride and raclopride on "pre"- and postsynaptic dopamine receptors in the rat brain.
Fowler, CJ; Magnusson, O; Mohringe, B; Ogren, SO; Wijkström, A, 1988
)
0.27
" The model is then used to optimize the dosage regimen for each patient individually (according to the clinical particularities and needs of each patient) with respect to an objective function which includes the symptoms dynamically and the total amount of levodopa which is to be administered."( Optimization of symptomatic therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Albani, C; Hacisalihzade, SS; Mansour, M, 1989
)
0.46
" Levodopa dosage ranged from 300 to 687 mg/day and was kept stable throughout the study."( Treatment of Parkinson's disease with subcutaneous lisuride infusions.
Fernandez Pardal, M; Gatto, M; Micheli, F; Perez y Gonzalez, N, 1988
)
1.19
" Even better results could be accomplished in an extended trial attempting to establish the best dosage ratio of the combination, possibly admitting increased dosage."( A combined regimen of subcutaneous lisuride and oral Madopar HBS in Parkinson's disease.
Aljanati, R; Caamaño, JL; Chouza, C; de Medina, O; Romero, S; Scaramelli, A, 1988
)
0.27
" Administration in daily dosage of 10 mgs produces an almost complete inhibition of the enzyme."( R-(-)-deprenyl and parkinsonism.
Yahr, MD, 1987
)
0.27
"The pathogenesis of "random" fluctuations in parkinsonian mobility, which are not clearly related to the dosing schedule of levodopa, has not been determined."( Erratic gastric emptying of levodopa may cause "random" fluctuations of parkinsonian mobility.
Kurlan, R; Lichter, D; Miller, C; Nutt, JG; Rothfield, KP; Shoulson, I; Woodward, WR, 1988
)
0.78
" Mean daily Sinemet dosage decreases were 17% in the deprenyl group and 7% in the placebo group."( Deprenyl in the treatment of symptom fluctuations in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Ahlskog, JE; Duvoisin, RC; Foo, SH; Golbe, LI; Gopinathan, G; Lieberman, AN; Muenter, MD; Neophytides, AN, 1988
)
0.27
" Pergolide in doses of 2 mg per day considerably and durably improved the parkinsonian symptoms and enabled the patients to reduce L-dopa dosage by about 50%."( [Clinical study of pergolide in Parkinson's disease].
Delwaide, PJ; Gonce, M, 1985
)
0.27
" These data indicate that only patients treated with lower cranial irradiation dosage (18 Gy) had complete growth recovery and normal GH responses to pharmacologic tests."( Differential effects of 18- and 24-Gy cranial irradiation on growth rate and growth hormone release in children with prolonged survival after acute lymphocytic leukemia.
Balsamo, A; Cacciari, E; Cau, M; Cicognani, A; Paolucci, G; Pirazzoli, P; Rosito, P; Tosi, MT; Vecchi, V, 1988
)
0.27
" The antiparkinsonian threshold dose correlated best with duration of symptoms; the dyskinesia threshold dose, therapeutic window, and dose-response slope related most closely with the duration of levodopa treatment."( Motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease: central pathophysiological mechanisms, Part II.
Bartko, JJ; Chase, TN; Fabbrini, G; Juncos, JL; Mouradian, MM; Schlegel, J, 1988
)
0.46
" The following report concerns a 62-year-old female Parkinsonian patient with levodopa-induced "On-Off", depression and sleep disturbances, the severity of which was dramatically reduced by administration of low dosage amitriptyline (a serotonergic agent)."( Serotonergic mechanisms in levodopa-induced "on-off" and sleep disorders in Parkinson's disease.
Sandyk, R, 1988
)
0.8
" Reduced dosage frequency and significant motor improvement with reduced fluctuation occurred and were maintained with CR4-Sinemet compared with baseline on Sinemet."( Controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa (CR4-Sinemet) in Parkinson's disease patients with and without motor fluctuations.
Carroll, VS; Carvey, PM; Gilley, D; Goetz, CG; Klawans, HL; Shannon, KM; Tanner, CM, 1988
)
0.57
" During the first month the dosage titration was aimed at finding the optimal therapeutic effect."( Clinical trial of Madopar HBS in parkinsonian patients with fluctuating drug response after long-term levodopa therapy.
Aymard, N; Holzer, J; Rondot, P; Ziegler, M, 1987
)
0.49
"Madopar HBS (125 mg) is a controlled-release dosage form with 100 mg L-dopa and 25 mg benserazide."( The hydrodynamically balanced system: a novel principle of controlled drug release.
Erni, W; Held, K, 1987
)
0.27
" At the beginning the patients were switched from standard Madopar to Madopar HBS, initially keeping constant L-dopa dosage and the number of daily doses."( Open clinical study of Madopar HBS.
Ludin, HP, 1987
)
0.27
" However, with the new formulation the dosage had to be increased by 86% on average as compared with standard Madopar."( Treatment of parkinsonian conditions with a controlled-release form of levodopa--preliminary study.
D'Andrea, G; Durisotti, C; Ferro-Milone, F; Lion, P; Lorizio, A; Nordera, GP, 1987
)
0.51
" For the first few days (up to 1 week) dosage and number of daily intakes of HBS were the same as those of the standard formulation."( Preliminary experience with Madopar HBS: clinical observations and plasma levodopa concentrations.
Baas, H; Fischer, PA, 1987
)
0.5
" The overall increase in dosage of levodopa with Madopar HBS was 54% in comparison with the initial standard Madopar dosage."( Open multicenter trial with Madopar HBS in parkinsonian patients. Preliminary assessment after short-term treatment.
Heersema, T; Jansen, EN; Meerwaldt, JD; Speelman, JD; van Manen, J, 1987
)
0.55
" The frequency of drug intake was unaltered but daily dosage could be increased by 30% without increasing severity of abnormal movements to a similar degree."( [Controlled release levodopa-benserazide and changes in efficacy during treatment of Parkinson's disease].
Aymard, N; Holzer, J; Rondot, P; Ziegler, M, 1987
)
0.6
") age 80(5) years, showed that nocturnal dosing with levodopa produced a clinically significant improvement in sleep both as assessed subjectively and by measurement of number of spontaneous moves in bed."( Parkinson's disease in the elderly: response to and optimal spacing of night time dosing with levodopa.
Denham, MJ; Deshmukh, AA; Dobbs, RJ; Dobbs, SM; Leeman, AL; Nicholson, PW; O'Neill, CJ; Royston, JP, 1987
)
0.74
" In 13 patients a considerable diminution in nocturnal akinesia and in the frequency of waking up was reached with a mean dosage of 308 mg of Madopar HBS."( Madopar HBS in Parkinson patients with nocturnal akinesia.
Jansen, EN; Meerwaldt, JD, 1988
)
0.27
" It may improve even those patients with fluctuations who have failed to obtain optimal benefit from all forms of manipulation of the dosage schedule of levodopa or the addition of newer ancillary medications."( Practical application of a low-protein diet for Parkinson's disease.
Lang, AE; Riley, D, 1988
)
0.47
" Daily dosage frequency was significantly reduced with SINEMET CR compared with SINEMET 25/100, while the daily amount of levodopa required with SINEMET CR was significantly greater."( Treatment of chronic Parkinson's disease with controlled-release carbidopa/levodopa.
Elias, JW; Hutton, JT; Imke, SC; Morris, JL; Román, GC, 1988
)
0.71
"Dopamine (DA) has rarely been administered at low dosage to stable patients with pulmonary hypertension (PAH) secondary to chronic obstructive lung disease (COLD)."( Hemodynamic effects of a single dose of dopamine and L-dopa in pulmonary hypertension secondary to chronic obstructive lung disease.
Arnaud, A; Philip-Joet, F; Saadjian, A; Tran Guyen, A; Vestri, R, 1988
)
0.27
" Although the bioavailability after oral dosing is reduced as compared with standard Madopar (60-70%), this difference seems to be due to incomplete absorption rather than altered disposition of the drug."( Single-dose pharmacokinetics of Madopar HBS in patients and effect of food and antacid on the absorption of Madopar HBS in volunteers.
Allen, JG; Bird, H; Malcolm, SL; Marion, MH; Marsden, CD; O'Leary, CG; Quinn, NP, 1987
)
0.27
" At the end of the dosage adaptation phase (9 weeks) most patients improved; in patients with 'on-off' phenomenon, parkinsonism became less severe, on periods were longer, and fluctuations decrease; end-of-dose impairment resolved in 4 patients."( Substitution of standard Madopar by Madopar HBS in parkinsonians with fluctuations.
Aljanati, R; Caamano, JL; Chouza, C; de Medina, O; Gonzales Panizza, V; Romero, S; Scarmelli, A, 1987
)
0.27
" The dosage was adjusted until optimal response was obtained."( Madopar HBS: slow-release levodopa and benserazide in parkinsonian patients presenting marked fluctuations in symptoms on standard L-dopa treatment.
Dupont, E; Hansen, E; Jensen, NO; Mikkelsen, B; Mikkelsen, BO, 1987
)
0.57
" In all patients of the first group, after 3 months on stable 'optimal' dosage schedule, the previous L-dopa treatment was abruptly replaced, dose for dose, from one day to another by Madopar HBS, a new controlled-release form of Madopar."( Therapeutic value of Madopar HBS: judgment after 2 years experience.
Siegfried, J, 1987
)
0.27
" The method has been adopted official first action for determination of the active ingredients in levodopa tablets and capsules and in levodopa-carbidopa tablets and for content uniformity testing in the combination dosage form."( Liquid chromatographic determination of levodopa and levodopa-carbidopa in solid dosage forms: collaborative study.
Ting, S,
)
0.62
" The dosage of L-dopa infusion ranged between 360-1,250 mg for 12 hours."( Problems in daily motor performances in Parkinson's disease: the continuous dopaminergic stimulation.
Agnoli, A; Brughitta, G; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F, 1986
)
0.27
"Plasma 3-O-methyldopa (3OMD) concentrations in parkinsonian patients treated with levodopa on a long-term basis reflect daily levodopa dosage and do not vary markedly during the day."( 3-O-methyldopa and the response to levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Gancher, ST; Merrick, D; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1987
)
0.78
"" After the addition of bromocriptine any reductions in levodopa dosage were small, with repeated cuts made gradually over months preventing the deterioration commonly seen with larger sudden reductions in levodopa dosage."( Bromocriptine: long-term low-dose therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Bergsrud, D; Elton, RL; Racy, A; Teychenne, PF, 1986
)
0.52
" In contrast, the major effect of a similar degree of irreversible blockade (86%) on the dose-response curve for the autoreceptor-selective agent EMD 23,448 was a reduction in maximal response (60% of control), indicating that EMD 23,448 is a partial agonist."( Receptor reserve at striatal dopamine autoreceptors: implications for selectivity of dopamine agonists.
Adler, CH; Bohmaker, K; Friedhoff, AJ; Goldstein, M; Helmer-Matyjek, E; Meller, E, 1986
)
0.27
"In five patients with parkinsonism, the optimal dosage of a controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa preparation (CR-3) was three times higher than the dosage of Sinemet and produced higher plasma levodopa concentrations, but did not reduce the fluctuations in plasma levodopa or clinical response."( Clinical and biochemical studies with controlled-release levodopa/carbidopa.
Carter, JH; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1986
)
0.74
" In the sixth year, it appeared necessary to increase the dosage in the first three groups."( Low-dosage treatment in de novo patients with Parkinson's disease: a prospective study.
van der Drift, JH, 1987
)
0.27
" CI 201-678 demonstrated a good effect against rigidity, impairment of gait and posture, as well as impaired self-care, although daily levodopa dosage was concomitantly reduced."( Therapeutic experiences with an abeorphine derivative in Parkinson's disease.
Birbamer, G; Gerstenbrand, F; Poewe, W; Ransmayr, G, 1987
)
0.48
" Eight patients required a 41% reduction in total L-dopa dosage and discontinuation of all adjuvant therapy to reduce the preponderance of chorea."( Influence of dietary protein on motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Barry, K; Pincus, JH, 1987
)
0.27
"A system theoretical approach to the general multiple dosing problem is discussed [1], which is in turn reduced to a classical parameter optimization problem."( A simple algorithm for the solution of the multiple dosing problem.
Hacisalihzade, SS, 1985
)
0.27
" A 37% improvement of the mean neurologic deficit score was obtained at the maximal daily dosage of 20 mg."( Low dosages of bromocriptine added to levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Elton, RL; Hoehn, MM, 1985
)
0.54
" In four HNB cell lines the dopamine antagonists domperidone, pimozide, and spiroperidol inhibited macromolecular synthesis in vitro as indicated by decreased 3H-TdR and 14C-leu incorporation in a dose-response fashion with at least 50% inhibition noted at 10(-6)M concentration of each drug."( Inhibition of human neuroblastoma by dopamine antagonists.
McGrath, PC; Neifeld, JP, 1985
)
0.27
" Levodopa combined with a peripheral decarboxylase inhibitor is the treatment of choice thereafter, and with the appearance of fluctuations it is necessary to increase the frequency of dosage of levodopa and to consider adding bromocriptine."( The treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Morris, JG, 1985
)
1.18
" The dosage of drug was titrated at each visit to give minimum risk with acceptable benefit."( Patient benefits of l-dopa and a decarboxylase inhibitor in the treatment of Parkinson's disease in elderly patients.
Admani, AK; Cordingley, GJ; Harris, RI; Verma, S, 1985
)
0.27
" We describe five patients in whom an apparent psychologic effect from levodopa prompted dosage escalation to the point of toxicity."( Sinemet "abusers".
Nausieda, PA, 1985
)
0.5
" Complete remission of symptoms was obtained with low dosage of L-dopa."( Idiopathic fluctuating dystonia: a case of foot dystonia and writer's cramp responsive to L-dopa.
Deonna, T; Ferreira, A, 1985
)
0.27
"A new dosage form of levodopa, which has the characteristics of loading high concentrations of levodopa at the upper part of the intestine, has been developed to improve its bioavailability."( Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa VI: formulation of effervescent enteric-coated tablets.
Arai, M; Ikegami, Y; Morioka, T; Nakajima, E; Nishimura, K; Nitanai, T; Sasahara, K, 1984
)
0.83
" In some subjects it is difficult to establish a clear relation between levodopa dosage and timing and the resultant clinical effects."( Complicated response fluctuations in Parkinson's disease: response to intravenous infusion of levodopa.
Marsden, CD; Parkes, JD; Quinn, N, 1982
)
0.72
" Subsequently they were treated with either a mean dosage of 444 mg levodopa and benserazide (47 patients) or a combination of a mean of 298 mg levodopa and benserazide plus 17 mg bromocriptine (32 patients)."( [Combined treatment of the early stages of Parkinson's syndrome with bromocriptine and levodopa. The results of a multicenter study].
Fischer, PA; Majer, M; Przuntek, H; Welzel, D, 1984
)
0.73
" Following effective stereotaxic surgery, drug therapy should be continued with reduced dosage of the drugs."( [Combined (surgical and drug) therapy of parkinsonism].
Iadgarov, IS; Kandel', EI, 1984
)
0.27
" Alternate-day therapy results in less cumulative dosage and may better preserve existing compensatory striatal activity."( Intermittent levodopa therapy in parkinsonism.
Koller, WC, 1983
)
0.64
"The purpose of this double-blind placebo controlled study was to estimate how much the levodopa dosage can be reduced, when deprenyl is used, without worsening the disease and to see whether deprenyl can reduce the "off-periods"."( Deprenyl (selegiline) combined with levodopa and a decarboxylase inhibitor in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Hajba, A; Presthus, J, 1983
)
0.76
" We suggest that the analysis of the blink reflex after a single oral levodopa-carbidopa dosage could provide an objective and quantifiable method for the detection of individuals at risk for Huntington's disease."( Early detection of Huntington's disease. Blink reflex and levodopa load in presymptomatic and incipient subjects.
Esteban, A; Giménez-Roldán, S; Mateo, D, 1981
)
0.74
" Reducing the dosage prevents dyskinesia."( [Toxic drug effects of antiparkinson therapy and their preventability].
Danielczyk, W,
)
0.13
" The observed duration of action and dose-response properties of carbidopa suggested that current empirically based dose schedules are optimal and supported the concept that decarboxylase inhibitors enhance the clinical effect of L-dopa largely by reducing the extent of first-pass metabolism rather than through an action on the decarboxylase enzyme in cerebral capillaries."( L-dopa decarboxylation in chronically treated patients.
Calne, DB; Kopin, IJ; Trombley, IK; Ward, CD, 1984
)
0.27
" Fatal hyperpyrexia followed simultaneous levodopa withdrawal and a decrease in the dosage of diphenhydramine."( Fatal hyperpyrexia after withdrawal of levodopa.
Mutani, R; Sechi, GP; Tanda, F, 1984
)
0.8
" From our observations, low dosage of levodopa is a desirable alternative, but not the answer to therapeutic failure."( Chronic low-dose levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease: an argument for delaying levodopa therapy.
Laverty, WH; Rajput, AH; Stern, W, 1984
)
0.88
" Also, using as low a dosage as possible should reduce the risk of any long-term complication related to accumulative dose."( Should levodopa therapy for Parkinsonism be started early or late? Evidence against early treatment.
Bressman, SB; Fahn, S, 1984
)
0.72
" It is concluded that agonist induction of subsensitivity in the DA system is difficult to reproduce and may depend on highly specific dosage conditions and treatment schedules."( The effect of chronic bromocriptine and L-dopa on spiperone binding and apomorphine-induced stereotypy.
Bannet, J; Belmaker, RH; Globus, M; Lerer, B, 1982
)
0.26
" Interactions at the absorption level can be avoided by administering the antacid one hour after intake of the other drugs (one hour after meals) which is also the optimum dosing schedule to ensure good antacid effect."( [Metabolic effects of antacids and interactions with other drugs].
Gugler, R; Musch, E, 1983
)
0.27
" As the reason for the weak effectiveness of alpha-methyldopa on the incidence of AIHA, it might be considered that the dosage employed was not sufficiently high enough and/or it may be due to the species difference between man and animals."( Influence of carbidopa, an aromatic amino acid decarboxylase inhibitor, on the development of autoimmune hemolytic anemia in NZB mice.
Kemi, M; Kondo, M; Maki, E; Tanabe, K, 1983
)
0.27
" Increased absorption of a given dose of levodopa in the elderly explains in part the lower dosage requirements."( Senile Parkinsonism and dopa pharmacokinetics.
Broe, GA; Evans, MA; Triggs, EJ, 1981
)
0.53
" The relation of complications to dosage is now better understood, and the ratio of dopa-decarboxylase inhibitor to levodopa inhibitor to levodopa of 1:4 is better than the previous 1:10."( Sinemet and the treatment of Parkinsonism.
Boshes, B, 1981
)
0.47
" The very melanotic F1 cell line showed no inhibition by dopa or dopamine, but pimozide inhibited 14C-leu and 3H-TdR incorporation in a dose-response fashion; 50% inhibition was noted at 10(-9) M concentration with no loss in cell viability as tested by trypan blue exclusion or cell counting."( Effects of dopamine agonists and antagonists on murine melanoma: correlation with dopamine binding activity.
Krummel, TM; Neifeld, JP; Taub, RN, 1982
)
0.26
" PRL increase after benserazide was compared with PRL response after carbidopa at the same dosage in untreated parkinsonian patients."( Prolactin response to acute administration of different L-dopa plus decarboxylase inhibitors in Parkinson's disease.
Agnoli, A; Baldassarre, M; D'Urso, R; De Giorgio, G; Falaschi, P; Rocco, A; Ruggieri, S, 1982
)
0.26
" The daily dose of levodopa should be as low as possible and when dyskinesias develop, the dosage of both levodopa and anticholinergic agents should be reduced."( Management of motor side effects of chronic levodopa therapy.
Jankovic, J, 1982
)
0.85
" Therapeutic intervention with dosage adjustments and/or drug holidays are indicated when psychosis occurs."( Behavioral alterations and the therapy of parkinsonism.
Klawans, HL, 1982
)
0.26
" The lowering of epinephrine concentration was greater with L-dopa than with D-dopa, was dose-related over a dosage range of 50 to 200 mg/kg of L-dopa and was not prevented by a dopamine receptor antagonist."( Effects of L-dopa on epinephrine concentration in rat brain: possible role of inhibition of norepinephrine N-methyltransferase by S-adenosylhomocysteine.
Fuller, RW; Hemrick-Luecke, SK; Perry, KW, 1982
)
0.26
" These findings constitute biochemical evidence for selective elevation of brain DA during the first postnatal week of life after L-DOPA administration in a dosage that is also capable of enhancing the coordination required for swimming behavior."( Brain catecholamine concentration during the first week of development in rats.
Korányi, L; Phelps, CP; Tamásy, V, 1982
)
0.26
" In contrast, there seemed to be a correlation between dopamine turnover and optimum dosage of l-DOPA."( [Value of the probenecid test in the diagnosis and treatment of parkinson disease].
Mendlewicz, J; Noel, G; Vanderheyden, JE,
)
0.13
" Because most patients required lower dosage after the holiday, dyskinesias were no longer present."( Drug holiday and management of Parkinson disease.
Klawans, HL; Koller, WC; Nausieda, PA; Perlik, S; Weiner, WJ, 1980
)
0.26
" Combination of the two drugs permitted rapid increase in bromocriptine dosage from 22."( Bromocriptine and domperidone in the treatment of Parkinson disease.
Agid, Y; Illas, A; Lhermitte, F; Quinn, N, 1981
)
0.26
" The use of minimum dosage has therefore been recommended."( Alternate day levodopa therapy in parkinsonism.
Koller, WC, 1982
)
0.62
" A low initial dose (1 mg per day) and slow escalation in dosage produced an optimal, though delayed improvement."( Bromocriptine: low-dose therapy in Parkinson disease.
Bergsrud, D; Elton, RL; Racy, A; Teychenne, PF; Vern, B, 1982
)
0.26
" Patients were maintained on a stable, therapeutically optimal dosage and schedule of levadopa-carbidopa (Sinemet) throughout the study."( Parkinson's disease: Cogentin with Sinemet, a better response.
Gilden, ER; Hansch, EC; Hirsch, SB; Potvin, AR; Potvin, JH; Syndulko, K; Tourtellotte, WW, 1982
)
0.26
" This methylamphetamine treatment also attenuated the ability of methylamphetamine and apomorphine to produce increases in locomotor activity without shifting the dose-response curve to the right or left."( The effects of dopaminergic agents on the locomotor activity of rats after high doses of methylamphetamine.
Lucot, JB; Schuster, CR; Seiden, LS; Wagner, GC, 1980
)
0.26
" However, in both dogs and patients, the relationship after oral dosing was nonlinear, with the relative AUC increasing with increasing dose."( Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa III: Influence of dose on pharmacokinetic behavior of levodopa in dogs and Parkinsonian patients.
Habara, T; Morioka, T; Nakajima, E; Nitanai, T; Sasahara, K, 1980
)
0.51
" End-of-dose deterioration ('wearing-off' effect of individual doses) occurred in 65 per cent of patients: unpredictable oscillations in motor performance (the 'on-off' phenomenon) unrelated to the time and dosage of levodopa, occurred in 10 per cent."( The impact of treatment with levodopa on Parkinson's disease.
Lees, AJ; Shaw, KM; Stern, GM, 1980
)
0.74
" Two dosage strengths are available: 100 mg levodopa plus 25 mg benserazide and 50 mg levodopa plus 12."( [Benefits of a new galenic form of levodopa and benserazide in the treatment of patients with Parkinson disease].
Dessibourg, CA; Gachoud, JP, 1995
)
0.83
" In the present study, we investigated the effect of increased dosage and duration of levodopa on amblyopes' visual functions."( Visual acuities and scotomas after 3 weeks' levodopa administration in adult amblyopia.
Gottlob, I; Reinecke, RD; Wizov, SS, 1995
)
0.78
" However, increasing the dosage and the duration of levodopa did not enhance the effect in adults."( Visual acuities and scotomas after 3 weeks' levodopa administration in adult amblyopia.
Gottlob, I; Reinecke, RD; Wizov, SS, 1995
)
0.8
"Efficacy of apomorphine following subcutaneous, rectal, sublingual, and intranasal dosage forms are evaluated."( Apomorphine for motor fluctuations and freezing in Parkinson's disease.
Corboy, DL; Sage, JI; Wagner, ML, 1995
)
0.29
" The IDI schedule that produced a satisfactory LDR was specific for each patient, since longer DIs failed to produce the required LDR, and a shorter IDI schedule (resulting in larger cumulative dosage of levodopa) did not significantly enhance the response."( The subacute levodopa test for evaluating long-duration response in Parkinson's disease.
Aguglia, U; Branca, D; Colao, R; Montesanti, R; Nicoletti, G; Palmieri, A; Parlato, G; Quattrone, A; Rizzo, M; Zappia, M, 1995
)
0.85
" We conclude that mood and anxiety fluctuations related to levodopa dosing are robust pharmacologic, and not placebo, effects."( Dose-response relationship of levodopa with mood and anxiety in fluctuating Parkinson's disease: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Carter, JH; Maricle, RA; Nutt, JG; Valentine, RJ, 1995
)
0.82
" Regular dosing with levodopa or apomorphine reliably resulted in peak-dose dyskinesia which was scored in terms of its choreic and dystonic components."( Thalamotomy for the alleviation of levodopa-induced dyskinesia: experimental studies in the 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine-treated parkinsonian monkey.
Crossman, AR; Page, RD; Sambrook, MA, 1993
)
0.88
" To provide an overview for physicians and patients on the diversity of preparations available in the different countries, we compiled the most commonly used substances along with their size of dosage and formula in an international guide to drugs for PD."( International guide to drugs for Parkinson's disease.
Dodel, RC; Oertel, WH, 1995
)
0.29
" Tolerance to levodopa should be considered in establishing oral dosing regimens and in developing new strategies for drug delivery."( Effect of brief levodopa holidays on the short-duration response to levodopa: evidence for tolerance to the antiparkinsonian effects.
Carter, JH; Nutt, JG; Woodward, WR, 1994
)
1
" L-DOPA dose-response curve for production of dyskinesias without altering relief of parkinsonism."( Suppression of dyskinesias in advanced Parkinson's disease: moderate daily clozapine doses provide long-term dyskinesia reduction.
Bennett, JP; Dietrich, S; Landow, ER; Schuh, LA, 1994
)
0.29
" A three times greater dosage of L-dopa-s."( [Slow-release L-dopa vs. standard L-dopa in Parkinson patients in various stages of the disease. Studies of pharmacokinetics and motor effectiveness].
Baas, H; Bergemann, N; Fischer, PA, 1994
)
0.29
" Levodopa-carbidopa in low dosage adequately controlled symptoms in most patients and delayed the appearance of dyskinesia and end of dose failure for about two years longer than conventional doses."( The Sydney Multicentre Study of Parkinson's disease: a randomised, prospective five year study comparing low dose bromocriptine with low dose levodopa-carbidopa.
Broe, GA; Hely, MA; Margrie, S; Morris, JG; O'Sullivan, DJ; Rail, D; Reid, WG; Williamson, PM, 1994
)
1.4
" The relationship between apomorphine dosage and the following parameters, namely age, duration of disease, body height, body surface, skinfold thickness of the abdominal wall and the upper arm as a measure of subcutaneous fatty tissue, and amount of administered L-dopa was studied in 45 patients with Parkinson's disease in whom the apomorphine test was positive."( [Apomorphine test in Parkinson disease--dose and corresponding parameters].
Helscher, RJ; Pinter, MM; Sattler, AP, 1993
)
0.29
" The effect of levodopa in the two dosing regimens was estimated optico-electronically every 15 min and was also evaluated from videorecordings every 30 min and plasma levels of levodopa was regularly measured."( Intraduodenal infusion of a water-based levodopa dispersion for optimisation of the therapeutic effect in severe Parkinson's disease.
Aquilonius, SM; Bredberg, E; Johansson, K; Johnels, B; Nilsson, D; Nyström, C; Paalzow, L, 1993
)
0.91
" These response fluctuations appear when intrasynaptic dopamine concentrations begin to reflect the swings in levodopa availability that attend standard dosing regimens."( Catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor tolcapone prolongs levodopa/carbidopa action in parkinsonian patients.
Amantea, MA; Bravi, D; Chase, TN; Cora-Locatelli, G; Mouradian, MM; Roberts, JW, 1993
)
0.74
" No addiction to the drugs, and in particular no need of a dosage increase was observed during the whole period of 18 months."( [Restless legs syndrome. Report of experience].
Grandjean, P, 1993
)
0.29
"05) after 7 days of multiple dosing with entacapone."( Effect of entacapone, a COMT inhibitor, on clinical disability and levodopa metabolism in parkinsonian patients.
Ahtila, S; Gordin, A; Kaakkola, S; Rita, H; Teräväinen, H, 1994
)
0.52
"We characterized the clinical dose-response curves for relief of parkinsonism and production of dyskinesias as a function of plasma levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa levels in six patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) and fluctuating responses to oral levodopa/carbidopa."( Suppression of dyskinesias in advanced Parkinson's disease. I. Continuous intravenous levodopa shifts dose response for production of dyskinesias but not for relief of parkinsonism in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Bennett, JP; Schuh, LA, 1993
)
0.71
" All 10 patients had significantly decreased variability in levodopa levels permitting better titration of levodopa dosage to individual requirements."( Double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of duodenal infusion of levodopa/carbidopa in Parkinson's disease patients with 'on-off' fluctuations.
Goetz, CG; Irwin, I; Kurth, MC; Langston, JW; Stebbins, GT; Tanner, CM; Tetrud, JW, 1993
)
0.76
"To examine selegiline's dosing effects, we studied 16 Parkinson disease patients with motor fluctuations in a double-blind, crossover trial of selegiline at 0, 5, and 10 mg daily."( Effects of selegiline dosing on motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Hubble, JP; Koller, WC; Waters, C, 1993
)
0.29
" Plasma L-dopa was evaluated in relation to dosage and postdose sampling time in 71 outpatients with Parkinson disease."( Measuring L-dopa in plasma and urine to monitor therapy of elderly patients with Parkinson disease treated with L-dopa and a dopa decarboxylase inhibitor.
Copeland, LG; Dutton, J; Playfer, JR; Roberts, NB, 1993
)
0.29
" Oral LCAS allowed better titration of levodopa dosage and offered a more predictable response than LD/CD tablets."( Oral levodopa/carbidopa solution versus tablets in Parkinson's patients with severe fluctuations: a pilot study.
Irwin, I; Kurth, MC; Langston, JW; Lyness, WH; Tetrud, JW, 1993
)
1.07
" Disease duration and daily levodopa dosage were similar in the three groups."( Effect of age and disease duration on parkinsonian motor scores under levodopa therapy.
Falk, M; Künig, G; Neubauer, M; Ransmayr, G; Wagner, M, 1995
)
0.82
" Dosage adjustments, addition of a second medication to the drug regimen, and dietary modifications may help maximize response to symptomatic therapy."( Moderate Parkinson's disease. Strategies for maximizing treatment.
Silverstein, PM, 1996
)
0.29
"To establish, in a double blind manner, the antiparkinsonian effects of repeated dosing with entacapone, a peripheral COMT inhibitor."( Entacapone prolongs levodopa response in a one month double blind study in parkinsonian patients with levodopa related fluctuations.
Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM, 1996
)
0.62
"The efficacy of repeated entacapone dosing as an adjuvant to levodopa/DDC inhibitor treatment for Parkinson's disease with levodopa related fluctuations is verified."( Entacapone prolongs levodopa response in a one month double blind study in parkinsonian patients with levodopa related fluctuations.
Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM, 1996
)
0.86
" Titration of the dosage and additional treatment with sustained-release preparations of L-DOPA should be applied individually."( [Therapy of idiopathic and uremic restless legs syndrome].
Oertel, WH; Stiasny, K; Trenkwalder, C, 1996
)
0.29
" Whether higher doses or more frequent dosing is effective requires further investigation."( L-DOPA/carbidopa for nocturnal movement disorders in uremia.
Fine, A; Kryger, MH; Walker, SL, 1996
)
0.29
" In a subsequent open-label dose-escalation phase, further improvement was documented as the dosage was gradually raised to 10 mg daily."( Adjunctive cabergoline therapy of Parkinson's disease: comparison with placebo and assessment of dose responses and duration of effect.
Adler, CH; Ahlskog, JE; Muenter, MD; Wright, KF, 1996
)
0.29
" The AUC of 3-O-methyldopa decreased by 45% and AUC of homovanillic acid by 21% after 4 weeks' dosing with entacapone."( Effect of one month's treatment with peripherally acting catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor, entacapone, on pharmacokinetics and motor response to levodopa in advanced parkinsonian patients.
Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM, 1996
)
0.49
" The first afternoon levodopa administration was substituted with an equimolar dosage of the liquid formulation levodopa methyl ester (LDME)."( Fluctuating parkinsonism: a pilot study of single afternoon dose of levodopa methyl ester.
Barbato, L; Bramante, L; Nordera, G; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F; Vacca, L, 1996
)
0.85
"Dopaminergic agonists represent an important class of drugs in Parkinson's Disease, useful: a) in delaying the beginning of L-dopa therapy; b) in supporting it, reducing its dosage and widen the therapeutic window; c) moreover, as the disease advances, in trying to treat motor fluctuations."( Dopaminergic agonists in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: a review.
Piccoli, F; Riuggeri, RM, 1995
)
0.29
" The delayed levodopa absorption and lower plasma concentrations which characterise controlled-release formulations compared with standard forms must be taken into account when prescribing dosage regimens and can be complicating factors in the management of the advanced disease stages."( Pharmacokinetic optimisation in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Albani, F; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Riva, R, 1996
)
0.66
" Without co-medication a high L-dopa dosage may provoke/facilitate an organic cerebral dysfunction."( Computerised brain electrical activity findings of parkinson patients suffering from hyperkinetic side effects (hypersensitive dopamine syndrome) and a review of possible sources.
Fünfgeld, EW, 1995
)
0.29
" The drugs were dosed according to the individual need of the patients."( Sustained-release Madopar HBS compared with standard Madopar in the long-term treatment of de novo parkinsonian patients.
Andersen, A; Boas, J; Boisen, E; Borgmann, R; Buch, D; Dupont, E; Helgetveit, AC; Kjaer, MO; Kristensen, TN; Mikkelsen, B; Pakkenberg, H; Presthus, J; Stien, R; Worm-Petersen, J, 1996
)
0.29
"A dose-response study of the effects of entacapone on the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of levodopa and on the clinical response to levodopa was carried out in 20 parkinsonian patients with levodopa-related fluctuations."( A double-blind pharmacokinetic and clinical dose-response study of entacapone as an adjuvant to levodopa therapy in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Rinne, UK; Ruottinen, HM, 1996
)
0.73
" But the described pharmacokinetic behaviour gives hope, that these newly developed SR-preparations may lead to progress in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (prolongation of dosage intervals, reduction of motor fluctuations)."( Sustained-release of levodopa: single dose study of a new formulation.
Gerlach, M; Klotz, P; Kuhn, W; Müller, T; Przuntek, H, 1996
)
0.61
" LDEE injections produced significant and rapid elevations of striatal levodopa, dopamine, and DOPAC, which were similar to those achieved after levodopa administration, with similar dose-response curves."( Effect of subcutaneous administration of levodopa ethyl ester, a soluble prodrug of levodopa, on dopamine metabolism in rodent striatum: implication for treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Atlas, D; Djaldetti, R; Melamed, E, 1996
)
0.79
"We report a 65-year-old male parkinsonian patient who developed dominantly unilateral choreic movements over his right-side extremities after a daily dosage of up to 1,000 mg of carbidopa-levodopa (carbidopa 200 mg, levodopa 800 mg) for 12 years."( Ventrolateral thalamotomy for dyskinesia following levodopa therapy of Parkinson's disease.
Lee, ST; Lu, CS, 1996
)
0.74
" Levodopa/carbidopa dosage and frequency were significantly reduced."( Tolcapone improves motor function and reduces levodopa requirement in patients with Parkinson's disease experiencing motor fluctuations: a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Tolcapone Fluctuator Study Group I.
Adler, CH; Chernik, DA; Dorflinger, EE; Hilaire, MS; Kurth, MC; LeWitt, P; Singer, C; Waters, C; Yoo, K, 1997
)
1.47
" In the statistical investigation by the multiple analysis, the time from first onset to initiation on levodopa therapy or the duration of levodopa therapy was not closely related to the development of any adverse reaction, while Hoehn and Yahr's stage and dosage levodopa had the most significant influence on the development of adverse reactions."( [Problems of long-term levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease].
Nakamura, Y, 1997
)
0.82
" Dosage titration occurred over the 5 years of evaluations to maintain an optimal response."( Comparison of immediate-release and controlled release carbidopa/levodopa in Parkinson's disease. A multicenter 5-year study. The CR First Study Group.
Block, G; Irr, J; Liss, C; Nibbelink, D; Reines, S, 1997
)
0.53
"To determine if the combination of levodopa (LD) plus bromocriptine (Br) in the early stages of Parkinson's disease (PD) permits reduction of LD dosage and consequently results in fewer motor fluctuations and dyskinesias, a double-blind, multicenter prospective study in 50 PD patients who had responded favorably to LD while under treatment with that drug for < or = 6 months was undertaken."( Early combination of bromocriptine and levodopa in Parkinson's disease: a prospective randomized study of two parallel groups over a total follow-up period of 44 months including an initial 8-month double-blind stage.
Burguera, JA; Chacón, J; Forcadell, F; Giménez-Roldán, S; Liaño, H; Tolosa, E, 1997
)
0.84
" Motor fluctuations, which slowly emerge after 3-5 years of chronic LD therapy, gradually replace the smooth pattern of response, and more frequent dosing is required."( Problems with current pharmacologic treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Hurtig, HI, 1997
)
0.3
" When given in tablet form, the dosage of levodopa (which is usually combined with a decarboxylase inhibitor such as carbidopa or benserazide) often cannot be titrated adequately, and the drug may become unpredictable in its ability to relieve parkinsonian symptoms."( Using liquid levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. A practical guide.
Kurth, MC, 1997
)
0.93
" Studies were performed at 5-7 days post lesion (group 1 animals), at 21 days (group 2) when denervation supersensitivity was evident by contralateral turning to apomorphine and at the same time but following 7 days dosing with LDME plus benserazide (group 3)."( Effect of L-dopa alone and with benserazide on the spontaneous activity of striatal neurones in normal and 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned rats.
Chang, WY; Webster, RA, 1997
)
0.3
" Plasma levels of levodopa, 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD) and 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC) were determined before benserazide treatment and during all benserazide dosing regimens, as existing endogenously and after administration of 250 mg levodopa."( Pharmacodynamics of benserazide assessed by its effects on endogenous and exogenous levodopa pharmacokinetics.
Crevoisier, C; Dingemanse, J; Kleinbloesem, CH; Wood, ND; Zürcher, G, 1997
)
0.86
" As a result, the measurement of SDR may be inaccurate for establishing levodopa dosing regimen in individual patients."( Long-duration response to levodopa influences the pharmacodynamics of short-duration response in Parkinson's disease.
Aguglia, U; Colao, R; Gambardella, A; Montesanti, R; Oliveri, RL; Quattrone, A; Rizzo, M; Zappia, M, 1997
)
0.83
" Compound 6, 3-benzyl-8-methyl-1,2,3,4-tetrahydrochromeno[3,4-c]pyridin-5-one, increased DOPA (L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine) synthesis 84% in the hippocampus and 10% in the striatum of rat brain when dosed orally at 10 mg/kg."( Chromeno[3,4-c]pyridin-5-ones: selective human dopamine D4 receptor antagonists as potential antipsychotic agents.
Capiris, T; Connor, DT; Heffner, TG; MacKenzie, RG; Miller, SR; Pugsley, TA; Unangst, PC; Wise, LD, 1997
)
0.3
" In most cases the dosage of levodopa should be lowered or stopped altogether."( [Psychiatric complications of L-dopa: physiopathology and treatment].
Castro-García, A, 1997
)
0.59
" Used as adjuvant treatment to levodopa, they help lowering the dosage of levodopa."( [Initial treatment of Parkinson's disease].
Kulisevsky, J; López-Villegas, D, 1997
)
0.58
" At 6 months, both tolcapone groups had changes in levodopa dosage that were significantly different from placebo: the tolcapone groups had decreases in mean total daily dose of levodopa, whereas the placebo group had a mean increase."( Tolcapone in stable Parkinson's disease: efficacy and safety of long-term treatment. The Tolcapone Stable Study Group.
Bailey, P; Deptula, D; Dorflinger, E; Kurth, M; LeWitt, P; Pedder, S; Shulman, LM; Waters, CH, 1997
)
0.55
" To establish the dose-response profile for the dyskinesiogenic effect of LD, we administered intravenous LD over a wide dose range to 25 patients with advanced PD."( Effects of supra-threshold levodopa doses on dyskinesias in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Blanchet, P; Chase, TN; Klaassen, AA; Metman, LV; Mouradian, MM; van den Munckhof, P, 1997
)
0.59
"Two patients with Parkinson's disease repeatedly increased their levodopa dosage on their own to 1500-2000 mg/day to reach and sustain a state of euphoria, regardless of the fact that dosages of 400-800 mg/day were sufficient to suppress their parkinsonian symptoms."( Levodopa dependence and abuse in Parkinson's disease.
Spigset, O; von Schéele, C,
)
1.81
" In the first study (de novo patients), cabergoline was administered at increasing dosages until the maximum dosage of 2 mg/day once a day for 8 weeks; subsequently L-dopa (250 mg/day) was added."( Clinical and pharmacokinetic evaluation of L-dopa and cabergoline cotreatment in Parkinson's disease.
Bonuccelli, U; Colzi, A; Del Dotto, P; Fariello, R; Musatti, E; Persiani, S; Strolin Benedetti, M, 1997
)
0.3
" dosing with the lowest fully effective dose of apomorphine (averaging 27."( Motor response to a dopamine D3 receptor preferring agonist compared to apomorphine in levodopa-primed 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine monkeys.
Blanchet, PJ; Chase, TN; Konitsiotis, S, 1997
)
0.52
" As a consequence, levodopa dosage might be increased and the interdose interval progressively shortened."( Clinical implications of sustained dopaminergic stimulation.
Barbato, L; Berardelli, A; Bonamartini, A; Manfredi, M; Patsalos, PN; Ruggieri, S; Stocchi, F, 1994
)
0.62
" In the statistical investigation by the multivariate analysis (quantification method type II), the age of initial levodopa therapy, the duration from the onset to the initiation of levodopa therapy, and the duration of levodopa therapy were not closely related to the development of any adverse reaction, while Hoehn & Yahr's stage and the dosage of levodopa had the most significant influence on the development of adverse reactions."( [Multivariate analysis of the problems of long-term levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease].
Endo, S; Hikiji, A; Nakamura, Y; Yoshinaga, J, 1997
)
0.76
" The mean daily levodopa dosage was 569 mg for Std-L compared with 751 mg for L-CR."( Comparison of standard carbidopa-levodopa and sustained-release carbidopa-levodopa in Parkinson's disease: pharmacokinetic and quality-of-life measures.
Koller, WC; Lyons, K; McGuire, D; Pahwa, R; Robischon, M; Silverstein, P; Zwiebel, F, 1997
)
0.92
" These results indicate that the mode of administration of a D2 dopamine receptor agonist, such as U91356A, although at a roughly equivalent dosage influences the extent of inhibition of the expression of PPE in the denervated striatum of monkeys."( Preproenkephalin mRNA expression in the caudate-putamen of MPTP monkeys after chronic treatment with the D2 agonist U91356A in continuous or intermittent mode of administration: comparison with L-DOPA therapy.
Bédard, PJ; Blanchet, PJ; Calon, F; Di Paolo, T; Goulet, M; Morissette, M; Soghomonian, JJ, 1997
)
0.3
" However, no correlation was found between delta BW, delta BMI or %Fat on the one hand, and the disease severity or the total dosage of L-dopa with carbidopa on the other."( [Body fat loss in patients with Parkinson's disease].
Sakajiri, K; Takamori, M, 1997
)
0.3
"The primary objective of this study was to assess the effect of tolcapone on levodopa dosage in parkinsonian patients whose "wearing-off" phenomenon has been controlled with more frequent levodopa dosage."( Tolcapone added to levodopa in stable parkinsonian patients: a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Tolcapone in Parkinson's Disease Study Group II (TIPS II).
Burgunder, JM; Dorflinger, E; Dupont, E; Findley, LJ; Olsson, JE, 1997
)
0.85
" Across groups, mean Hoehn and Yahr stage and daily levodopa dosage progressively increase (and mean Schwab and England disability ratings decrease), but more conservatively than in prior reports in the postlevodopa era."( Motor complications of chronic levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Busenbark, K; Hubble, J; Koller, WC; Lyons, K; McGuire, D; Michalek, D; Miyawaki, E; Pahwa, R; Smith, D; Tröster, AI, 1997
)
0.83
""Freezing" is a sudden, unforeseen state of immobility occurring independently of L-Dopa dosage timing and often presents in connection with walking, speech and hand movements."( [Freezing phenomenon in Parkinson disease].
Ringendahl, H; Sierla, T, 1997
)
0.3
" Thus, with increasing degeneration of the nigrostriatal system, swings in plasma levodopa concentrations associated with standard dosage regimens produce nonphysiological fluctuations in intrasynaptic dopamine."( The significance of continuous dopaminergic stimulation in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Chase, TN, 1998
)
0.53
"5 mg/day) achieved a statistically significant decrease in levodopa dosage compared with placebo (18 vs 3%) and improved the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores for activities of daily living in a greater number of patients (23 vs 4%)."( Clinical experience with cabergoline in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease treated with levodopa.
Marsden, CD, 1998
)
0.76
" DOPA ester 300 ng, microinjected 1 min previously, shifted a dose-response curve for DOPA 30-300 ng to the right without reduction of the maximum response, showing a competitive mode of antagonism."( [Studies on novel, stable and potent competitive antagonists against L-DOPA].
Furukawa, N; Goshima, Y; Misu, Y; Miyamae, T; Okumura, Y; Shimizu, M; Sugiyama, Y, 1997
)
0.3
" However, in the long term, the reduction of levodopa dosage in the STN group led to an indirect reduction of LID similar to that in the GPi group during activities of everyday life."( Subthalamic nucleus or internal pallidal stimulation in young onset Parkinson's disease.
Benabid, AL; Benazzouz, A; Hoffmann, D; Krack, P; Limousin, P; Pollak, P; Xie, J, 1998
)
0.56
" Tolcapone can significantly reduce the off time and increases the total on time while simultaneously reducing levodopa dosage and frequency."( [Tolcapone: a different, effective approach to improving dopaminergic treatment in Parkinson's disease].
Kulisevsky, J, 1998
)
0.51
" Despite a clear, asymmetric improvement of cardinal Parkinson's disease symptoms after unilateral PVP, changes in the dose-response L-dopa profile occurred symmetrically, suggesting that mechanisms underlying the two effects are distinct."( Changes in the motor response to acute L-dopa challenge after unilateral microelectrode-guided posteroventral pallidotomy.
Cammarotta, A; Leiguarda, R; Merello, M; Nouzeilles, MI; Pikielny, R,
)
0.13
" The great increase in levodopa responses by deprenyl suggests a likely therapeutic use of this dopamine precursor with a higher dosage of the MAO inhibitor, to reduce effectively the daily levodopa requirements in Parkinson's disease patients."( Modification of levodopa responses by deprenyl (selegiline): an electrophysiological and behavioral study in the rat relevant to Parkinson's disease.
Bernardi, G; Bonci, A; Federici, M; Mercuri, NB; Scarponi, M; Siniscalchi, A, 1998
)
0.96
" Dosing days were separated by a 7-day washout."( The effect of tolcapone on levodopa pharmacokinetics is independent of levodopa/carbidopa formulation.
Aitken, J; Fotteler, B; Jorga, K; Nielsen, T; Sedek, G, 1998
)
0.6
" Daily levodopa dosage requirements decreased significantly."( Highlights of the North American and European experiences.
Goetz, CG, 1998
)
0.76
" At 6 months, both tolcapone groups had changes in levodopa dosage that were significantly different from placebo: the tolcapone groups had decreases in mean total daily dose of levodopa, whereas the placebo group had a mean increase."( Tolcapone in stable Parkinson's disease: efficacy and safety of long-term treatment. Tolcapone Stable Study Group.
Bailey, P; Deptula, D; Dorflinger, E; Kurth, M; LeWitt, P; Pedder, S; Shulman, LM; Waters, CH, 1998
)
0.55
"In an open study, a group of 10 PD patients was treated with low dosage clozapine (mean 30 mg/day) for a 4-month period and L-dopa dyskinesias were evaluated in basal conditions and during clozapine treatment after the usual morning dose of clozapine."( Low dosage clozapine effects on L-dopa induced dyskinesias in parkinsonian patients.
Adipietro, A; Fattapposta, F; Pierelli, F; Pozzessere, G; Scoppetta, C; Soldati, G, 1998
)
0.3
" Two blood samples were taken from each subject at varying times during the levodopa dosage interval, and the exact time and dosage of levodopa were noted."( Effect of oral levodopa treatment on articulatory function in Parkinson's disease: preliminary results.
Cahill, LM; Charles, BG; Murdoch, BE; Theodoros, DG; Triggs, EJ; Yao, AA, 1998
)
0.88
"A neural network model of movement control in normal and Parkinson's disease (PD) conditions is proposed to simulate the time-varying dose-response relationship underlying the effects of levodopa on movement amplitude and movement duration in PD patients."( Neural dynamics of short and medium-term motor control effects of levodopa therapy in Parkinson's disease.
Contreras-Vidal, JL; Poluha, P; Stelmach, GE; Teulings, HL, 1998
)
0.73
" Levodopa dose-response curves for antiparkinsonian and dyskinetic effects were then compared for each study arm."( Dextromethorphan improves levodopa-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease.
Chase, TN; Del Dotto, P; Natté, R; van den Munckhof, P; Verhagen Metman, L, 1998
)
1.51
" Since Shy-Drager syndrome is often treated with antiparkinsonian drugs, neuroleptic malignant syndrome can possibly develop after the change in dosage of catecholaminergic drugs."( [A case of impending neuroleptic malignant syndrome associated with Shy-Drager syndrome].
Egi, N; Harada, T; Kumagai, R; Kurokawa, K; Nakamura, S; Okazaki, M; Shimote, K, 1998
)
0.3
" There was no difference in age, duration or stage of PD, or dosage or duration of levodopa therapy between the two groups."( Poor visual discrimination and visual hallucinations in Parkinson's disease.
Diederich, NJ; Goetz, CG; Leurgans, S; Pappert, EJ; Piery, V; Raman, R,
)
0.36
" The inhibition of platelet MAO-B activity against multiple dosing of selegiline (2."( Is 10 milligrams selegiline essential as an adjunct therapy for the symptomatic treatment of Parkinson's disease?
Mahmood, I, 1998
)
0.3
" The dose-response curve obtained from the denervated striatum showed a shift to the right."( Loss of regulation by presynaptic dopamine D2 receptors of exogenous L-DOPA-derived dopamine release in the dopaminergic denervated striatum.
Kannari, K; Maeda, T; Matsunaga, M; Suda, T, 1999
)
0.3
" A short terminal disposition half-life of 2 hours mandates dosing 3 times/day."( Tolcapone, a selective catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor for treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Guay, DR, 1999
)
0.3
" At the same time, the lower levodopa dosage in the selegiline group was accompanied by at least equal therapeutic efficacy (which is necessary for an unambiguous interpretation)."( SELEDO: a 5-year long-term trial on the effect of selegiline in early Parkinsonian patients treated with levodopa.
Conrad, B; Dichgans, J; Kraus, PH; Krauseneck, P; Pergande, G; Przuntek, H; Rinne, U; Schimrigk, K; Schnitker, J; Vogel, HP, 1999
)
0.81
" There was no relationship between TH mRNA expression disease duration or L-dopa dosage in the IPD group."( The vulnerability of nigral neurons to Parkinson's disease is unrelated to their intrinsic capacity for dopamine synthesis: an in situ hybridization study.
Foster, OJ; Kingsbury, AE; Marsden, CD, 1999
)
0.3
" Patients with complex fluctuations and diphasic dyskinesias were excluded and the conversion was made after some recommendations, depending on the clinical problems and the daily dosage and administration schedule of standard (STD) Sinemet."( Controlled release levodopa in Parkinson's disease: influence of selection criteria and conversion recommendations in the clinical outcome of 450 patients. STAR Study Group.
Bravo, JL; Grandas, F; Linazasoro, G; Martínez Martín, P,
)
0.46
" At doses of 200 mg 2 to 10 times daily coadministered with levodopa/carbidopa or levodopa/benserazide entacapone may increase the duration of clinical response both after the first single dose and after repeated dosing in patients with end-of-dose fluctuations."( [Entacapone: is it useful as complimentary treatment with levodopa?].
Burguera, JA; Grandas, F; Horga de la Parte, JF; Kulisevsky, J; Luquin, R; Martí, F; Matías-Guiu, J; Obeso, JA,
)
0.62
" They both potentiated the effects of L-DOPA in the 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned rat, a model of Parkinson's disease, dosed at 10 mg/kg ip, but 48 was not active at 30 mg/kg po."( Subtype-selective N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists: synthesis and biological evaluation of 1-(arylalkynyl)-4-benzylpiperidines.
Bigge, CF; Boxer, PA; Cai, SX; Gregory, TF; Hawkinson, JE; Konkoy, CS; Meltzer, LT; Serpa, K; Whittemore, ER; Wise, LD; Woodward, RM; Wright, JL; Zhou, ZL, 1999
)
0.3
" No patient showed dose-response motor flutuations during levodopa treatment."( Drug-induced motor complications in dopa-responsive dystonia: implications for the pathogenesis of dyskinesias and motor fluctuations.
de la Fuente-Fernández, R,
)
0.38
" The present study was conducted in order to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of entacapone after multiple dosing and the pattern of COMT inhibition in erythrocytes during the first day of dosing as well as during steady state."( Pharmacokinetics of oral entacapone after frequent multiple dosing and effects on levodopa disposition.
Gordin, A; Huhtala, S; Huupponen, R; Korpela, K; Reinikainen, K; Rouru, J; Savontaus, E; Scheinin, M, 1999
)
0.53
" There were no indications of accumulation of COMT inhibition during frequent dosing of entacapone."( Pharmacokinetics of oral entacapone after frequent multiple dosing and effects on levodopa disposition.
Gordin, A; Huhtala, S; Huupponen, R; Korpela, K; Reinikainen, K; Rouru, J; Savontaus, E; Scheinin, M, 1999
)
0.53
"Even when dosed frequently, there are neither indications of accumulation of entacapone nor of its COMT inhibiting activity."( Pharmacokinetics of oral entacapone after frequent multiple dosing and effects on levodopa disposition.
Gordin, A; Huhtala, S; Huupponen, R; Korpela, K; Reinikainen, K; Rouru, J; Savontaus, E; Scheinin, M, 1999
)
0.53
" Since the pre- and post-pallidotomy daily levodopa dosage remained essentially the same, the improvement in LID could not be attributed to a reduction in levodopa."( Levodopa-induced dyskinesias treated by pallidotomy.
Ben-Arie, L; Grossman, R; Jankovic, J; Krauss, JK; Lai, E, 1999
)
2.01
" Although parkinsonian symptoms responded poorly to levodopa, AEO worsened after increasing levodopa dosage and disappeared when levodopa was discontinued."( "Apraxia of eyelid opening" induced by levodopa therapy and apomorphine in atypical parkinsonism (possible progressive supranuclear palsy): a case report.
De Mari, M; De Salvia, R; Defazio, G; Giorelli, M; Lamberti, P; Livrea, P,
)
0.65
" When dosed orally, this compound potentiates the effects of L-DOPA in the 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned rat, a model of Parkinson's disease."( Discovery of subtype-selective NMDA receptor ligands: 4-benzyl-1-piperidinylalkynylpyrroles, pyrazoles and imidazoles as NR1A/2B antagonists.
Boxer, PA; Gregory, TF; Meltzer, LT; Serpa, KA; Wise, LD; Wright, JL, 1999
)
0.3
"Two studies were undertaken, a single-dose study and a longitudinal dosing study."( Levodopa-carbidopa and childhood retinal disease.
Bremer, DL; Jende, DL; Leguire, LE; McGregor, ML; Nairus, TM; Rogers, GL; Walson, PD, 1998
)
1.74
"05) between change in visual acuity in the single-dose study and the longitudinal dosing study."( Levodopa-carbidopa and childhood retinal disease.
Bremer, DL; Jende, DL; Leguire, LE; McGregor, ML; Nairus, TM; Rogers, GL; Walson, PD, 1998
)
1.74
" Although certain exceptions apply, dosage adjustments and drug changes should be instituted slowly."( Maximizing the benefit of pharmacotherapy in Parkinson's disease.
Berchou, RC, 2000
)
0.31
"Thirteen older amblyopic children were randomly assigned to receive or not receive part-time occlusion (3 h/day) combined with 7 weeks of oral dosing with levodopa-carbidopa (1."( Occlusion and levodopa-carbidopa treatment for childhood amblyopia.
Bremer, DL; Leguire, LE; McGregor, ML; Rogers, GL; Walson, PD, 1998
)
0.86
" Selective adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonists, such as KW-6002, may be one means of reducing the dosage of L-DOPA used in treating Parkinson's disease and are potentially a novel approach to treating the illness both as monotherapy and in combination with dopaminergic drugs."( Combined use of the adenosine A(2A) antagonist KW-6002 with L-DOPA or with selective D1 or D2 dopamine agonists increases antiparkinsonian activity but not dyskinesia in MPTP-treated monkeys.
Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; Kanda, T; Kase, H; Kuwana, Y; Nakamura, J; Pearce, RK; Smith, LA, 2000
)
0.31
" Antiparkinsonian medication dosage did not significantly change during the study period."( [Efficacy and safety of posteroventral pallidotomy for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease].
Ferrer, E; Molinuevo, JL; Nobbe, FA; Rumià, J; Tolosa, E; Valldeoriola, F, 2000
)
0.31
" Repeated levodopa dosing is necessary to induce dyskinesia, implying the development of sensitization to levodopa."( Clinical pharmacology of levodopa-induced dyskinesia.
Nutt, JG, 2000
)
1.01
" Urine recoveries of the three analytes over one 8 h dosing interval showed that the majority of the excreted levodopa and carbidopa was recovered during the first 4 h, and there is proportionally greater excretion of the carbidopa dose than the levodopa dose."( Bioavailability studies of oral dosage forms containing levodopa and carbidopa using column-switching chromatography followed by electrochemical detection.
Sagar, KA; Smyth, MR, 2000
)
0.77
" This study was conducted in parallel with a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response study of the safety and efficacy of tolcapone in combination with levodopa/carbidopa therapy."( Illness impact and adjustment to Parkinson's disease: before and after treatment with tolcapone.
Chernik, D; Dorflinger, E; Waters, C; Welsh, MD, 2000
)
0.5
" Clinical studies show that they increase the daily ON time by an average 1 to 3 hours, improve the activities of daily living and allow daily levodopa dosage to be decreased."( Clinical pharmacology, therapeutic use and potential of COMT inhibitors in Parkinson's disease.
Kaakkola, S, 2000
)
0.51
" Outcome measures were evolution of L-dopa dosage and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores and subscores, and incidence of motor complications."( Five-year follow-up of early lisuride and levodopa combination therapy versus levodopa monotherapy in de novo Parkinson's disease. The French Lisuride Study Group.
Allain, H; Bentué-Ferrer, D; Destée, A; Le Cavorzin, P; Patay, M; Petit, H; Schück, S, 2000
)
0.57
" All were hospitalized initially to determine optimal dosage and to teach them the technique of self-injection."( [Apomorphine for treatment of "off-periods" in Parkinson's disease].
Kuritzky, A; Melamed, E; Merims, D; Ziv, I; Zoldan, J, 1999
)
0.3
" For patients with residual disability, the dosage was escalated during the first 10 weeks."( Pramipexole vs levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson disease: A randomized controlled trial. Parkinson Study Group.
, 2000
)
0.66
" However, poorer quality of life associated with inadequate dosage of levodopa may be the price for a low rate of motor complications in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Dyskinesias and motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease. A community-based study.
Quinn, N; Schrag, A, 2000
)
0.54
" The dosing schedule was one tablet TID for 1 week, 1 1/2 tablets TID for 1 week, then two tablets TID for 6 weeks."( Carbidopa/levodopa for smoking cessation: a pilot study with negative results.
Ahlskog, JE; Croghan, GA; Croghan, IT; Hurt, RD; Moyer, TP; Offord, KP; Wolter, TD, 2000
)
0.71
" These findings suggest that pramipexole can markedly reduce the daily levodopa dosage without deterioration of motor response and support that this new selective D2/D3 receptor agonist also improves later levodopa-associated motor complications."( An open-label, multicentre clinical trial to determine the levodopa dose-sparing capacity of pramipexole in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease.
Hebenstreit, E; Pinter, MM; Rutgers, AW, 2000
)
0.78
" This paper reviews the pharmacokinetics, dosing schedule, peripheral and central effects, and safety profile of these agents."( Issues important for rational COMT inhibition.
Dingemanse, J, 2000
)
0.31
"In bioequivalence studies, the first blood or plasma sample taken after dosing sometimes yields a higher assayed drug concentration than any samples drawn thereafter."( First measured plasma concentration value as C(max); impact on the C(max) confidence interval in bioequivalence studies.
Conner, D; Jackson, A; Miller, R, 2000
)
0.31
" Severity of Parkinson's disease and levodopa dosing are the main clinical risk factors."( Dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease. Pathophysiology and clinical risk factors.
Baas, H, 2000
)
0.58
" The study showed that repeated dosing of entacapone inhibits the COMT activity in a dose-dependent manner and thereby reduces the loss of L-Dopa to 3-OMD."( The effects of different repeated doses of entacapone on the pharmacokinetics of L-Dopa and on the clinical response to L-Dopa in Parkinson's disease.
Gordin, A; Heikkinen, H; Koller, WC; LeWitt, PA; Nutt, JG,
)
0.13
"To develop stable liquid dosage forms of levodopa-carbidopa for use in children with amblyopia."( Development of two stable oral suspensions of levodopa-carbidopa for children with amblyopia.
Leguire, LE; Morosco, RS; Nahata, MC,
)
0.66
" Therapeutic drug monitoring might be useful to explain these modifications in relation to the clinical effect and even to possible problems in transport competition and so to define the LD dosage regimen."( Monitoring of L-dopa concentrations in Parkinson's disease.
Benetello, P; Furlanut , M; Furlanut, M, 2001
)
0.31
"To examine the short- and long-duration responses to levodopa dosing in subjects with DRD."( Response to levodopa treatment in dopa-responsive dystonia.
Nutt, JG; Nygaard, TG, 2001
)
0.94
"The short-duration response to levodopa dosing seems to develop more slowly and persists longer in subjects with DRD than in subjects with Parkinson disease."( Response to levodopa treatment in dopa-responsive dystonia.
Nutt, JG; Nygaard, TG, 2001
)
0.98
" At week 4, 116 eligible patients entered an 8-week double-blind treatment period and were randomized to receive tolcapone three times daily at either 100 mg (group 1; n = 58) or 200 mg (group 2; n = 58) until week 8, followed by the alternative tolcapone dosage until week 12."( Comparison of two dosages of tolcapone added to levodopa in nonfluctuating patients with PD.
Bailey, P; Bulger, L; Facciponte, G; Pourcher, E; Suchowersky, O,
)
0.39
" The occurrence of dyskinesia correlated with plasma concentrations of L-dopa, with animals displaying the most severe dyskinesias having significantly higher plasma concentrations of L-dopa one hour after dosing than animals with mild or moderate dyskinesia or no dyskinesia."( L-dopa induces dyskinesia in normal monkeys: behavioural and pharmacokinetic observations.
Heikkilä, M; Jenner, P; Lindén, IB; Pearce, RK, 2001
)
0.31
" In this pilot trial of five patients with tardive and four patients with idiopathic dystonia we tested the effect of morphinsulfate in a retarded form with a dosage of 20-60 mg per day."( Morphine in tardive and idiopathic dystonia (short communication).
Becker, G; Berg, D; Naumann, M; Reiners, K, 2001
)
0.31
" From a practical point of view, knowledge of individual patients' kinetic-dynamic variables can help the physician assess patients' clinical needs objectively and optimize levodopa dosing according to disease progression."( Levodopa therapy monitoring in patients with Parkinson disease: a kinetic-dynamic approach.
Albani, F; Avoni, P; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Riva, R, 2001
)
1.95
" Since antiparkinsonian medication has short- and long-term effects that may prevent an estimate of the maximal possible impact of STN DBS, such medication was used at the lowest possible dosage after DBS implantation."( Subthalamic DBS replaces levodopa in Parkinson's disease: two-year follow-up.
Ghika, J; Pollo, C; Pralong, E; Temperli, P; Villemure, JG; Vingerhoets, FJ, 2002
)
0.62
" All medications were stopped before implantation and reintroduced, at the lowest dosage needed, only if the postoperative motor score did not reach the baseline level."( Subthalamic DBS replaces levodopa in Parkinson's disease: two-year follow-up.
Ghika, J; Pollo, C; Pralong, E; Temperli, P; Villemure, JG; Vingerhoets, FJ, 2002
)
0.62
"We studied the relationship of nonmotor fluctuations with motor symptoms and determined the influence of age at disease onset, duration of disease, dosage and duration of levodopa treatment in the appearance of nonmotor fluctuations."( The clinical profile of nonmotor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease patients.
Aktan, S; Bekiroglu, N; Gunal, DI; Nurichalichi, K; Tuncer, N, 2002
)
0.51
" Levodopa and carbidopa combination in 2 different dosage schedules were given to both adults and children."( Effect of levodopa and carbidopa in human amblyopia.
Chaudhuri, Z; Kumar, M; Pandey, PK; Satyabala, K; Sharma, P,
)
1.44
" For patients with residual disability, the dosage was escalated during the first 10 weeks, and subsequently, open-label levodopa could be added."( Dopamine transporter brain imaging to assess the effects of pramipexole vs levodopa on Parkinson disease progression.
, 2002
)
0.75
"A randomised, double-blind trial in which 555 patients were assigned to three treatment groups according to the level of daily dosage of L-dopa, presence of motor fluctuations, and use of dopamine agonist before study entry."( A six-month multicentre, double-blind, bromocriptine-controlled study of the safety and efficacy of ropinirole in the treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease not optimally controlled by L-dopa.
Brooks, DJ; Brunt, ER; Korczyn, AD; Montastruc, JL; Stocchi, F, 2002
)
0.31
" Our findings suggest that lighter patients with Parkinson's disease probably receive a greater cumulative dosage of LD per kilogram of body weight during long-term treatment, because in clinical practice, LD is administered without any adjustment of the dose to body weight."( Body weight influences pharmacokinetics of levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Arabia, G; Bagalà, A; Bastone, L; Bonavita, S; Caracciolo, M; Crescibene, L; Di Costanzo, A; Gambardella, A; Nicoletti, G; Quattrone, A; Scornaienchi, M; Zappia, M,
)
0.39
" In 44 of 58 dosing events, an oral dose of levodopa was related to a peak in plasma concentration."( Levodopa pharmacokinetics and motor performance during activities of daily living in patients with Parkinson's disease on individual drug combinations.
Aquilonius, SM; Gomes-Trolin, C; Lennernäs, H; Nyholm, D,
)
1.84
"2 years in the group without falls) and the daily levodopa dosage (on average 806."( [Analysis of causes for falls in people with Parkinson's disease].
Fiszer, U; Jedynecka, U; Krygowska-Wajs, A; Michałowska, M; Sobieszek, A,
)
0.38
" Consumption was expressed in defined daily dosage (DDD) and the costs in euros."( [The evolution of use of anti-Parkinson drugs in Spain].
Castel, JM; Montané, E; Vallano Ferraz, A,
)
0.13
" This entails evaluating the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic actions of the drug regimens used and possibly, dosage form and route of administration of the drugs."( Role of integrative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic optimization strategy in the management of Parkinson"s disease patients experiencing motor fluctuations with levodopa.
Okereke, CS,
)
0.33
" Mean dosage of dopaminergic drugs was reduced, but force overflow and dyskinesias were equally improved in 2 patients without a reduction."( Dyskinesias and grip control in Parkinson's disease are normalized by chronic stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus.
Deuschl, G; Fietzek, U; Kopper, F; Krack, P; Mehdorn, HM; Müller, D; Poepping, M; Schrader, B; Wenzelburger, R; Zhang, BR, 2002
)
0.31
" An analysis of clinical findings showed that: 1) there was a slight amelioration in bradykinesia, rigidity, and smaller dosage of L-DOPA; 2) tremor and drug-induced dyskinesia remained unchanged; 3) subsequently (till 9 years), the clinical effect slightly decreased in almost all patients with PD and in some of them the clinical status became worse than that prior to surgery; 4) repeated NT (2 cases) in the striatum contralaterally did not improved the situation; 5) only neurostimulation of subcortical structures improved clinical results."( [Neurotransplantation in the treatment of Parkinson disease: follow-up].
Arora, M; Fedorova, NV; Iakovleva, SA; Popov, AP; Shabalov, VA; Shtok, VN; Ugriumov, MV,
)
0.13
" Oral administration of high dosage of anticholinergic drugs is firstly recommended for the treatment of dystonia."( [Medical treatment of dystonia].
Kachi, T, 2001
)
0.31
"These findings indicate that subthalamotomy can ameliorate the cardinal symptoms of PD, reduce the dosage of levodopa, diminish complications of the drug therapy, and improve the quality of life."( Subthalamotomy for advanced Parkinson disease.
Liou, HH; Liu, HM; Su, PC; Tseng, HM; Yen, RF, 2002
)
0.53
" Serial blood samples were drawn before dosing and up to 24 h after the dose and pharmacokinetic parameters of L-dopa, its metabolites, carbidopa, and entacapone were determined."( Entacapone improves the availability of L-dopa in plasma by decreasing its peripheral metabolism independent of L-dopa/carbidopa dose.
Heikkinen, H; Kaakkola, S; Kela, M; Laine, T; Puttonen, J; Reinikainen, K; Varhe, A, 2002
)
0.31
"Thirty (91%) of 33 subjects contacted who participated in three similar 7-week, longitudinal dosing studies returned for follow-up."( Long-term follow-up of L-dopa treatment in children with amblyopia.
Komaromy, KL; Leguire, LE; Nairus, TM; Rogers, GL,
)
0.13
" The improvement of peak-dose/diphasic dyskinesias of STN stimulation is considered to be due to the decrease in the daily dosage of antiparkinsonian drugs."( [Variance in effects of subthalamic nucleus stimulation].
Hamada, I; Hasegawa, N; Okiyama, R; Takahashi, H; Taniguchi, M; Yokochi, F, 2002
)
0.31
" The proposed methods were successfully applied to the assay of LD, MD, and DP in various dosage forms."( Spectrophotometric investigations of the assay of physiologically active catecholamines in pharmaceutical formulations.
Keshavayya, J; Melwanki, MB; Nagaralli, BS; Ramesh, KC; Seetharamappa, J,
)
0.13
" In this group of patients with most serious motor disability, it has been possible to improve dyskinesia and fluctuations with a relatively important dosage of pergolide and without increase of levodopa dosage."( [Pergolide: a useful agonist for the treatment of Parkinson disease].
Bonnet, AM; Houeto, JL, 2002
)
0.5
" Severity of Parkinson's disease and levodopa dosing are the main clinical risk factors."( Which factors influence therapeutic decisions in Parkinson's disease?
Baas, H; Fuchs, G; Gemende, I; Hueber, R; Lachenmayer, L; Schneider, E; Schoenberger, B; Werner, M, 2002
)
0.59
" Our data suggest that during long-term treatment, lighter PD patients, especially women, may receive a greater cumulative dosage of levodopa per kilogram of body weight."( Body weight, levodopa pharmacokinetics and dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease.
Arabia, G; Bagalà, A; Bastone, L; Bosco, D; Caracciolo, M; Crescibene, L; Quattrone, A; Scornaienghi, M; Zappia, M, 2002
)
0.89
" In two patients with possible progressive supranuclear palsy, AEO worsened after increasing levodopa dosage or acute apomorphine challenge and disappeared following levodopa discontinuation."( Frequency of apraxia of eyelid opening in the general population and in patients with extrapyramidal disorders.
Aniello, MS; De Mari, M; Defazio, G; Lamberti, P; Zenzola, A, 2002
)
0.53
" Statistical differences were observed between UPDRS parts II, III and IV values and daily levodopa dosage in the pre- and postoperative periods, while no differences were evident between the 3 postoperative conditions."( Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in Parkinson's disease: long-term follow-up.
Bergamasco, B; Bosticco, E; Lanotte, M; Lopiano, L; Perozzo, P; Rizzone, M; Tavella, A; Torre, E, 2002
)
0.54
" This may be achieved by a controlled release (CR) gastroretentive dosage form (GRDF)."( Novel levodopa gastroretentive dosage form: in-vivo evaluation in dogs.
Eyal, S; Friedman, M; Hoffman, A; Klausner, EA; Lavy, E, 2003
)
0.8
" Daily dosage of levodopa requirement was reduced by 42%."( Treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease by subthalamotomy: one-year results.
Liou, HH; Liu, HM; Su, PC; Tseng, HM; Yen, RF, 2003
)
0.66
" Our data suggest that bcl-2 expression is beneficial only in a limited gene dosage range and that high-level expression of bcl-2 exerts potential deleterious effects."( Gene dosage-dependent effects of bcl-2 expression on cellular survival and redox status.
Evert, BO; Klockgether, T; Schaupp, M; Schulz, JB; Schwarz, CS; Seyfried, J; Wüllner, U, 2003
)
0.32
"A new concept for individualising the dosage of drugs in solid form is presented."( An automatic dose dispenser for microtablets--a new concept for individual dosage of drugs in tablet form.
Aquilonius, SM; Bredenberg, S; Nyholm, D; Nyström, C, 2003
)
0.32
" Despite the purpose of treatment, the ideal pharmacological drug for PD will include the presence of a safe side-effect profile, a simple dosing schedule, the ability to provide symptomatic relief and the potential to alter disease progression."( Recent developments in the pharmacological treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Riss, J; Tuite, P, 2003
)
0.32
" In the 19 patients studied, there were negative correlations between dosage or absorption and extent of O-methylation and of sulfation of L-DOPA or its metabolites."( L-DOPA biotransformation: correlations of dosage, erythrocyte catechol O-methyltransferase and platelet SULT1A3 activities with metabolic pathways in Parkinsonian patients.
Decker, PA; Dousa, MK; Muenter, MD; Offord, KP; Tyce, GM; Weinshilboum, RM, 2003
)
0.32
" This hypothesis is, for many clinicians, the rationale for postponing the employment of and reducing the applied dosage of L-DOPA and for beginning therapy with dopamine receptor agonists or the monoamine oxidase type B (MAO-B) inhibitor selegiline."( Arguments for the use of dopamine receptor agonists in clinical and preclinical Parkinson's disease.
Double, K; Gerlach, M; Reichmann, H; Riederer, P, 2003
)
0.32
" In order to simplify the daily dosing of these medications, Orion has developed an entacapone/levodopa/carbidopa combination tablet."( Entacapone/levodopa/carbidopa combination tablet: Stalevo.
, 2003
)
0.93
"To design novel expandable gastroretentive dosage form (GRDFs) and evaluate their gastroretentive properties."( Novel gastroretentive dosage forms: evaluation of gastroretentivity and its effect on levodopa absorption in humans.
Barta, M; Cserepes, E; Friedman, M; Hoffman, A; Klausner, EA; Lavy, E, 2003
)
0.54
"1 cm), multi layer dosage forms (DFs) with different rigid polymeric matrices an mechanical properties were folded into gelatin capsules and wer administered to healthy volunteers with a light breakfast."( Novel gastroretentive dosage forms: evaluation of gastroretentivity and its effect on levodopa absorption in humans.
Barta, M; Cserepes, E; Friedman, M; Hoffman, A; Klausner, EA; Lavy, E, 2003
)
0.54
" The off daily duration and the levodopa dosage were significantly reduced in infused patients."( Continuous apomorphine infusion and neuropsychiatric disorders: a controlled study in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Antonini, A; Basile, G; Di Blasi, L; Di Raimondo, G; Di Rosa, AE; Epifanio, A; Imbesi, D; La Spina, P; Martino, G; Morgante, L; Stocchi, F; Tetto, A, 2003
)
0.6
" Pronoran ("Servier", France) combined with levodopa was used in dosage 50-150 mg daily during 6 months."( [Use of pronoran (piribedil) in Parkinson's disease: the results of a multicenter study].
Fedorova, NV, 2003
)
0.58
" The mean clozapine dosage was 39."( Clozapine improves dyskinesias in Parkinson disease: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Borg, M; Broussolle, E; Debilly, B; Durif, F; Galitzky, M; Morand, D; Rascol, O; Thobois, S; Viallet, F, 2004
)
0.32
" Drug dosage may be reduced by 50%."( Further experience with extradural motor cortex stimulation for treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease. Report of 3 new cases.
Pagni, CA; Zeme, S; Zenga, F, 2003
)
0.32
" The galenic form and the dosage of levoDOPA were strictly the same for morning and noon intakes in each patient."( The effects of a normal protein diet on levodopa plasma kinetics in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Bruguerolle, B; Gantcheva, R; Simon, N; Viallet, F, 2004
)
0.87
" This problem emerged 2 weeks after the patient's dosage of carbidopa 50 mg-levodopa 200 mg 3 times/day was decreased to twice/day."( Apraxia of lid opening: dose-dependent response to carbidopa-levodopa.
Finley, R; Lee, KC; Miller, B, 2004
)
0.79
"The mean (SD) dosage of clozapine was 35."( Clozapine in drug induced psychosis in Parkinson's disease: a randomised, placebo controlled study with open follow up.
Bourdeix, I; Destée, A; Durif, F; Péré, JJ; Pollak, P; Rascol, O; Senard, JM; Tison, F, 2004
)
0.32
" Since pramipexole was well tolerated, an ideal dosage to control RLS symptoms could be reached rapidly."( Low-dose pramipexole in the management of restless legs syndrome. An open label trial.
Oertel, WH; Stiasny-Kolster, K, 2004
)
0.32
" Long-term use of levodopa is commonly associated with motor complications such as dyskinesia, and both the dosing frequency and total daily dose of levodopa determine the rate of onset and severity."( Dopamine agonists, receptor selectivity and dyskinesia induction in Parkinson's disease.
Jenner, P, 2003
)
0.65
" Patients were divided into 3 groups (3, 4 or 5 doses daily) based on their current levodopa dosage frequency."( Combining entacapone with levodopa/DDCI improves clinical status and quality of life in Parkinson's Disease (PD) patients experiencing wearing-off, regardless of the dosing frequency: results of a large multicentre open-label study.
Azulay, JP; Bernhard, G; Giménez-Roldán, S; Markabi, S; Martin, W; Onofrj, M; Schmidt, W; Thomas, A; Vingerhoets, F, 2004
)
0.85
" Dosage was escalated during the first 10 weeks for patients with ongoing disability."( Pramipexole vs levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson disease: a 4-year randomized controlled trial.
Alexander-Brown, B; Atassi, F; Barclay, L; Bennett, S; Berry, D; Biglan, K; Borchert, L; Brocht, A; Brown, D; Daigneault, S; DeAngelis, M; Dillon, S; Dobson, J; Evans, S; Factor, S; Fahn, S; Fontaine, D; Ford, B; Fussell, B; Hall, J; Hammerstad, J; Harrigan, M; Hodgeman, K; Holloway, RG; Hubble, J; Jankovic, J; Kamp, C; Kieburtz, K; Kurlan, R; Lang, A; LeWitt, P; Marek, K; McDermott, M; Miyasaki, J; Montgomery, A; Musch, B; O'Connell, C; Pahwa, R; Panisset, M; Pantella, C; Petsinger, G; Pfeiffer, B; Pfeiffer, R; Rainey, P; Rajput, A; Richard, K; Riley, D; Rodnitzky, R; Ross, T; Rost-Ruffner, E; Russell, DS; Seibyl, J; Shinaman, A; Shirley, T; Shoulson, I; Shults, C; Sime, E; Stacy, M; Standaert, D; Suchowersky, O; Sutherland, L; Tennis, M; Waters, C; Watts, A; Weeks, C; Weiner, W; Welsh, M; Wood, S; Wooten, F, 2004
)
0.68
"One could distinguish between "off freezing", which is a symptom tightly bound to L-dopa dosage and titration, and is clinically bound to wearing off, and, on the contrary, "on freezing" which does not respond to therapy modifications or to different drug's titration."( [Freezing of gait is a symptom of Parkinson disease].
Bandel, D; Capus, L; Mezzarobba, S; Moretti, R; Torre, P, 2004
)
0.32
" These data support the notion that pulsatile stimulation contributes to the development of dyskinesia and suggests that more frequent dosing of L-dopa plus entacapone may be a useful treatment strategy for patients in the early stages of Parkinson's disease."( Multiple small doses of levodopa plus entacapone produce continuous dopaminergic stimulation and reduce dyskinesia induction in MPTP-treated drug-naive primates.
Al-Barghouthy, G; Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; Kuoppamaki, M; Olanow, W; Rose, S; Smith, LA, 2005
)
0.64
" Tolcapone produced a greater reduction in levodopa dosage than bromocriptine."( Catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors versus active comparators for levodopa-induced complications in Parkinson's disease.
Clarke, CE; Deane, KH; Spieker, S, 2004
)
0.82
"Twenty-five patients with PD who were taking physician-optimized doses of levodopa/carbidopa (with daytime dosing intervals of 4-8 h) were administered once-daily doses of either donepezil HCl (5 mg) or placebo for 15 days, in two treatment periods, separated by a washout of at least 2 weeks."( Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses.
Cullen, EI; Hahne, WA; Kirby, L; Kumar, D; Okereke, CS; Pratt, RD, 2004
)
0.81
"Clinical awareness to the structured order of responses and to the effect of dosage can help clinicians in early assessment of response to dopaminergic treatment in VS patients."( Differential time and related appearance of signs, indicating improvement in the state of consciousness in vegetative state traumatic brain injury (VS-TBI) patients after initiation of dopamine treatment.
Groswasser, Z; Keren, O; Krimchansky, BZ; Sazbon, L, 2004
)
0.32
", dosage decrement or discontinuation of an antiparkinsonian agent) or had started a benzodiazepine in the 180 days before the start of the antipsychotic or before a randomly chosen index date in the controls."( Decrease of antiparkinsonian drugs before start of an antipsychotic in patients on levodopa treatment?
de Boer, A; Jansen, PA; Porsius, AJ; Roos, RA; van de Vijver, DA, 2004
)
0.55
" Previous reports have indicated that ascorbic acid (AsA) can reduce LD dosage without losing its effectiveness."( The effect of ascorbic acid on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa in elderly patients with Parkinson disease.
Hamamoto, M; Katayama, Y; Nagayama, H; Nito, C; Ueda, M; Yamaguchi, H,
)
0.38
" There was a good response to levodopa therapy as well as cysticidal therapy with albendazole, allowing later reduction of levodopa dosage in one patient and complete withdrawal in the other."( Parkinsonism associated with neurocysticercosis.
Sá, DS; Teive, HA; Troiano, AR; Werneck, LC, 2005
)
0.62
" A poorer response to levodopa was associated with increased mortality independent of disease severity or dosage of levodopa."( Survival in Parkinson disease: thirteen-year follow-up of the DATATOP cohort.
Lang, AE; Marras, C; McDermott, MP; Naglie, G; Rochon, PA; Rudolph, A; Tanner, CM, 2005
)
0.64
" CD/LD-loaded microspheres were specifically prepared to apply as an injectable dosage forms for brain implantation."( Carbidopa/levodopa-loaded biodegradable microspheres: in vivo evaluation on experimental Parkinsonism in rats.
Akalan, N; Arica, B; Hincal, AA; Kaş, HS; Moghdam, A, 2005
)
0.73
"Subjects aged > or =18 years with PD controlled using a stable dosage of C-L were enrolled in this multicenter, open-label, sequential study."( A multicenter, open-label, sequential study comparing preferences for carbidopa-levodopa orally disintegrating tablets and conventional tablets in subjects with Parkinson's disease.
DeRoche, C; Kastenholz, KV; Nausieda, PA; Pfeiffer, RF; Slevin, JT; Tagliati, M, 2005
)
0.56
" Wearing-off can be treated by dietary manipulation, shortening the dosing interval, substituting sustained-release levodopa, adding amantadine, or monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors, and other options, including catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors and the approved dopamine agonists addressed in another chapter."( Other pharmacological treatments for motor complications and dyskinesias.
Waters, C, 2005
)
0.54
" The risk of developing motor fluctuations has been linked to disease severity, dosage of levodopa, and the age of the patient."( Pathophysiology of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Widnell, K, 2005
)
0.55
"Fluctuations in the symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD), such as wearing-off and on-off effects, and dyskinesias are related to a variety of factors, including duration and dosage of levodopa, age at onset, stress, sleep, food intake, and other pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic mechanisms."( Motor fluctuations and dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease: clinical manifestations.
Jankovic, J, 2005
)
0.52
" L-DOPA was used in the form of the drug madopar in dosage of 25,5 mg/kg of body mass daily."( [Influence of L-DOPA on rat brain depending on individual behavioral features].
Gershteĭn, LM; Sergutina, AV, 2004
)
0.32
" The dosage of ropinirole needed to treat the symptoms of restless legs syndrome appears to be much smaller than what is necessary for Parkinson's disease therapy."( Ropinirole in the treatment of restless legs syndrome.
Kakar, RS; Kushida, CA, 2005
)
0.33
" The method was successfully applied to the determination of L-dopa in commercial dosage forms without any pre-treatment."( A disposable electrochemical sensor for the rapid determination of levodopa.
Bergamini, MF; Santos, AL; Stradiotto, NR; Zanoni, MV, 2005
)
0.56
" Squirrel monkeys were rendered parkinsonian by chronic administration of MPTP and subsequently dosed with vehicle, L-DOPA plus carbidopa (L-DOPA), ropinirole, or sumanirole over a duration of 8 weeks."( The effects of a selective dopamine D2 receptor agonist on behavioral and pathological outcome in 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine-treated squirrel monkeys.
Childs, MA; Connell, MA; Emborg, ME; Hajos-Korcsok, E; Meglasson, MD; Stephenson, DT, 2005
)
0.33
" Levodopa dosage may be reduced by 50%."( Extradural motor cortex stimulation (EMCS) for Parkinson's disease. History and first results by the study group of the Italian neurosurgical society.
Altibrandi, MG; Bentivoglio, A; Caruso, G; Cioni, B; Fiorella, C; Insola, A; Lavano, A; Maina, R; Mazzone, P; Pagni, CA; Signorelli, CD; Sturiale, C; Valzania, F; Zeme, S; Zenga, F, 2005
)
1.24
" The dosage of L-dopa could be reduced in 31% of the patients."( [Practical experience on improving activities of daily living competence in Parkinson's patients treated with ropinirole. Results of a applied study].
Angersbach, D; Buchwald, B; Reichmann, H, 2005
)
0.33
" There was a trend for lower daily levodopa equivalence dosage and more severe dyskinesia score among females but these differences did not reach statistical significance after Bonferroni correction."( Gender and the Parkinson's disease phenotype.
Baba, Y; Putzke, JD; Uitti, RJ; Whaley, NR; Wszolek, ZK, 2005
)
0.61
" Twenty-one treated PD patients received LD/CD and then the identical oral LD dosage of LCE within a standardized setting on 2 consecutive days."( Inhibition of catechol-O-methyltransferase contributes to more stable levodopa plasma levels.
Bremen, D; Erdmann, C; Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Przuntek, H; Woitalla, D, 2006
)
0.57
" The dosage was gradually escalated over 9 weeks and then maintained until Week 40, at which time active treatment was withdrawn over 3 days."( Does levodopa slow or hasten the rate of progression of Parkinson's disease?
Fahn, S, 2005
)
0.84
" OTHER OBSERVATIONS: The ELLDOPA study was the first levodopa dose-response study ever conducted."( Does levodopa slow or hasten the rate of progression of Parkinson's disease?
Fahn, S, 2005
)
1.09
"The therapeutic success of L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) treatment in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients remains controversial as many patients become tolerant requiring higher dosage regimens."( l-DOPA administration enhances 6-hydroxydopamine generation.
Daya, S; Maharaj, H; Mokokong, R; Scheepers, M; Sukhdev Maharaj, D, 2005
)
0.33
" The model accounted for levodopa dosing prior to each trial and endogenous levodopa synthesis."( Importance of within subject variation in levodopa pharmacokinetics: a 4 year cohort study in Parkinson's disease.
Chan, PL; Holford, NH; Nutt, JG, 2005
)
0.9
" After the first GCRC admission patients were treated with oral levodopa dosed for optimal control of Parkinsonism."( Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes during the first four years of levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease.
Chan, PL; Holford, NH; Nutt, JG, 2005
)
0.8
" Animals were assessed for 6 months with the same L-dopa dosing as presurgery as well as chronic oral L-dopa treatment."( Focal striatal dopamine may potentiate dyskinesias in parkinsonian monkeys.
Bankiewicz, KS; Bringas, J; Cunningham, J; Daadi, M; Eberling, JL; Forsayeth, JR; Pivirotto, P; Sanftner, L, 2006
)
0.33
" Dopamine-deficient mice have a rightward shift in the dose-response curve to morphine on the tail-flick test (a pain sensitivity assay), suggesting either a decreased sensitivity to the analgesic effects of morphine and/or basal hyperalgesia."( Morphine reward in dopamine-deficient mice.
Hnasko, TS; Palmiter, RD; Sotak, BN, 2005
)
0.33
"A sensitive, reliable and reproducible HPLC method with electrochemical detection (HPLC-ECD) has been developed for the separation and quantification of levodopa methyl ester (LDME) and its impurities such as levodopa (l-DOPA), 3-methoxytyrosine (MTS) and l-tyrosine (TS) in bulk drug and pharmaceutical dosage form."( Determination, purity assessment and chiral separation of levodopa methyl ester in bulk and formulation pharmaceuticals.
Fang, Y; Wang, J, 2006
)
0.78
" Duration of the disease was longer, its stage more advanced, daily levodopa dosage higher, and the proportion of patients with abnormalities in the EEG apparently greater in the group with falls."( Falls in Parkinson's disease. Causes and impact on patients' quality of life.
Fiszer, U; Krygowska-Wajs, A; Michałowska, M; Owczarek, K,
)
0.37
" These results suggest that at this dosage and under these specific conditions, timing is dopamine-mediated but the effect of aging on time production is not."( Single-dose levodopa administration and aging independently disrupt time production.
Li, T; Malapani, C; Rakitin, BC; Scarmeas, N; Stern, Y, 2006
)
0.71
" LD daily dosage appeared to be inversely correlated with ROS levels and positively associated with GR activity, suggesting a protective role for LD on PBMCs redox status."( Oxidative stress in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from patients with Parkinson's disease: negative correlation with levodopa dosage.
Andreoni, S; Begni, B; Beretta, S; Brighina, L; Ferrarese, C; Galbussera, A; Garofalo, R; Piolti, R; Prigione, A, 2006
)
0.54
" However, patients still encounter difficulties in non-specialist settings where there is often confusion over drug selection, dosage and the timing of dosages."( Identifying poor symptom control in Parkinson's disease.
Scott, L,
)
0.13
" Not optimum treated hospitalised patients with Parkinson's disease received the same LD dosage on the first day only with carbidopa (CD) and on the second day with CD and EN (t."( Pharmacokinetic behaviour of levodopa and 3-O-methyldopa after repeat administration of levodopa/carbidopa with and without entacapone in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Bremen, D; Erdmann, C; Goetze, O; Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Przuntek, H; Woitalla, D, 2006
)
0.63
" Objectives were to simultaneously determine plasma LD elimination, gastric emptying, and clinical response after a single intake of the same LD dosage as LD/CD--or as (LD/CD/EN) formulation on 2 consecutive days."( Impact of gastric emptying on levodopa pharmacokinetics in Parkinson disease patients.
Bremen, D; Erdmann, C; Goetze, O; Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Schmidt, WE; Woitalla, D,
)
0.42
" Demographics, efficacy as determined by off Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) part III scores, and levodopa equivalent dosing were analyzed."( Subthalamic deep brain stimulation in patients with a previous pallidotomy.
Almaguer, M; Jankovic, J; Ondo, WG; Silay, Y, 2006
)
0.54
" Factors associated with levodopa side effects were earlier age of onset, long duration of disease, advanced stage, higher levodopa dosage and long duration of levodopa treatment."( Levodopa induced motor complications in Thai Parkinson's disease patients.
Kulkantrakorn, K; Pongchaiyakul, C; Pulkes, T; Tiamkao, S, 2006
)
2.08
" PD medications were unchanged during the study, and levetiracetam was slowly titrated up to a maximum dosage of 3,000 mg/d over a 2-month period."( Efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam in Parkinson disease patients with levodopa-induced dyskinesia.
Lyons, KE; Pahwa, R,
)
0.36
"We examined the direct effect of deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS) on levodopa-induced peak-dose dyskinesia in 45 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) without reducing the levodopa dosage during the early period after surgery."( Direct effect of subthalamic nucleus stimulation on levodopa-induced peak-dose dyskinesia in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Fukaya, C; Kano, T; Katayama, Y; Kobayashi, K; Oshima, H; Yamamoto, T, 2006
)
0.8
" Dyskinesia is unwanted, sometimes excessive and causes abnormal facial, body and limb movements that appear in many PD patients who are often dependent on the overall dosage of dopaminergic substitution."( Levodopa, motor fluctuations and dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease.
Müller, T; Russ, H, 2006
)
1.78
" Daily dosage of levodopa was reduced by 15% at 6 months."( Bilateral effects of unilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Chung, SJ; Jeon, SR; Kim, SR; Lee, MC; Sung, YH, 2006
)
0.67
" Rather, the clinical results indicated that the symptoms had progressed much less than placebo, and in a dose-response manner."( A new look at levodopa based on the ELLDOPA study.
Fahn, S, 2006
)
0.69
" Therefore, safinamide may be used in PD to reduce l-dopa dosage and also represents a valuable therapeutic drug to test disease-modifying potential."( Safinamide: from molecular targets to a new anti-Parkinson drug.
Caccia, C; Calabresi, M; Curatolo, L; Faravelli, L; Fariello, RG; Maestroni, S; Maj, R; Salvati, P, 2006
)
0.33
" The choices available to alleviate these motor fluctuations range from altering the patient's levodopa/carbidopa dosing schedule to the addition of other agents to the regimen, including dopamine receptor agonists, catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and amantadine, as well as implementing dietary changes."( Motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease.
Weiner, WJ, 2006
)
0.55
" Finally, after determination of basal levels of 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), homovanillic acid (HVA), and 5-hydroxyindole-3-acetic acid (5-HIAA) in the rats, the rats were dosed with benserazide followed by l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (l-DOPA)."( Evaluation of an osmotic pump for microdialysis sampling in an awake and untethered rat.
Cooper, JD; Davies, MI; Heppert, KE; Lunte, SM, 2007
)
0.34
" Outcome measures included changes in mean medication dosage (levodopa and dopamine agonists), Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS Parts II-III and Item 39), and dyskinesias (Abnormal Involuntary Movements Scale [AIMS])."( Extradural motor cortex stimulation in Parkinson's disease.
Antonini, A; Cilia, R; Landi, A; Pezzoli, G; Sganzerla, E; Vergani, F, 2007
)
0.58
" Their resultant-weight (RW) values were always higher than those obtained with a marketed HBS dosage form within 13h."( Development and evaluation of new multiple-unit levodopa sustained-release floating dosage forms.
Amighi, K; Goole, J; Vanderbist, F, 2007
)
0.6
"Mood fluctuations related to levodopa (LD) dosing are well-known psychiatric complications of Parkinson's disease (PD)."( Acute effects of immediate and controlled-release levodopa on mood in Parkinson's disease: A double-blind study.
Barbanoj, M; García-Sánchez, C; Gironell, A; Kulisevsky, J; Pagonabarraga, J; Pascual-Sedano, B, 2007
)
0.88
" The first change in antiparkinsonian drug treatment, defined as an increase in the daily dosage of any antiparkinsonian drug, the start of a new antiparkinsonian drug or a change in the dosage form during the follow-up period, was taken as an endpoint."( Influence of initial use of serotonergic antidepressants on antiparkinsonian drug use in levodopa-using patients.
Arbouw, ME; Egberts, TC; Guchelaar, HJ; Movig, KL; Neef, C, 2007
)
0.56
"To determine if repeated dosing with methylphenidate hydrochloride (MPD) (Ritalin; Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ), an inhibitor of the dopamine transporter, would augment the effects of oral levodopa in patients with Parkinson disease."( Effects of methylphenidate on response to oral levodopa: a double-blind clinical trial.
Carlson, NE; Carter, JH; Nutt, JG, 2007
)
0.78
" Oral levodopa dosage was decreased as clinically feasible during the first 4 days in the GCRC during open-label administration of MPD and hourly monitoring of parkinsonism and vital signs between 7 am and 8 pm."( Effects of methylphenidate on response to oral levodopa: a double-blind clinical trial.
Carlson, NE; Carter, JH; Nutt, JG, 2007
)
1.08
" L-DOPA was administered subchronically for 11 days (beginning 3 days after last MPTP/NaCl injection) or for 14 days (with dosing started immediately following the last MPTP/NaCl injection)."( The effect of subchronic, intermittent L-DOPA treatment on neuronal nitric oxide synthase and soluble guanylyl cyclase expression and activity in the striatum and midbrain of normal and MPTP-treated mice.
Chalimoniuk, M; Langfort, J, 2007
)
0.34
" Altering dopaminergic dosing and timing can abate dyskinesias, but usually impact the control of parkinsonism."( Levodopa-induced dyskinesias.
Brotchie, JM; Fabbrini, G; Goetz, CG; Grandas, F; Nomoto, M, 2007
)
1.78
" In young parkinsonian patients with mild motor dysfunction, use of levodopa may be delayed or the dosage minimised."( When should levodopa therapy be initiated in patients with Parkinson's disease?
Fernandez, HH; Halkias, IA; Haq, I; Huang, Z, 2007
)
0.95
" Sometimes excessive abnormal facial, body and limb movements depend on the overall dosage of dopaminergic substitution."( [Dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease--major clinical features, aetiology, therapy].
Ellrichmann, G; Müller, T; Russ, H, 2007
)
0.34
"Nanoparticular CoQ(10) at a dosage of 300 mg/d is safe and well tolerated and leads to plasma levels similar to 1200 mg/d of standard formulations."( Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on symptomatic effects of coenzyme Q(10) in Parkinson disease.
Durner, J; Fuchs, G; Greulich, W; Henningsen, H; Herting, B; Jost, WH; Koch, R; Kuhn, W; Kupsch, A; Müller, T; Niklowitz, P; Oertel, WH; Reichmann, H; Spiegel, J; Storch, A; Vieregge, P, 2007
)
0.34
" The therapeutic and preventative strategies for LID include using a lower dosage of levodopa, employing dopamine agonists as initial therapy in Parkinson's disease, amantadine, atypical neuroleptics, and neurosurgery."( Levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease: clinical features, pathogenesis, prevention and treatment.
Lo, N; Robinson, T; Thanvi, B, 2007
)
2.01
" We compared the motor response after once dosing of 200 mg retarded release LD (levodopa)/CD (carbidopa) and of 150 mg LD/CD/EN (entacapone) by rating of motor symptoms, by measurement of LD- and 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD) plasma concentrations and by the outcomes of a line tracing task."( Comparison of 200 mg retarded release levodopa/carbidopa - with 150 mg levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone application: pharmacokinetics and efficacy in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Ander, L; Kolf, K; Muhlack, S; Müller, T; Woitalla, D, 2007
)
0.84
" Based on the POETRY results, it is hypothesized that estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) may lead to improvement in PD symptoms and provide an opportunity to reduce the dosage of antiparkinsonian medication in women."( Gender differences in Parkinson's disease.
Shulman, LM, 2007
)
0.34
" Here, we present a case of PTPS deficiency which showed a more significant correlation of dosage of L-Dopa/carbidopa with serum prolactin levels than with CSF HVA levels."( A case of 6-pyruvoyl-tetrahydropterin synthase deficiency demonstrates a more significant correlation of L-Dopa dosage with serum prolactin levels than CSF homovanillic acid levels.
Kanazawa, M; Kitani, Y; Kohno, Y; Ogawa, A; Shintaku, H; Takayanagi, M, 2008
)
0.35
" However, dyskinesia can also consist of dystonia or myoclonus and occur during other parts of the levodopa dosing cycle."( Levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease: epidemiology, etiology, and treatment.
Hauser, RA; Sullivan, KL; Zesiewicz, TA, 2007
)
2
" Thus, rasagiline, administered as a simple and convenient dosage regimen, is a well tolerated and effective option for monotherapy in patients with early Parkinson's disease and for adjunctive therapy in patients with moderate to advanced disease."( Rasagiline: a review of its use in the management of Parkinson's disease.
Keating, GM; Oldfield, V; Perry, CM, 2007
)
0.34
" Genetic analysis included a genome-wide linkage study with microsatellite markers (STR), GTP cyclohydrolase I (GCH1) gene sequencing, and dosage analysis."( Study of a Swiss dopa-responsive dystonia family with a deletion in GCH1: redefining DYT14 as DYT5.
Baker, M; Burkhard, PR; Cannon, A; Cobb, SA; Coon, KD; Farrer, MJ; Gass, J; Ghika, J; Hauf, M; Hutton, M; Kachergus, JM; Kapatos, G; Melquist, S; Schorderet, DF; Solida, A; Stephan, DA; Vingerhoets, FJ; Wider, C; Wszolek, ZK, 2008
)
0.35
" No mutation was found in GCH1 by gene sequencing but dosage methods identified a novel heterozygous deletion of exons 3 to 6 of GCH1."( Study of a Swiss dopa-responsive dystonia family with a deletion in GCH1: redefining DYT14 as DYT5.
Baker, M; Burkhard, PR; Cannon, A; Cobb, SA; Coon, KD; Farrer, MJ; Gass, J; Ghika, J; Hauf, M; Hutton, M; Kachergus, JM; Kapatos, G; Melquist, S; Schorderet, DF; Solida, A; Stephan, DA; Vingerhoets, FJ; Wider, C; Wszolek, ZK, 2008
)
0.35
" Comprehensive sequencing and dosage analysis of known genes is recommended prior to genome-wide linkage analysis."( Study of a Swiss dopa-responsive dystonia family with a deletion in GCH1: redefining DYT14 as DYT5.
Baker, M; Burkhard, PR; Cannon, A; Cobb, SA; Coon, KD; Farrer, MJ; Gass, J; Ghika, J; Hauf, M; Hutton, M; Kachergus, JM; Kapatos, G; Melquist, S; Schorderet, DF; Solida, A; Stephan, DA; Vingerhoets, FJ; Wider, C; Wszolek, ZK, 2008
)
0.35
" When choosing one of these drugs one should consider its efficacy in monotherapy in early phase and in combined therapy with levodopa in advanced PD, side effects profile, effectiveness in non-motor symptoms of PD, dosing and route of administration."( [Choosing a dopamine agonist in Parkinson's disease].
Bogucki, A; Gajos, A,
)
0.34
" Dyskinesia is usually managed through changes in levodopa dosing or administration; changing the doses of adjunct therapies also may be helpful."( Optimizing pharmacotherapy: strategies to manage the wearing-off phenomenon.
Tse, W, 2006
)
0.59
" While it has been suggested that the daily dose of l-DOPA can play a critical role, the mechanisms linking l-DOPA dosage to the occurrence of motor complications have not yet been explored."( l-DOPA dosage is critically involved in dyskinesia via loss of synaptic depotentiation.
Angela Cenci, M; Bagetta, V; Barone, I; Bernardi, G; Calabresi, P; Ghiglieri, V; Lindgren, HS; Paillé, V; Picconi, B, 2008
)
0.35
" He markedly improved with a very low dosage of L-DOPA/carbidopa, while higher dosages were not tolerated."( Tyrosine hydroxylase deficiency presenting with a biphasic clinical course.
Antonozzi, I; Artiola, C; Carducci, C; Giovanniello, T; Leuzzi, V; Pozzessere, S; Sabato, ML; Santagata, S, 2007
)
0.34
" However, due to the short duration of action of conventional levodopa/decarboxylase inhibitor formulations, multiple dosing may be required in individual patients with persisting symptoms."( Entacapone prolongs the reduction of PLM by levodopa/carbidopa in restless legs syndrome.
Ellmén, J; Hirvonen, K; Karvinen, J; Polo, O; Vahteristo, M; Ylä-Sahra, R,
)
0.63
"Postoperatively, the mean levodopa dosage was decreased by 27%."( Effect of bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation on levodopa-unresponsive axial symptoms in Parkinson's disease.
Goto, S; Hamasaki, T; Kuratsu, JI; Yamada, K, 2008
)
0.89
" Thus, a reduction of the total levodopa dosage would be recommended."( Should levodopa dose be reduced when switched to stalevo?
Hernández, B; Kulisevsky, J; Linazasoro, G, 2008
)
1.08
" Such 'wearing-off' imposes an escalation in the dosage of the drug, which ultimately fails to provide stable control of motor symptoms and results in the appearance of abnormal involuntary movements or dyskinesia."( Parkinson's disease: levodopa-induced dyskinesia and signal transduction.
Fisone, G; Santini, E; Valjent, E, 2008
)
0.66
" Our findings may be explained by differences in the distribution of dopaminergic receptor subtypes in the olfactory system in animals and humans, by relative differences in dosing regimes, or by subtle differences in the respective paradigms."( Lack of improvement in odor identification by levodopa in humans.
Berger, K; Breitenstein, C; Flöel, A; Knecht, S; Rösser, N; Vomhof, P, 2008
)
0.6
" In the long-term management of PD, treatment-associated dyskinesia often becomes sufficiently troublesome as to compromise the effective dosing of antiparkinsonian medication."( Optimizing long-term therapy for Parkinson disease: levodopa, dopamine agonists, and treatment-associated dyskinesia.
Galbreath, A; Stacy, M,
)
0.38
" All patients received tetrahydrobiopterin replacement in a daily dosage between approximately 2 and 4 mg/kg."( Long-term follow-up of Taiwanese Chinese patients treated early for 6-pyruvoyl-tetrahydropterin synthase deficiency.
Cheng, LY; Hsiao, KJ; Lee, NC; Liu, KM; Liu, TT; Niu, DM, 2008
)
0.35
" This report suggests that serum prolactin levels can be a good biomarker for optimal dosage of hydroxylated precursors in long-term treatment monitoring."( Serum prolactin as a tool for the follow-up of treated DHPR-deficient patients.
Concolino, D; Moricca, MT; Muzzi, G; Pascale, MG; Rapsomaniki, M; Strisciuglio, P, 2008
)
0.35
"The aim of the present study was to investigate the course of levodopa induced dyskinesia (LID) development in parkinsonian rats treated with several different levodopa dosing regiments."( The course of dyskinesia induction by different treatment schedules of levodopa in Parkinsonian rats: is continuous dopaminergic stimulation necessary?
Evangelou, A; Konitsiotis, S; Marselos, M; Tsironis, C, 2008
)
0.82
" Fiber was administered at two different doses, 100 and 400 mg/kg, and the dosage of levodopa/carbidopa was 20:5 mg/kg."( The hydrosoluble fiber Plantago ovata husk improves levodopa (with carbidopa) bioavailability after repeated administration.
Diez, MJ; Fernandez, N; Garcia, JJ; Prieto, C; Sahagun, A; Sierra, M, 2008
)
0.82
" The aim of this study was to analyze the presence of DNA damage in peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) of PD patients, during a washout and a controlled LD dosage and to evaluate the oxidative damage fluctuation after LD intake."( Levodopa therapy reduces DNA damage in peripheral blood cells of patients with Parkinson's disease.
Aprile, I; Cornetta, T; Cozzi, R; Padua, L; Palma, S; Testa, A; Tonali, P, 2009
)
1.8
" Our previous work had shown that intermittent nicotine dosing reduced L-DOPA-induced dyskinetic-like movements in nonhuman primates."( Continuous and intermittent nicotine treatment reduces L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA)-induced dyskinesias in a rat model of Parkinson's disease.
Bordia, T; Campos, C; Huang, L; Quik, M, 2008
)
0.35
" Given these findings, it is important for physicians to understand the relationship between the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa in order to provide dosage regimens that meet patient needs."( The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Hsu, A; Khor, SP, 2007
)
0.8
" The present study was directed toward examining reach-to-eat movements in early PD patients untreated with medication, along with a follow-up examination of a PD patient sub-group who were treated with a symptomatically stable dosage of dopamine replacement."( Bilateral impairments of skilled reach-to-eat in early Parkinson's disease patients presenting with unilateral or asymmetrical symptoms.
Doan, JB; Melvin, KG; Suchowersky, O; Whishaw, IQ, 2008
)
0.35
" Medical management includes manipulation of levodopa dosing to establish the optimum treatment schedule, improving levodopa absorption, catechol-O-methyl transferase-inhibition (COMT), Monoamine oxidase-B (MAO-B) inhibition, dopaminergic agonists, amantadine, and continuous dopaminergic infusions."( Treatment of levodopa-induced motor complications.
Olanow, CW; Stocchi, F; Tagliati, M, 2008
)
0.97
" Cumulative lifetime L-dopa dosage and fasting MMA levels were associated with PN severity."( Neuropathy as a potential complication of levodopa use in Parkinson's disease.
Brown, MS; Furtado, S; Suchowersky, O; Toth, C; Zochodne, D, 2008
)
0.61
" The results of the study revealed that the drug substantially reduced motor deficit, increased the "on"-period, decreased the duration and severity of the "off" period, improved the daily activity and quality of life of patients compared to standard therapy with an additional dosage of levodopa/DDC inhibitor."( [The clinical-pharmacoeconomic study of efficacy of stalevo in the treatment of Parkinson's disease with motor fluctuations].
Chigir', IP; Dokadina, LV; Fedorova, NV; Levin, OS; Makhnev, SO; Smolentseva, IG, 2008
)
0.52
" They underwent an oral levodopa instrumental kinetic-dynamic test on 2 occasions, 4 weeks apart, according to an intrasubject open comparative design: at the first examination, while receiving their usual levodopa/benserazide therapy, and at the second one after a 4-week entacapone (200 mg) dosing concomitantly with usual first morning levodopa/benserazide intake."( The effect of entacapone on levodopa rate of absorption and latency to motor response in patients with Parkinson disease.
Albani, F; Avoni, P; Baruzzi, A; Contin, M; Martinelli, P; Riva, R; Scaglione, C,
)
0.73
" Six patients (3F, mean age 62 years) with mild-moderate PD (mean disease duration 6 years, UPDRS-off 13, UPDRS-on 3, H&Y stage 2, daily levodopa dosage 450 mg) were studied off and on levodopa on separate days."( Spike-timing-related plasticity is preserved in Parkinson's disease and is enhanced by dopamine: evidence from transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Mastaglia, FL; Rodrigues, JP; Stell, R; Thickbroom, GW; Walters, SE, 2008
)
0.55
" However, the mean pergolide dosage in our study was lower than in previous studies."( Valvular heart disease in patients with Parkinson's disease treated with pergolide, levodopa or both.
Aydemir, T; Bader, H; Cetin, S; Kizkin, S; Meral, H; Ozben, B; Ozben, S; Ozer, F; Ozturk, O; Tiras, R, 2009
)
0.58
" Compared to the rest of our PD patients submitted to STN-DBS, the dyskinesia group needed a lower levodopa-equivalent daily dosage (LEDD) over the time of follow-up."( Transient disabling dyskinesias: a predictor of good outcome in subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease.
Ayres-Basto, M; Gago, MF; Linhares, P; Rosas, MJ; Sousa, G; Vaz, R, 2009
)
0.57
" Accordingly, the dose-response curve for the response to LY379268 in both knockout mice was shifted leftward."( Enhanced sensitivity to group II mGlu receptor activation at corticostriatal synapses in mice lacking the familial parkinsonism-linked genes PINK1 or Parkin.
Bonsi, P; Cuomo, D; Kitada, T; Martella, G; Pisani, A; Platania, P; Sciamanna, G; Shen, J; Tassone, A; Tscherter, A; Vita, D, 2009
)
0.35
" A number of therapeutic options are available to optimize therapeutic outcome, including modification of the levodopa dose or dosing schedule,switching to another levodopa formulation and the use of adjunct therapies, such as catechol-O-methyl transferase inhibitors, dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors."( Levodopa-related wearing-off in Parkinson's disease: identification and management.
Lyons, KE; Pahwa, R, 2009
)
2.01
"Open-label, randomized, two-period, active-controlled, cross-over study with four dosing regimens: groups I and II (healthy volunteers and Parkinson's disease patients) received levodopa 100 mg or 150 mg four times daily, respectively, and groups III and IV (healthy volunteers) received the same strengths of levodopa five times daily."( Comparison of pharmacokinetic profile of levodopa throughout the day between levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone and levodopa/carbidopa when administered four or five times daily.
Ellmén, J; Hänninen, J; Hartikainen, P; Kaakkola, S; Kaasinen, V; Kailajärvi, M; Korpela, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Löyttyniemi, E; Lyytinen, J; Marttila, R; Ruokoniemi, P, 2009
)
0.81
"The present results on the differences in levodopa PK between LCE and LC provide a basis to evaluate the relationship of levodopa PK and the induction of motor complications in an on-going study in early Parkinson's disease using similar dosing regimens."( Comparison of pharmacokinetic profile of levodopa throughout the day between levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone and levodopa/carbidopa when administered four or five times daily.
Ellmén, J; Hänninen, J; Hartikainen, P; Kaakkola, S; Kaasinen, V; Kailajärvi, M; Korpela, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Löyttyniemi, E; Lyytinen, J; Marttila, R; Ruokoniemi, P, 2009
)
0.88
" All patients had bilateral symptoms and their levodopa equivalent dosing were analysed."( Comparison of unilateral pallidotomy and subthalamotomy findings in advanced idiopathic Parkinson's disease.
Barlas, O; Coban, A; Hanagasi, HA; Karamursel, S, 2009
)
0.61
" The cysteine increase may be due to the significant higher dosing of daily LD/DCI and the significant higher morning LD/DCI dose 1 hour before blood sampling in PD patients with tHcy above 15 when compared with the remaining PD patients and the controls."( Cysteine elevation in levodopa-treated patients with Parkinson's disease.
Kuhn, W; Müller, T, 2009
)
0.67
" Daily levodopa dosage per kg and total dopaminergic dosage per kg body weight were negatively correlated with BMI."( Dopaminergic treatment is associated with decreased body weight in patients with Parkinson's disease and dyskinesias.
Bachmann, CG; Brunner, E; Trenkwalder, C; Zapf, A, 2009
)
0.81
" Our findings indicate that patients with a lower BMI received a higher cumulative levodopa dosage and that levodopa may be responsible for weight loss in PD."( Dopaminergic treatment is associated with decreased body weight in patients with Parkinson's disease and dyskinesias.
Bachmann, CG; Brunner, E; Trenkwalder, C; Zapf, A, 2009
)
0.58
" Also, alpha-syn gene dosage can cause familial PD and inhibition of its gene expression by blocking translation via a newly identified Iron Responsive Element-like RNA sequence in its 5'-untranslated region may provide a new PD drug target."( Physiological and pathological role of alpha-synuclein in Parkinson's disease through iron mediated oxidative stress; the role of a putative iron-responsive element.
Branden, L; Greig, NH; Huang, X; Olivares, D; Rogers, JT, 2009
)
0.35
" Patients taking higher dosage of levodopa had fewer NMOS."( Non-motor off symptoms in Parkinson's disease.
Cheon, SM; Kim, JW; Kim, WJ; Park, MJ, 2009
)
0.63
"A simple, precise, and accurate high-performance liquid chromatographic method was developed and validated to determine percent drug release of levodopa (LEV), carbidopa (CAR), and entacapone (ENT) from its combination dosage form."( Development and application of a high-performance liquid chromatographic method for the determination of in vitro drug release of levodopa, carbidopa, and entacapone from a tablet formulation.
Doshi, AS; Mehta, TN; Nanda, N; Upadhyay, KJ,
)
0.54
" ICD behaviors were associated with an increased mean levodopa equivalent daily dosage and alcohol use (p=0."( Impulse control disorders in Parkinson's disease in a Chinese population.
Chan, P; Ding, H; Fan, W; Ma, J, 2009
)
0.6
" In a dose-response study, we identified a dose window leading to >60% decrease in TH(+) neurons without any change in vesicular monoamine transporter-2 (VMAT2) expression."( Dose optimization for long-term rAAV-mediated RNA interference in the nigrostriatal projection neurons.
Aebischer, P; Björklund, T; Kirik, D; Sahin, G; Ulusoy, A, 2009
)
0.35
" In this group, substitution with IPX054 reduced dosing frequency while maintaining CD/LD efficacy."( Reducing dosing frequency of carbidopa/levodopa: double-blind crossover study comparing twice-daily bilayer formulation of carbidopa/levodopa (IPX054) versus 4 daily doses of standard carbidopa/levodopa in stable Parkinson disease patients.
Fan, W; Goetz, CG; Hinson, VK; Hsu, A; Leurgans, S; Nguyen, T,
)
0.4
"009) and daily levodopa dosage (R(p)=-0."( Serum uric acid levels in patients with Parkinson's disease: their relationship to treatment and disease duration.
Andreadou, E; Boufidou, F; Gournaras, F; Nikolaou, C; Rentzos, M; Tsoutsou, A; Vassilopoulos, D; Zissimopoulos, V; Zournas, C, 2009
)
0.71
" The daily administrations of l-dopa were curtailed from 3 or 4 to 2, and the l-dopa dosage was reduced up to 40%."( Dopamine agonists in 6-pyruvoyl tetrahydropterin synthase deficiency.
Concolino, D; Mussa, A; Ponzone, A; Porta, F; Spada, M, 2009
)
0.35
" Following oral or intravenous administration of L-dopa plus C-dopa and intranasal dosing of L-dopa in the presence and absence of C-dopa to the rat, the concentrations of L-dopa in plasma and brain were determined using HPLC."( Pharmacokinetic evaluation and modeling of formulated levodopa intranasal delivery systems.
Chun, IK; Gwak, HS; Kang, W; Kim, TK; Lee, YH; Oh, SY, 2009
)
0.6
" In animals previously exposed to L: -dopa to induce dyskinesia, escalating and repeated dosing of aplindore (0."( The dopamine D(2) receptor partial agonist aplindore improves motor deficits in MPTP-treated common marmosets alone and combined with L-dopa.
Andree, TH; Hansard, M; Hoffman, DC; Hurtt, MR; Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; Kehne, JH; Pitler, TA; Smith, LA; Stack, G, 2010
)
0.36
" For the groups C, D, E and F, the dosage of levodopa administered was also recorded."( [A multi-centered randomized double-blinded controlled clinical study on efficacy of gulling pa'an capsule in treating Parkinson's disease].
Meng, QG; Yu, XD; Zhao, GH, 2009
)
0.61
" GPC shows obvious effects in improving patients' motor syndrome and the quality of life; as used in combining with levodopa, the dosage of levodopa required could be reduced."( [A multi-centered randomized double-blinded controlled clinical study on efficacy of gulling pa'an capsule in treating Parkinson's disease].
Meng, QG; Yu, XD; Zhao, GH, 2009
)
0.56
"8% at 24 weeks best discriminated treatment with levodopa 300 mg/day (a common initial maintenance dosage in clinical practice) from placebo."( Levodopa response in early Parkinson's disease.
Auinger, P; Hauser, RA; Oakes, D, 2009
)
2.05
"In this open-label naturalistic study, 75 PD patients (group A) completely switched standard LD (Sinemet or Madopar) with Sirio at an equivalent dosage (800-1000 mg/d)."( Clinical experiences with levodopa methylester (melevodopa) in patients with Parkinson disease experiencing motor fluctuations: an open-label observational study.
Antonini, A; Guidi, M; Mancini, F; Martignoni, E; Pacchetti, C; Sciarretta, M; Stocchi, F; Zangaglia, R,
)
0.43
" Oral levodopa dosing was increased in 28% of patients; the primary outcome remained significant when these patients were excluded."( Direct switch from levodopa/benserazide or levodopa/carbidopa to levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone in Parkinson's disease patients with wearing-off: efficacy, safety and feasibility--an open-label, 6-week study.
Amar, K; Eggert, K; Kuoppamäki, M; Leinonen, M; Luotonen, L; Nissinen, H; Oertel, W; Skogar, O, 2010
)
1.17
"The characteristics of levodopa dosing are not well described in the literature."( Large differences in levodopa dose requirement in Parkinson's disease: men use higher doses than women.
Askmark, H; Karlsson, E; Lundberg, M; Nyholm, D, 2010
)
0.99
" Patients with high dose at 5 years PD duration continuously increased their dosage the following years, whereas low-dose patients did not."( Large differences in levodopa dose requirement in Parkinson's disease: men use higher doses than women.
Askmark, H; Karlsson, E; Lundberg, M; Nyholm, D, 2010
)
0.68
" Then, a dose-response of MPEP and MTEP (1."( Effect of the metabotropic glutamate receptor type 5 antagonists MPEP and MTEP in parkinsonian monkeys.
Di Paolo, T; Gasparini, F; Gomez-Mancilla, B; Grégoire, L; Morin, N, 2010
)
0.36
" The Cochrane Collaboration guidelines were followed and the following data were extracted from each study: identifier (title and bibliographical reference), classification of the quality of the evidence (Jadad criteria), type and design of the study, number of patients, patient demographics (average age, sex), Parkinson's disease stage (Hoehn and Yahr Scale), treatment (monotherapy or adjuvant to levodopa), drugs used (including dosage and duration), study objective (safety or tolerability), method of evaluation of results, randomization and blinding, and description of all the adverse events in all treatment groups."( Tolerability and safety of ropinirole versus other dopamine agonists and levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Kulisevsky, J; Pagonabarraga, J, 2010
)
0.76
"Hc levels were significantly higher in patients taking levodopa and were not related to levodopa dosage or treatment duration."( [Homocysteine and cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease].
Avilés, F; Cañizares, F; Carles-Díes, R; Fernández-Barreiro, A; Herrero, MT; Martín-Fernández, JJ; Morsi-Hassan, O; Parra, S; Villegas, I,
)
0.38
" However, age, PD severity, disease duration and levodopa dosage were similar."( Long term follow-up of Parkinson's disease patients with impulse control disorders.
Demiray, DY; Erginöz, E; Kenangil, G; Ozekmekçi, S; Sohtaoğlu, M, 2010
)
0.62
"Although we studied a small number of patients the recovery from compulsive behaviors may be associated with the decrease in DA dosage and increase in levodopa."( Long term follow-up of Parkinson's disease patients with impulse control disorders.
Demiray, DY; Erginöz, E; Kenangil, G; Ozekmekçi, S; Sohtaoğlu, M, 2010
)
0.56
" We now report on the choice of dopa decarboxylase inhibitors, dose and the time of dosing relationships of carbidopa, benserazide and L-alpha-methyl dopa (L-AMD) in potentiating the effects of L-DOPA in the 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6 tetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-treated common marmoset."( The timing of administration, dose dependence and efficacy of dopa decarboxylase inhibitors on the reversal of motor disability produced by L-DOPA in the MPTP-treated common marmoset.
Fisher, R; Jackson, MJ; Jenner, P; Rose, S; Tayarani-Binazir, KA; Zoubiane, G, 2010
)
0.36
" STN-DBS induced attenuation of her cardinal PD symptoms and marked improvement of dyskinesia without reduction of LD dosage perioperatively."( Direct relief of levodopa-induced dyskinesia by stimulation in the area above the subthalamic nucleus in a patient with Parkinson's disease--case report.
Fukaya, C; Katayama, Y; Kobayashi, K; Nishikawa, Y; Ogasawara, K; Ogawa, A; Oshima, H; Yamamoto, T, 2010
)
0.7
"Dissolution studies cannot distinguish phenomena occurring inside the dosage forms when studying formulation with similar dissolution profiles-such formulations can behave differently when considering their physical changes."( Novel application of MRI technique combined with flow-through cell dissolution apparatus as supportive discriminatory test for evaluation of controlled release formulations.
Dorozyński, PP; Jachowicz, R; Kulinowski, P; Mendyk, A; Młynarczyk, A, 2010
)
0.36
" This paper reviews the various therapeutic options available for childhood-onset dystonia, with a specific attention to dosage and side effects of the drugs regarding pediatric population according to the data of the literature."( [Treatment of childhood dystonia].
Bahi-Buisson, N; Doummar, D; Echenne, B; Payet, C; Roubertie, A; Roze, E, 2010
)
0.36
" The amount of NT-modified aSN within PBMCs was positively correlated with intracellular ROS concentration and inversely related to daily dosage of levodopa, making its measurement potentially relevant for disease-intervention studies."( Alpha-synuclein nitration and autophagy response are induced in peripheral blood cells from patients with Parkinson disease.
Andreoni, S; Begni, B; Brighina, L; Difrancesco, JC; Ferrarese, C; Galbussera, A; Piazza, F; Piolti, R; Prigione, A, 2010
)
0.56
" The preliminary diagnosis was parkinsonism associated with V-P shunting: therefore, the levodopa dosage was increased from 200 mg/day to 600 mg/day."( [Rapidly progressive parkinsonism that developed one year after ventriculoperitoneal shunting for idiopathic aqueductal stenosis: a case report].
Hayashi, Y; Hozumi, I; Inuzuka, T; Kimura, A; Sakurai, T; Tanaka, Y; Yamada, M, 2010
)
0.58
" While levodopa dosage had no relationship to anxiety, experience of dyskinesias or on/off fluctuations increased the risk."( Anxiety disorders in Parkinson's disease: prevalence and risk factors.
Byrne, GJ; Dissanayaka, NN; Marsh, R; Matheson, S; Mellick, GD; O'Sullivan, JD; Sellbach, A; Silburn, PA, 2010
)
0.82
" Future studies should address the issue of the optimal therapeutic window and dosage of medications to identify those patients who would benefit most."( Effect of methylphenidate and/or levodopa coupled with physiotherapy on functional and motor recovery after stroke--a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Delbari, A; Lokk, J; Salman Roghani, R, 2011
)
0.65
" Our results indicate that effective dosing with A(2A)R antagonists should be tested as monotherapy in early PD, and serves to remind us that positive behavioral effects of such treatment need not be reflected in rescue of striatal dopamine levels."( Chronic A2A antagonist treatment alleviates parkinsonian locomotor deficiency in MitoPark mice.
Fuxe, K; Galter, D; Lindqvist, E; Marcellino, D; Müller, CE; Olson, L; Schneider, M, 2010
)
0.36
" As compared to placebo medication, low and high dosages of L-dopa abolished facilitatory as well as inhibitory plasticity, whereas the medium dosage prolonged inhibitory plasticity, and turned facilitatory plasticity into inhibition."( Dosage-dependent non-linear effect of L-dopa on human motor cortex plasticity.
Grundey, J; Liebetanz, D; Monte-Silva, K; Nitsche, MA; Paulus, W, 2010
)
0.36
"5%) or dispensation of the wrong carbidopa/levodopa dosage (2/8; 25%)."( Carbidopa/levodopa pharmacy errors in Parkinson's disease.
Khadem, NR; Nirenberg, MJ, 2010
)
1.03
" We retrospectively analyzed data from 17 stable HP rhesus monkeys treated long-term with chronic intermittent dosing of levodopa (LD) in an attempt to induce choreoathetoid and dystonic dyskinesias."( Dyskinesias do not develop after chronic intermittent levodopa therapy in clinically hemiparkinsonian rhesus monkeys.
Bakay, RA; Deogaonkar, M; Lieu, CA; Subramanian, T, 2011
)
0.83
" The main strategies to assure reproducibility of both intestinal absorption and delivery to the brain, and the clinical effect include standardization of levodopa dosing with respect to meal times and a controlled dietary protein intake."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa.
Contin, M; Martinelli, P, 2010
)
0.88
" The novel integrated approach included measurements of: solvent uptake, erosion, apparent density and changes in the internal structure of dosage forms during dissolution test by means of a USP4 compatible MRI."( Gastroretentive drug delivery systems with L-dopa based on carrageenans and hydroxypropylmethylcellulose.
Dorożyński, P; Jachowicz, R; Kulinowski, P; Mendyk, A, 2011
)
0.37
" This is delayed by lower dosage at early stages, made possible by additional treatment with histamine antagonists."( L-Dopa activates histaminergic neurons.
Blandina, P; Haas, HL; Klyuch, BP; Li, S; Lin, JS; Passani, MB; Sergeeva, OA; Yanovsky, Y; Yao, Q, 2011
)
0.37
" Therefore, when generating mouse models of LID, strain must be taken into consideration when choosing the L-DOPA dosing regimen."( Generation of a model of L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia in two different mouse strains.
Brotchie, JM; Fahana, N; Johnston, TH; Khademullah, CS; Lam, D; Lo, C; Nash, JE; Talwar, S; Thiele, SL; Warre, R, 2011
)
0.37
" For patients preferring mobility over dyskinesia, levodopa should be dosed sufficiently, and possibly titrated, to maximize clinical benefit and patient satisfaction."( [Patients' perspective on Parkinson disease therapies: results of a large-scale survey in Japan].
Fujimoto, K; Hattori, N; Kondo, T; Murata, M, 2011
)
0.62
" Neither disease severity nor L-dopa dosage correlated with plasma AVP levels."( Increased plasma arginine vasopressin levels in dopamine agonist-treated Parkinson's disease patients.
Arai, M, 2011
)
0.37
" Despite dosing differences, the PR titration regimen was generally well tolerated, with an AE profile similar to that of IR."( PREPARED: Comparison of prolonged and immediate release ropinirole in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Giorgi, L; Hunter, B; Schapira, AH; Stocchi, F, 2011
)
0.37
" A nonlinear, inverted U-shaped dose-response curve of its effects on cognition has been observed in animal studies."( Dose-dependent nonlinear effect of L-DOPA on paired associative stimulation-induced neuroplasticity in humans.
Grundey, J; Nitsche, MA; Paulus, W; Thirugnanasambandam, N, 2011
)
0.37
" Levodopa CR dosage was adjusted to match the optimal L/DDC dose for each participant."( A single-blind cross over study investigating the efficacy of standard and controlled release levodopa in combination with entacapone in the treatment of end-of-dose effect in people with Parkinson's disease.
Danoudis, M; Iansek, R, 2011
)
1.5
"Patients with Parkinson's disease can benefit from controlled released levodopa dosage forms since there is a clear clinical advantage in obtaining sustained plasma concentrations."( In-vivo evaluation of prolonged release bilayer tablets of anti-Parkinson drugs in Göttingen minipigs.
Bonifácio, MJ; Falcão, A; Lobo, JS; Machado, R; Soares-da-Silva, P; Sousa e Silva, JP, 2011
)
0.6
" This study demonstrates that gastric-retentive ER dosage forms may reduce dose frequency while minimizing the plasma peak-to-trough fluctuation and consequently reduce motor fluctuation in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa delivered from gastric-retentive extended-release formulations in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Chen, C; Cowles, VE; Illarioshkin, SN; Stolyarov, ID; Sweeney, M, 2012
)
0.7
" Future studies are needed which determine the optimal therapeutic window for and dosage of psychostimulants as well as identify those stroke patients who might benefit the most from treatment."( Effect of methylphenidate and/or levodopa combined with physiotherapy on mood and cognition after stroke: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Delbari, A; Lokk, J; Salman-Roghani, R, 2011
)
0.65
" At the end of the study, daily medication dosage was reduced in treated patients, whereas it was significantly increased in control patients."( Effectiveness of intensive inpatient rehabilitation treatment on disease progression in parkinsonian patients: a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up.
Balbi, P; Bertotti, G; Boveri, N; Comi, C; Frazzitta, G; Guaglio, G; Maestri, R; Perini, M; Riboldazzi, G; Turla, M; Uccellini, D, 2012
)
0.38
"Repeated dosing of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (LCE) has shown a favourable pharmacokinetic (PK) profile compared with levodopa/carbidopa (LC), but increases maximum plasma levodopa concentrations (C(max)) during the day."( The effect of different dosing regimens of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone on plasma levodopa concentrations.
Ellmén, J; Ingman, K; Korpela, I; Kuoppamäki, M; Naukkarinen, T; Vahteristo, M, 2012
)
0.97
"5/200 mg (LCE 100 and LCE 150), respectively, would avoid the increase in levodopa C(max) values observed during multiple dosing of LCE 100 and LCE 150."( The effect of different dosing regimens of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone on plasma levodopa concentrations.
Ellmén, J; Ingman, K; Korpela, I; Kuoppamäki, M; Naukkarinen, T; Vahteristo, M, 2012
)
0.87
"2) on stable levodopa dosage were studied."( Effect of a single dose of standard levodopa on cardiac autonomic function in Parkinson's disease.
Datta, K; Ganesan, M; Pal, PK; Sathyaprabha, TN; Sriranjini, SJ,
)
0.78
" Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (Duodopa) doses of 80% to 120% of individually and clinically optimized dosage were infused during five 4-hour periods."( Complexity of motor response to different doses of duodenal levodopa infusion in Parkinson disease.
Aquilonius, SM; Askmark, H; Hellquist, E; Johansson, A; Lennernäs, H; Nyholm, D,
)
1.28
" This case report serves as a reminder of the importance that patients receive their anti-Parkinsonian medications perioperatively, and highlights the potential benefits of inserting a gastric tube to continue anti-Parkinson's medication dosing during prolonged surgery."( Nasogastric medication for perioperative Parkinson's rigidity during anaesthesia emergence.
Grice, T; Stagg, P, 2011
)
0.37
" Higher plasma concentrations of levodopa during the first 2 h after dosing were followed by lower plasma concentrations during the third and fourth hours."( Plasma dopa concentrations after different preparations of levodopa in normal subjects.
Groves, MJ; Morris, JG; Parsons, RL; Trounce, JR, 1976
)
0.78
"Adherence to regular PD medication dosing schedules during hospitalization is problematic, but improves with specialist consultation."( Assessment of appropriate medication administration for hospitalized patients with Parkinson's disease.
Atassi, F; Fincher, L; Hou, JG; Lai, EC; Moore, S; Nelson, N; Sarwar, A; Ward, C; Wu, LJ; York, M, 2012
)
0.38
" Consequently, different L-dopa-sparing strategies have been successively introduced, with partial reduction of L-dopa dosage and amelioration of the clinical outcome."( Dopamine agonists in dihydropteridine reductase deficiency.
Concolino, D; Mussa, A; Ponzone, A; Porta, F; Spada, M, 2012
)
0.38
" Dosage of the drug was stable over time."( Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel infusion long-term therapy in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Johansson, A; Klangemo, K; Nyholm, D, 2012
)
1.82
"Subjects received CD-LD 3 or 4 times daily for 2 weeks, followed by XP21279 plus CD 3 times daily for 2 weeks at fixed dosing times, allowing dose adjustment to optimize clinical response, in this multiple-dose, multicenter, open-label, 2-period, sequential-treatment study."( Actively transported levodopa prodrug XP21279: a study in patients with Parkinson disease who experience motor fluctuations.
Chen, D; Ellenbogen, A; Huff, FJ; Lal, R; Lewitt, PA; Luo, W; McGuire, K; Zomorodi, K,
)
0.45
" However, at the higher dosage of 2 mg/day, rasagiline met the primary endpoint in the TEMPO study and the first, but not the second, of three hierarchical primary endpoints in the ADAGIO study."( Rasagiline: a review of its use in the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson's disease.
Hoy, SM; Keating, GM, 2012
)
0.38
"Aiming to explore pharmacological modulation on human motor cortex plasticity, we tested healthy subjects after each dosage of diazepam, levodopa i placebo administration, using paired associative stimulation protocol (PAS) that induce fenomena similar to a long-term potentiation and depression, as defined on the synaptic level."( [Effects of diazepam and levodopa single doses on motor cortex plasticity modulation in healthy human subjects: a TMS study].
Grajić, M; Ilić, NV; Ilić, TV; Petrović, I,
)
0.64
" Although mean plasma AVP levels are significantly higher in treated PD patients than in treatment-naïve patients, neither disease severity nor levodopa/carbidopa dosage (range, 300/30-850/85 mg) correlates with plasma AVP levels."( Levodopa in combination with carbidopa does not affect plasma arginine vasopressin levels in treatment-naïve older patients with Parkinson's disease: A before-after study.
Arai, M, 2012
)
2.02
" The microtablets are intended for individualized dosing of levodopa/carbidopa in Parkinson disease by means of an electronic dose dispenser with a built-in diary for symptom registration."( Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets versus levodopa/benserazide and levodopa/carbidopa in healthy volunteers.
Aquilonius, SM; Bäckström, T; Ehrnebo, M; Gomes-Trolin, C; Lewander, T; Nyholm, D; Nyström, C; Panagiotidis, G,
)
0.7
" Acute dosing led to a worsening of long-term depression in all the groups."( Acute dopamine boost has a negative effect on plasticity of the primary motor cortex in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Balachandran, A; Joseph, T; Kishore, A; Meunier, S; Popa, T; Velayudhan, B, 2012
)
0.38
" Few changes in medication treatment patterns were noted following the initial LID, with only slight increases in levodopa dosage and few additions of alternative agents."( Treatment patterns and associated costs with Parkinson's disease levodopa induced dyskinesia.
Mallya, U; Pahwa, R; Suh, DC, 2012
)
0.83
" We examined correlates of individual differences in alertness, including demographics, clinical features, nocturnal sleep variables, and class and dosage of anti-Parkinson's medications."( Daytime alertness in Parkinson's disease: potentially dose-dependent, divergent effects by drug class.
Bliwise, DL; Factor, SA; Freeman, A; Greer, SA; Juncos, JJ; Rye, DB; Trotti, LM; Wilson, AG; Wood-Siverio, C, 2012
)
0.38
" Pharmacologic options to treat wearing off include adding (or increasing the dosage of) levodopa, adding (or increasing the dosage of) a dopamine agonist, or adjunctive treatment with a monoamine oxidase inhibitor or catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor."( Off spells and dyskinesias: pharmacologic management of motor complications.
Khan, TS, 2012
)
0.6
"Repeated dosing (2."( Frequent administration of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets vs levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone in healthy volunteers.
Aquilonius, SM; Bäckström, T; Ehrnebo, M; Lewander, T; Nyholm, D; Nyström, C; Panagiotidis, G; Spira, J; Trolin, CG, 2013
)
0.69
" Daily levodopa dosage was significantly lower at both 6 and 12 months postoperatively."( Effect of bilateral deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus on freezing of gait in Parkinson's disease.
Huang, G; Ji, LY; Ji, XT; Li, JM; Liu, WP; Ma, LT; Niu, L; Qu, Y; Zhao, DS, 2012
)
0.81
" The significant reduction in levodopa dosage and improvement in neuropsychological function may be the reason for the therapeutic effect seen with STN-DBS."( Effect of bilateral deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus on freezing of gait in Parkinson's disease.
Huang, G; Ji, LY; Ji, XT; Li, JM; Liu, WP; Ma, LT; Niu, L; Qu, Y; Zhao, DS, 2012
)
0.67
" The relationship between released transmitters and potassium concentration was found to fit to a sigmoidal dose-response curve."( All polymer chip for amperometric studies of transmitter release from large groups of neuronal cells.
Larsen, ST; Taboryski, R, 2012
)
0.38
" After their dopaminergic treatment had been changed to a less pulsatile form of administration (ie, the use of dopamine agonist alone in the first patient and an increase in the dosage of dopamine agonist with a low dose of levodopa in the second), these abnormal movements totally disappeared in the first patient and were greatly improved in the second."( Continuous buccolingual masticatory dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease.
Damier, P; Derkinderen, P; Giumelli, B; Meyniel, C, 2012
)
0.56
" The dopamine precursor levodopa led to a dose-dependent (inverted U-shape) persistent episodic memory benefit for images of scenes when tested after 6 h, independent of whether encoding-related hippocampal fMRI activity was weak or strong (U-shaped dose-response relationship)."( Dopamine modulates episodic memory persistence in old age.
Bunzeck, N; Chowdhury, R; Dolan, RJ; Düzel, E; Guitart-Masip, M, 2012
)
0.69
" We propose an alternative apomorphine challenge test, with a single injection and a higher initial dosage of 2-4 mg, as well as to schedule treatment according to the obtained response at that dosage."( [Proposed alternative to standard apomorphine challenge test].
Burguera, JA; Martínez-Castrillo, JC, 2012
)
0.38
" The type of antipsychotic and the changes in levodopa dosage were determined."( Management of neuropsychiatric symptoms in long-term care residents with Parkinson's disease: a retrospective cohort study.
Anderson, GM; Fischer, HD; Herrmann, N; Marras, C; Rochon, PA; Wang, X, 2013
)
0.65
" The first levodopa dosage change was a dose reduction in 469 (98 %) patients, and a dose increase in ten (2 %) patients."( Management of neuropsychiatric symptoms in long-term care residents with Parkinson's disease: a retrospective cohort study.
Anderson, GM; Fischer, HD; Herrmann, N; Marras, C; Rochon, PA; Wang, X, 2013
)
0.78
"For best symptom management, careful consideration should be given to scheduling surgery at the earliest possible time, administering medications as close to the patient's usual dosing schedule as possible, and providing nursing education about optimal medication management for this patient population."( Perioperative medication withholding in patients with Parkinson's disease: a retrospective electronic health records review.
Anderson, LC; Fagerlund, K; Gurvich, O, 2013
)
0.39
" Furthermore, the robust stimulating effects on normal and dyskinetic movements had an identical time course and parallel dose-response curves."( Parallel dopamine D1 receptor activity dependence of l-Dopa-induced normal movement and dyskinesia in mice.
Li, L; Zhou, FM, 2013
)
0.39
" Different dosage of levodopa did not impact on the rotarod time (p>0."( Anti-allodynic effects of levodopa in neuropathic rats.
Joo, HS; Kim, ES; Kim, YH; Kwon, OK; Lee, J; Moon, DE; Park, HJ, 2013
)
1.01
" Effects of escalating ropinirole dosage on plasma AVP levels were evaluated using a one-way analysis of variance for repeated measures, an a priori Dunnett multiple comparison test, and a regression analysis."( Ropinirole does not affect plasma arginine vasopressin levels in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Arai, M, 2012
)
0.38
" There was no statistically significant dose-response relationship between the ropinirole dosage and plasma AVP levels."( Ropinirole does not affect plasma arginine vasopressin levels in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Arai, M, 2012
)
0.38
"A minimal therapeutic dosage of ropinirole did not affect plasma AVP levels in patients with PD taking levodopa."( Ropinirole does not affect plasma arginine vasopressin levels in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease.
Arai, M, 2012
)
0.59
"Extended-release carbidopa-levodopa might be a useful treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease who have motor fluctuations, with potential benefits including decreased off-time and reduced levodopa dosing frequency."( Extended-release carbidopa-levodopa (IPX066) compared with immediate-release carbidopa-levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease and motor fluctuations: a phase 3 randomised, double-blind trial.
Espay, AJ; Gupta, S; Hauser, RA; Hsu, A; Kell, S; O'Connell, M; Ondo, W; Sethi, K; Stacy, M, 2013
)
0.98
"We determined LD, 3-OMD, and homocysteine plasma concentrations in relation to daily LD dosage administered orally or as duodenal infusion with and without vitamins."( Methyl group-donating vitamins elevate 3-O-methyldopa in patients with Parkinson disease.
Jugel, C; Klostermann, F; Muhlack, S; Müller, T,
)
0.13
" The same 3-OMD and homocysteine accumulation despite the applied higher LD dosage during the infusion indicates a limited methylation capacity."( Methyl group-donating vitamins elevate 3-O-methyldopa in patients with Parkinson disease.
Jugel, C; Klostermann, F; Muhlack, S; Müller, T,
)
0.13
" The full analysis set (FAS) comprised 564 patients (106 de novo; 458 pretreated [454 had complete rotigotine dosing data])."( Effectiveness and tolerability of rotigotine transdermal patch for the treatment of restless legs syndrome in a routine clinical practice setting in Germany.
Bachmann, CG; Berg, D; Berkels, R; Grieger, F; Hofmann, WE; Lauterbach, T; Schollmayer, E; Stiasny-Kolster, K, 2013
)
0.39
" However, in particular, high levodopa dosing may contribute to disease progression."( Detoxification and antioxidative therapy for levodopa-induced neurodegeneration in Parkinson's disease.
Müller, T, 2013
)
0.94
" To test this hypothesis in a rodent model, the A2A receptor antagonists SCH 412348 (3 mg/kg), vipadenant (10 mg/kg), caffeine (30 mg/kg), or istradefylline (3 mg/kg) were chronically (19-22 days) administered to Sprague Dawley rats, and dyskinetic behaviors were scored across this chronic dosing paradigm."( A2A receptor antagonists do not induce dyskinesias in drug-naive or L-dopa sensitized rats.
Bleickardt, C; Hodgson, R; Jones, N; Mullins, D; Parker, E, 2013
)
0.39
" Based on final actual doses, there was a dose-response relationship on the modified Abnormal Involuntary Movements Scale, with 200 mg daily demonstrating the most robust effect (difference, -3."( AFQ056 in Parkinson patients with levodopa-induced dyskinesia: 13-week, randomized, dose-finding study.
Destee, A; Gao, H; Graf, A; Hattori, N; Hauser, RA; Kenney, C; Lang, AE; Merschhemke, M; Nagel, J; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Stacy, M; Stocchi, F; Tolosa, E; Trenkwalder, C, 2013
)
0.67
" The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores, TCM symptoms scores, quality of life, change of Madopar's dosage and the toxic and adverse effects of Madopar will be observed during a 3-month treatment period and through a further 6-month follow-up period."( Evaluation on the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medication Xifeng Dingchan Pill in treating Parkinson's disease: study protocol of a multicenter, open-label, randomized active-controlled trial.
Ma, YZ; Shen, XM; Zhang, J, 2013
)
0.39
" After a washout period, repeat TC-8831 dosing led to a greater decline in LIDs (60%) in both sets of monkeys that was similar to the effect of nicotine."( Nicotinic receptor agonists reduce L-DOPA-induced dyskinesias in a monkey model of Parkinson's disease.
Bencherif, M; Carroll, FI; Letchworth, S; Mallela, A; Quik, M; Sohn, D; Zhang, D, 2013
)
0.39
" L-dopa dosage and part IV of the UPDRS correlated with PDSS scores but not with polysomnographic parameters."( Negative influence of L-dopa on subjectively assessed sleep but not on nocturnal polysomnography in Parkinson's disease.
Antczak, JM; Banach, M; Derejko, M; Jakubczyk, T; Jernajczyk, W; Rakowicz, MJ; Sienkiewicz, J; Więcławska, M; Zalewska, U, 2013
)
0.39
"The degree of reduction in presynaptic dopaminergic uptake at baseline is associated with higher antiparkinson drug dosage at follow-up, but the wide variation means that the baseline FP-CIT SPECT does not reliably predict drug use in individual cases."( Baseline [(123) I]FP-CIT SPECT (DaTSCAN) severity correlates with medication use at 3 years in Parkinson's disease.
Grosset, DG; Grosset, KA; Hadley, D; Malek, N; Newman, EJ; Nissen, T; Patterson, J, 2014
)
0.4
" Mavoglurant (AFQ056) was up-titrated over two weeks from 25 mg twice daily (bid) to 100 mg bid (L-dopa kept stable), followed by three weeks during which the daily L-dopa dosage was increased by up to 300 mg/day."( Mavoglurant (AFQ056) in combination with increased levodopa dosages in Parkinson's disease patients.
Dronamraju, N; Graf, A; Hauser, RA; Kenney, C; Kumar, R; Merschhemke, M; Mostillo, J, 2016
)
0.69
" Moreover, no dose-response effect of levodopa on metabolic risk factors was observed."( Cardiometabolic factors and disease duration in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Barichella, M; Caccialanza, R; Cancello, R; Cassani, E; Cereda, E; Cilia, R; Madio, C; Pezzoli, G; Zini, M,
)
0.4
" Dopaminergic pharmacotherapy and individual gene polymorphisms can affect the mesolimbic and prefrontal cortical dopaminergic functions in a comparable, inverted-U dose-response relationship."( Dopamine overdose hypothesis: evidence and clinical implications.
Bohnen, NI; Kwak, Y; Schonfeld, D; Seidler, R; Vaillancourt, DE, 2013
)
0.39
"Fractionation of daily levodopa dosage is one strategy to manage the almost inevitable development of symptom fluctuations in Parkinson's disease (PD)."( Levodopa fractionation in Parkinson's disease.
Nyholm, D; Stepien, V, 2014
)
2.16
"Fractionation of levodopa dosage into >4 daily doses was common."( Levodopa fractionation in Parkinson's disease.
Nyholm, D; Stepien, V, 2014
)
2.18
" Initially, the l-DOPA dosing paradigm was evaluated."( Effects of l-DOPA pre-loading on the uptake of boronophenylalanine using the F98 glioma and B16 melanoma models.
Barth, RF; Chandra, S; Haider, SA; Huo, T; Kabalka, GW; Shaikh, AL; Yang, W, 2014
)
0.4
" D1-like receptor activation produced an inverted U-shaped dose-response curve on plasticity induced by both facilitatory tDCS and PAS."( Nonlinear dose-dependent impact of D1 receptor activation on motor cortex plasticity in humans.
Fresnoza, S; Kuo, MF; Nitsche, MA; Paulus, W, 2014
)
0.4
" Further evaluations of optimal dosage and long-term efficacy and safety of metabotropic glutamate 5-receptor antagonists for management of L-Dopa-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease are required."( Use of metabotropic glutamate 5-receptor antagonists for treatment of levodopa-induced dyskinesias.
Di Paolo, T; Fox, S; Gasparini, F; Gomez-Mancilla, B; Kenney, C; Rascol, O, 2014
)
0.64
" A potential strategy, currently under investigation, is the coadministration of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) negative allosteric modulators (NAMs) and L-DOPA; a treatment that results in the improvement of dyskinesia symptoms and that permits reductions in l-DOPA dosage frequency."( Mavoglurant as a treatment for Parkinson's disease.
Auladell, C; Beas-Zarate, C; Camins, A; Canudas, AM; de Lemos, ML; Folch, J; Lazarowski, A; Pallàs, M; Pedros, I; Petrov, D, 2014
)
0.4
" Staff familiarity with Parkinson disease, and especially carbidopa-levodopa dosing and dynamics, may prevent such problems and streamline hospital and nursing home care."( Parkinson disease treatment in hospitals and nursing facilities: avoiding pitfalls.
Ahlskog, JE, 2014
)
0.64
" It is established that the antidyskinetic effect of the injectable dosage form of a new antiparkinsonian drug hemantane (5 mg/kg) after a single intravenous administration is weaker than that of the most effective in clinical practice antidyskinetic drug amantadine (20 mg/kg)."( [Influence of hemantane in injectable dosage form on levodopa-induced dyskinesia in rats with model parkinsonian syndrome].
Ivanova, EA; Kapitsa, IG; Kokshenev, II; Nepoklonov, AV; Val'dman, EA; Voronina, TA, 2014
)
0.65
" A dose-response study (0."( The α7 nicotinic receptor agonist ABT-107 decreases L-Dopa-induced dyskinesias in parkinsonian monkeys.
Decker, MW; McGregor, M; Quik, M; Zhang, D, 2014
)
0.4
" Age, polypharmacy, change of one-year daily levodopa equivalent dosage and newly onset of dementia, stroke and psychiatric diseases all affect drug compliance in PD patients."( Initial medication in patients of newly diagnosed Parkinson's disease in Taiwan.
Chang, MH; Guo, YJ; Liao, YC; Lin, CH, 2014
)
0.66
" Their median daily LD dosage was 1495 mg from IPX066 and 600 mg from CL + E, corresponding, after correction for bioavailability, to an approximately 22% higher LD exposure on IPX066."( Comparison of IPX066 with carbidopa-levodopa plus entacapone in advanced PD patients.
Dillmann, U; Ellenbogen, A; Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Liang, G; Mahler, A; Rubens, R; Stocchi, F, 2014
)
0.68
" However, the dosage and the actual effectiveness of carbidopa have not yet been well defined."( Evaluation of levodopa and carbidopa antioxidant activity in normal human lymphocytes in vitro: implication for oxidative stress in Parkinson's disease.
Ceci, R; Colamartino, M; Cozzi, R; Duranti, G; Padua, L; Sabatini, S; Santoro, M; Testa, A, 2015
)
0.78
" The distribution of difference NMS is associated with the severity of motor symptoms and the dosage of anti-PD medications in Chinese PD patients."( The heterogeneity of non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease.
Cohen, AD; Liu, W; Ye, M; Zhang, N; Zhang, Y, 2015
)
0.42
" The two formulations are bioequivalent; the majority (>80 %) of patients can be switched overnight from pramipexole IR to ER without the need for dosage adjustment."( Pramipexole extended-release: a review of its use in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Frampton, JE, 2014
)
0.4
" Both patients exhibited the clinical features of serotonin syndrome, coinciding with an increase in dosage of each drug."( Serotonin syndrome in stroke patients.
Chang, MC; Jang, SH; Kwon, YM, 2015
)
0.42
" In early PD, this may avoid dose escalation or allow a reduction in dopamine agonist dosage without a loss of efficacy and prevent dopaminergic side-effects from becoming treatment limiting."( The adenosine A2A receptor antagonist, istradefylline enhances the anti-parkinsonian activity of low doses of dopamine agonists in MPTP-treated common marmosets.
Jenner, P; Kanda, T; Kawai-Uchida, M; Mori, A; Okita, E; Soshiroda, K; Uchida, S, 2015
)
0.42
"The objective of this study was to investigate the risk factors of wearing-off phenomenon in Parkinson's disease (PD) and propose safe dosage of levodopa to reduce wearing-off development based on Chinese cohort."( Risk factors and safe dosage of levodopa for wearing-off phenomenon in Chinese patients with Parkinson's disease.
Chen, H; Fang, J; Feng, T; Gao, L; Li, F, 2015
)
0.9
"The major modifications in medication dosage occurred during the initial postoperative period."( The medical treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease receiving subthalamic neurostimulation.
Alexoudi, A; Deuschl, G; Knudsen, K; Mehdorn, M; Shalash, A; Volkmann, J; Witt, K, 2015
)
0.42
"STN-DBS allows for a reduction in the dosage of medication and the costs are similarly reduced."( The medical treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease receiving subthalamic neurostimulation.
Alexoudi, A; Deuschl, G; Knudsen, K; Mehdorn, M; Shalash, A; Volkmann, J; Witt, K, 2015
)
0.42
"Thirty-four patients were enrolled; mean baseline L-dopa dosage was 968 mg/d."( Gastroretentive carbidopa/levodopa, DM-1992, for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease.
Chen, C; Cowles, VE; Stover, N; Sweeney, M; Verhagen Metman, L, 2015
)
0.72
"DM-1992 was associated with a reduction in %OFF time compared with CD/L-dopa IR despite a reduced dosing frequency."( Gastroretentive carbidopa/levodopa, DM-1992, for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease.
Chen, C; Cowles, VE; Stover, N; Sweeney, M; Verhagen Metman, L, 2015
)
0.72
" Dosage of levodopa and oral DA (pramipexole ≤1."( Rotigotine transdermal system as add-on to oral dopamine agonist in advanced Parkinson's disease: an open-label study.
Bauer, L; Chung, SJ; Ikeda, J; Jeon, BS; Kim, JM; Kim, JW; Singh, P; Thierfelder, S, 2015
)
0.81
" Early PD patients were titrated to an appropriate dosing regimen while advanced patients started with regimens established in the antecedent studies."( Long-Term Treatment with Extended-Release Carbidopa-Levodopa (IPX066) in Early and Advanced Parkinson's Disease: A 9-Month Open-Label Extension Trial.
Dzyak, L; Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Nausieda, P; Rudzinska, M; Silver, DE; Spiegel, J; Tsurkalenko, ES; Waters, CH, 2015
)
0.67
"Clinical experience with 2 LCIG dosing paradigms from phase 3 studies was examined."( Initiation and dose optimization for levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel: Insights from phase 3 clinical trials.
Benesh, JA; Chatamra, K; Dubow, JS; Fung, VS; Krüger, R; Lew, MF; Martínez Castrillo, JC; Robieson, WZ; Slevin, JT, 2015
)
0.69
"6 days; dosing remained stable post-titration (mean total daily dose [TDD] was 1572 mg at last visit)."( Initiation and dose optimization for levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel: Insights from phase 3 clinical trials.
Benesh, JA; Chatamra, K; Dubow, JS; Fung, VS; Krüger, R; Lew, MF; Martínez Castrillo, JC; Robieson, WZ; Slevin, JT, 2015
)
0.69
" Interestingly, plasma taurine levels negatively correlated with cumulative levodopa dosage in tPD."( Reduced plasma taurine level in Parkinson's disease: association with motor severity and levodopa treatment.
Ding, J; Jiang, S; Tong, Q; Xu, Q; Yuan, Y; Zhang, K; Zhang, L; Zhang, R, 2016
)
0.89
" An increase of the levodopa dosage led to clinical improvement, which needed a maintenance dosage because of dependency."( Parkinsonism Improved With Levodopa After Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy in Shunted Hydrocephalus Due to Aqueductal Stenosis.
Endo, T; Nakazawa, M; Ohnishi, H; Okawa, S; Sanpei, Y; Sugawara, M, 2015
)
1.04
" The in vitro drug release of the delivery systems was compared to those of the conventional dosage forms and in vivo absorption was predicted."( An optimized gastroretentive nanosystem for the delivery of levodopa.
Choonara, YE; du Toit, LC; Kumar, P; Modi, G; Ngwuluka, NC; Pillay, V, 2015
)
0.66
" Rats were dosed orally with Tozadenant, a selective A2A receptor antagonist, and three different doses of Radiprodil, an NR2B-selective NMDA receptor antagonist."( Behavioural Assessment of the A2a/NR2B Combination in the Unilateral 6-OHDA-Lesioned Rat Model: A New Method to Examine the Therapeutic Potential of Non-Dopaminergic Drugs.
De Wolf, C; Downey, P; Michel, A; Scheller, D; Schwarting, R; Van Damme, X, 2015
)
0.42
" Voxelwise one-way analysis of covariance and post hoc analyses of ALFF were performed among the three groups, with age and gender as covariates (levodopa daily dosage and gray matter volume as additional covariates for validation analysis)."( Different patterns of spontaneous brain activity between tremor-dominant and postural instability/gait difficulty subtypes of Parkinson's disease: a resting-state fMRI study.
Chen, HM; Fang, JP; Feng, T; Gao, LY; Hou, YN; Ma, LY; Wang, ZJ; Wu, T; Zhang, JR, 2015
)
0.62
" IPX066 was designed to rapidly attain therapeutic LD concentrations and maintain them to allow a dosing interval of ∼6 hours."( Conversion to IPX066 from Standard Levodopa Formulations in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: Experience in Clinical Trials.
Elmer, L; Gil, RA; Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Modi, NB; Nausieda, PA; Rubens, R; Singer, C; Spiegel, J, 2015
)
0.69
"To extensively analyze the dosing data collected in IPX066 studies during open-label conversions from IR CD-LD alone or with entacapone (CLE) and identify patterns relevant for managing conversion in the clinical setting."( Conversion to IPX066 from Standard Levodopa Formulations in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: Experience in Clinical Trials.
Elmer, L; Gil, RA; Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Modi, NB; Nausieda, PA; Rubens, R; Singer, C; Spiegel, J, 2015
)
0.69
" Suggested initial dosing conversion tables based on prior LD daily dosage were provided."( Conversion to IPX066 from Standard Levodopa Formulations in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: Experience in Clinical Trials.
Elmer, L; Gil, RA; Gupta, S; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Modi, NB; Nausieda, PA; Rubens, R; Singer, C; Spiegel, J, 2015
)
0.69
" A dose-response relationship is established for carbidopa-levodopa extended-release capsules (IPX066) in levodopa-naive Parkinson disease patients using a disease progression model."( Dose-Response Analysis of the Effect of Carbidopa-Levodopa Extended-Release Capsules (IPX066) in Levodopa-Naive Patients With Parkinson Disease.
Mao, ZL; Modi, NB, 2016
)
0.93
"The addition of opicapone 50 mg to levodopa treatment in patients with Parkinson's disease and end-of-dose motor fluctuations could enable a simplified drug regimen that allows physicians to individually tailor the existing levodopa daily regimen, by potentially reducing the total daily levodopa dose, increasing the dosing interval, and ultimately reducing the number of intakes, thereby maximising its benefit."( Opicapone as an adjunct to levodopa in patients with Parkinson's disease and end-of-dose motor fluctuations: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.
Ferreira, JJ; Lees, A; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2016
)
1.01
" Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel is an aqueous gel that can be delivered to the jejunum via a percutaneous gastrojejunostomy tube which is connected to an infusion pump dosing the levodopa gel continuously to the place of absorption."( [Application of levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel in advanced Parkinson's disease].
Bereczki, D; Nagy, H; Takáts, A; Toth, A; Wacha, J, 2015
)
1.67
" After this dosing change, the patient failed to develop fever during the rest of his hospital stay."( Levodopa Withdrawal Presenting as Fever in a Critically Ill Patient Receiving Concomitant Enteral Nutrition.
Ablordeppey, E; Taylor, B; Whitman, CB, 2016
)
1.88
" Facial emotion recognition was measured twice during target LCE dosing and twice on placebo: once without cocaine and once after repeated cocaine doses."( Effects of levodopa-carbidopa-entacapone and smoked cocaine on facial affect recognition in cocaine smokers.
Bedi, G; Bisaga, A; Foltin, RW; Nunes, EV; Shiffrin, L; Vadhan, NP, 2016
)
0.82
" While fractionation of levodopa dosage is the most frequently utilized strategy, many patients require deep brain stimulation to control their troublesome motor fluctuations and LIDs."( Drug-Induced Dyskinesia, Part 1: Treatment of Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia.
Jankovic, J; Vijayakumar, D, 2016
)
1
" 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."( Outpatient titration of carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (Duopa).
Lyons, KE; Pahwa, R, 2017
)
0.97
"  Madopar dosage was maintained in both groups."( The effect of levodopa benserazide hydrochloride on homocysteinemia levels in patients with Parkinson's disease and treatment of hyperhomocysteinemia.
Cao, LD; Guo, G; Wu, QY; Xu, S, 2016
)
0.79
" Its dosage requires careful monitoring, since the required amount changes over time, and excess dosage can lead to muscle spasms known as levodopa-induced dyskinesia."( Using epigenetic networks for the analysis of movement associated with levodopa therapy for Parkinson's disease.
Alty, JE; Cosgrove, J; Jamieson, S; Lones, MA; Smith, SL; Trefzer, MA; Turner, AP; Tyrrell, AM, 2016
)
0.87
" Compared with STN DBS, increased dosage of levodopa equivalent doses was needed in GPi DBS (standardized MD =0."( Efficacies of globus pallidus stimulation and subthalamic nucleus stimulation for advanced Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Huang, T; Jiang, Y; Tan, ZG; Zhou, Q, 2016
)
0.7
" Meanwhile, GPi DBS was also associated with increased dosage of levodopa equivalent doses."( Efficacies of globus pallidus stimulation and subthalamic nucleus stimulation for advanced Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Huang, T; Jiang, Y; Tan, ZG; Zhou, Q, 2016
)
0.67
" Patients presented to clinic in the morning in the practically defined OFF state and were dosed with APL-130277 10 mg."( Sublingual apomorphine (APL-130277) for the acute conversion of OFF to ON in Parkinson's disease.
Agro, A; Bilbault, T; Dubow, J; Dzyngel, B; Hauser, RA; Isaacson, S; Olanow, CW; Shill, H, 2016
)
0.43
" Moreover, pseudoresistance can emerge as not all features of PD respond adequately to the same dosage of levodopa."( Unmasking levodopa resistance in Parkinson's disease.
Bloem, BR; de Vries, NM; Helmich, RC; Nonnekes, J; Rascol, O; Timmer, MH, 2016
)
1.05
" In addition, the association between premotor symptoms and levodopa equivalent dosage (LED) was examined."( Premotor Symptoms as Predictors of Outcome in Parkinsons Disease: A Case-Control Study.
Chang, MH; Chen, YH; Lee, WJ; Lin, CH; Wu, YH, 2016
)
0.68
" Case-control analysis revealed that male, initial extremity of motor symptom onset, history of depressive disorder, delusion, any psychiatric disorder, and higher L-dopa dosage were significantly associated with suicide among PD patients."( Increased suicide risk and clinical correlates of suicide among patients with Parkinson's disease.
Ahn, MH; Chung, SJ; Hong, JP; Kim, J; Kim, MS; Lee, HB; Lee, T, 2016
)
0.43
"5 min after administration; in contrast, in dogs dosed orally with levodopa plus carbidopa, plasma levodopa was not detected until 30 min after administration."( Preclinical and clinical assessment of inhaled levodopa for OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease.
Batycky, R; Freed, MI; Leinonen, M; Lipp, MM; Moore, J, 2016
)
0.93
"On the whole, after switching from "pulsatile" to "pulse" administration, there was a reduction in number of L-dopa daily doses and an increase in the amount of the dosage of the single doses, AIMS maximum score decreased without increasing motor disability."( Switching L-dopa Therapy from Pulsatile to Pulse Administration Reduces Motor Complications in Parkinson's Disease.
Cicero, CE; Contrafatto, D; Dibilio, V; Donzuso, G; Luca, A; Mostile, G; Nicoletti, A; Raciti, L; Sciacca, G; Vasta, R; Zappia, M,
)
0.13
" Therefore, the dosage of dopa-decarboxylase inhibitor, increasing the L-dopa concentration, may contribute to GE delay and its consequent effect on drug delivery and efficacy."( Delayed Gastric Emptying in Advanced Parkinson Disease: Correlation With Therapeutic Doses.
Bestetti, A; Capozza, A; Lacerenza, M; Mancini, F; Manfredi, L, 2017
)
0.46
"This phase 3 international, multicenter outpatient study evaluated a 25- and a 50-mg/d dosage of opicapone in a randomized, double-blind, 14- to 15-week, placebo-controlled clinical trial, followed by a 1-year open-label phase during which all patients received active treatment with opicapone."( Opicapone as Adjunct to Levodopa Therapy in Patients With Parkinson Disease and Motor Fluctuations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Ferreira, J; Lees, AJ; McCrory, M; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2017
)
0.76
"8] years) were randomized to a 25-mg/d (n = 129) or a 50-mg/d (n = 154) dosage of opicapone or to placebo (n = 144)."( Opicapone as Adjunct to Levodopa Therapy in Patients With Parkinson Disease and Motor Fluctuations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Ferreira, J; Lees, AJ; McCrory, M; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P, 2017
)
0.76
" Examples and a case study to illustrate how pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics contributed to the selection of dosing regimens, demonstration of an improved therapeutic effect, or regulatory approval of an improved product label are presented."( Application of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics in Product Life Cycle Management. A Case Study with a Carbidopa-Levodopa Extended-Release Formulation.
Modi, NB, 2017
)
0.66
"This Phase IV, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study characterized the dose-response and tolerability of fixed doses of ropinirole prolonged release (PR) in subjects with advanced Parkinson's disease."( A randomized, fixed-dose, dose-response study of ropinirole prolonged release in advanced Parkinson's disease.
Chriscoe, S; Davy, M; Jimenez, T; Upward, J; VanMeter, S; Zesiewicz, TA, 2017
)
0.46
"IPX066 (Rytary®; carbidopa and levodopa [CD-LD] extended-release capsules) was designed to achieve therapeutic LD plasma concentrations within 1h of dosing and maintain LD concentrations for a prolonged duration in early or advanced Parkinson's disease (PD)."( Conversion to carbidopa and levodopa extended-release (IPX066) followed by its extended use in patients previously taking controlled-release carbidopa-levodopa for advanced Parkinson's disease.
Duker, AP; Ellenbogen, A; Farbman, ES; Gupta, S; Hauser, RA; Hsu, A; Kell, S; Khanna, S; Kreitzman, D; Liang, GS; Nausieda, P; Nieves, A; Rubens, R; Tetrud, J, 2017
)
1.04
" Low levodopa dosing and antioxidants in the rotigotine patch matrix prevented cysteinyl-glycine fall."( Levodopa, placebo and rotigotine change biomarker levels for oxidative stress.
Herrman, L; Kinkel, M; Muhlack, S; Müller, T, 2017
)
2.41
"To evaluate individualized levodopa/carbidopa dosing using microtablets dispensed with a dose dispenser, with respect to efficacy and usability as perceived by patients."( First clinical experience with levodopa/carbidopa microtablets in Parkinson's disease.
Albo, J; Hellström, M; Nyholm, D; Senek, M; Svenningsson, P, 2017
)
1.04
" Safinamide will help to reduce dosing of levodopa but also of dopamine agonists during long term treatment in patients with Parkinson's disease."( Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of safinamide mesylate for the treatment of mid-to-late stage Parkinson's disease.
Müller, T, 2017
)
0.72
"Correlation analysis showed that age, gender, education, disease duration, Hohn-Yahr stage, UPDRS-II and UPDRS-III scores, and dosage of levodopa do not correlate with the daily movement function (P > 0."( Continuous quantitative monitoring of physical activity in Parkinson's disease patients by using wearable devices: a case-control study.
Cai, G; Dai, H; Huang, Y; Lin, Z; Luo, S; Ye, Q, 2017
)
0.66
" Although levodopa remains the single effective agent in the management of Parkinson's disease, the accurate determination of this optimal dosage is complicated by marked between-subject and between-occasion variability in this population."( Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease: A Review of Population Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics Analysis.
Azulay, JP; Blin, O; Guilhaumou, R; Marsot, A, 2017
)
2.3
" A detailed understanding of the nature of PD-specific gastrointestinal parameters and of how they may affect drug release of orally administered dosage forms seems to be essential information for developing better oral PD medications."( A review of patient-specific gastrointestinal parameters as a platform for developing in vitro models for predicting the in vivo performance of oral dosage forms in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Klein, S; Wollmer, E, 2017
)
0.46
" The primary outcome of this study was to assess the postoperative improvement in the symptoms, evaluated using either Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores or levodopa equivalent dosage (LEDD) requirement."( Comparison of General and Local Anesthesia for Deep Brain Stimulator Insertion: A Systematic Review.
Englesakis, M; Manninen, P; Mehta, J; Rowland, NC; Sheshadri, V; Venkatraghavan, L, 2017
)
0.65
" Regarding the clinical outcomes, there were no significant differences in the postoperative Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale and levodopa equivalent drug dosage between the GA and the LA groups."( Comparison of General and Local Anesthesia for Deep Brain Stimulator Insertion: A Systematic Review.
Englesakis, M; Manninen, P; Mehta, J; Rowland, NC; Sheshadri, V; Venkatraghavan, L, 2017
)
0.66
" Collectively, this data highlights the importance of the frontal cortex in methamphetamine-induced effects, and also the similar dose-response effect of methamphetamine on dopamine and BDNF expression."( Dose-Dependent Effects of Binge-Like Methamphetamine Dosing on Dopamine and Neurotrophin Levels in Rat Brain.
Doyle, KM; Kelly, JP; Moreira da Silva Santos, A, 2017
)
0.46
" No difference was observed in maintenance dosage of rotigotine between the two groups."( Efficacy and safety of rotigotine in elderly patients with Parkinson's disease in comparison with the non-elderly: a post hoc analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.
Iwaki, H; Kondo, H; Nomoto, M; Sakurai, M, 2018
)
0.48
" The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of L-DOPA dosage on pupillometric parameters in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients."( Pupillometry as an indicator of L-DOPA dosages in Parkinson's disease patients.
Bartošová, O; Bonnet, C; Perlík, F; Růžička, E; Šíma, M; Slanař, O; Ulmanová, O, 2018
)
0.48
" This study describes an algorithmic method to derive optimized dosing suggestions for infusion treatment of PD, by fitting individual dose-response models."( Individual dose-response models for levodopa infusion dose optimization.
Alam, M; Nyholm, D; Senek, M; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2018
)
0.76
"Patient records were collected at Uppsala University hospital which provided dosing information and dose-response evaluations."( Individual dose-response models for levodopa infusion dose optimization.
Alam, M; Nyholm, D; Senek, M; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2018
)
0.76
" To our knowledge, this study is the first to explore the potential of unsupervised technology-based objective motor and non-motor tasks to monitor subacute LD dosing effects in PD patients."( Supervised versus unsupervised technology-based levodopa monitoring in Parkinson's disease: an intrasubject comparison.
Calandra-Buonaura, G; Chiari, L; Contin, M; Cortelli, P; Corzani, M; Lopane, G; Mellone, S, 2018
)
0.74
" We aim to determine the motor improvement and reduction in medication dosage of all patients with PD who underwent DBS at the Philippine Movement Disorder Surgery Center."( Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease in the Philippines: Outcomes of the Philippine Movement Disorder Surgery Center.
Aguilar, JA; Anlacan, JP; Diestro, JDB; Jamora, RDG; Teleg, RA; Vesagas, TS, 2018
)
0.48
" A significant reduction in the dosage of PD medications was also seen until the second year of follow-up (52."( Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease in the Philippines: Outcomes of the Philippine Movement Disorder Surgery Center.
Aguilar, JA; Anlacan, JP; Diestro, JDB; Jamora, RDG; Teleg, RA; Vesagas, TS, 2018
)
0.48
"DBS for PD improves the UPDRS motor score in the off-medication and on-medication state, with the maximal benefit seen at 3 years after surgery and reduces PD medication dosage by half."( Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease in the Philippines: Outcomes of the Philippine Movement Disorder Surgery Center.
Aguilar, JA; Anlacan, JP; Diestro, JDB; Jamora, RDG; Teleg, RA; Vesagas, TS, 2018
)
0.48
"Despite extensive research in the field of gastroretentive dosage forms, this "holy grail" of oral drug delivery yet remained an unmet goal."( Influence of Postprandial Intragastric Pressures on Drug Release from Gastroretentive Dosage Forms.
Hoppe, M; Koziolek, M; Schneider, F; Weitschies, W, 2018
)
0.48
" The levodopa equivalent dosage did not change."( A High-Intensity Multicomponent Agility Intervention Improves Parkinson Patients' Clinical and Motor Symptoms.
Hortobágyi, T; Kovács, N; Nagy, F; Tollár, J, 2018
)
0.99
" While there is some evidence that anti-parkinsonian medication, levodopa, might not improve balance and gait control or reduce fall risk in the PIGD subtype, it is unclear whether the levodopa dosage intake affects gait stability."( Head and trunk stability during gait before and after levodopa intake in Parkinson's disease subtypes.
Brodie, MA; Fung, VSC; Latt, MD; Lord, SR; Menant, JC; Menz, HB; Pelicioni, PHS, 2018
)
0.97
" To reduce the daily dosing of L-DOPA in patients, inhibitors of dopamine catabolizing enzymes, particularly monoamine oxidase-B (MAO-B), are prescribed."( Garcinol, an effective monoamine oxidase-B inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Bhattacharya, P; Borah, A; Chakrabarty, J; Dutta, A; Mazumder, MK; Paul, R; Phukan, BC, 2018
)
0.48
" Several factors hamper the use of current available catechol-O-methyl transferase inhibitors, that is, the moderate efficacy and multiple dosing for entacapone and the risk of liver toxicity with tolcapone."( Opicapone for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: A review of a new licensed medicine.
Fabbri, M; Ferreira, JJ; Lees, A; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Stocchi, F; Tolosa, E, 2018
)
0.48
" Therefore, it is critical to control the levodopa dosage accuracy to improve the curative effect in clinical."( Smartphone-based differential pulse amperometry system for real-time monitoring of levodopa with carbon nanotubes and gold nanoparticles modified screen-printing electrodes.
Cheng, C; Ji, D; Liu, J; Liu, Q; Liu, Z; Low, SS; Shi, Z; Xu, H; Xu, N; Yu, X; Zhang, T; Zhu, J, 2019
)
1
"A new extended release levodopa capsule (C/L ERC), Rytary®, has demonstrated improved "on" time in fluctuating Parkinson's disease patients, compared to optimally dosed immediate release levodopa."( Conversion of L-dopa to Extended Release L-dopa (Rytary®) in Patients with Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease: Predictors of Dose.
Christie, M; Coss, P; Ondo, W; Pascual, B, 2019
)
0.82
" Mayo neurologists favoring levodopa dosage optimization treated most patients."( Levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson disease: A population-based cohort study.
Ahlskog, JE; Bower, JH; Cutsforth-Gregory, JK; Mielke, MM; Parisi, JE; Savica, R; Turcano, P, 2018
)
2.22
" Motor response to and pre-surgical dosage of levodopa, male gender, and shorter PD duration were identified as predictors for posture improvement after STN DBS."( Effect of subthalamic deep brain stimulation on posture in Parkinson's disease: A blind computerized analysis.
Artusi, CA; Boyne, P; Espay, AJ; Fasano, A; Lopiano, L; Merola, A; Roediger, J; Romagnolo, A; Zibetti, M, 2019
)
0.77
" Our results highlight the role of microbial metabolism in drug availability, and specifically, that abundance of bacterial tyrosine decarboxylase in the proximal small intestine can explain the increased dosage regimen of levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease patients."( Gut bacterial tyrosine decarboxylases restrict levels of levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
Castejon, M; El Aidy, S; El-Gendy, AO; Frye, AK; Keshavarzian, A; van Dijk, G; van Kessel, SP, 2019
)
0.94
" This study proposes a dosing algorithm for oral administration of levodopa and evaluates its integration into a sensor-based dosing system (SBDS)."( Sensor-based algorithmic dosing suggestions for oral administration of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets for Parkinson's disease: a first experience.
Alam, M; Bergquist, F; Johansson, D; Memedi, M; Nyholm, D; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2019
)
0.98
" The SBDS uses data from wearable sensors to fit individual patient models, which are then used as input to the dosing algorithm."( Sensor-based algorithmic dosing suggestions for oral administration of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets for Parkinson's disease: a first experience.
Alam, M; Bergquist, F; Johansson, D; Memedi, M; Nyholm, D; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2019
)
0.75
"This study shows that it is possible to use algorithmic sensor-based dosing adjustments to optimize treatment with oral medication for PD patients."( Sensor-based algorithmic dosing suggestions for oral administration of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets for Parkinson's disease: a first experience.
Alam, M; Bergquist, F; Johansson, D; Memedi, M; Nyholm, D; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2019
)
0.75
" The classical symptomatic treatment for PD is Levodopa (L-DOPA) which brings a plethora of side effects and dosage problems in a prolonged drug regimen."( Baicalein enhances the effect of low dose Levodopa on the gait deficits and protects dopaminergic neurons in experimental Parkinsonism.
Bian, ZX; Chan, HY; Cheung, CY; Li, Y; Lyu, H; Poon, WS; Wang, KKW; Zheng, ZV, 2019
)
1.04
" This study aimed to examine the performance of TRIS for medication effects in a new population sample with Parkinson's disease (PD) and its usefulness for constructing individual dose-response models."( Evaluation of a sensor algorithm for motor state rating in Parkinson's disease.
Bergquist, F; Ericsson, A; Johansson, A; Johansson, D; Medvedev, A; Memedi, M; Nyholm, D; Ohlsson, F; Senek, M; Spira, J; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2019
)
0.51
"The objective sensor index shows promise for constructing individual dose-response models, but further evaluations and retraining of the TRIS algorithm are desirable to improve its performance and to ensure its clinical effectiveness."( Evaluation of a sensor algorithm for motor state rating in Parkinson's disease.
Bergquist, F; Ericsson, A; Johansson, A; Johansson, D; Medvedev, A; Memedi, M; Nyholm, D; Ohlsson, F; Senek, M; Spira, J; Thomas, I; Westin, J, 2019
)
0.51
" Using a randomized, double-blind, 2-way crossover design, eligible patients in the morning OFF state (having not received PD medication overnight) received a single dose of CVT-301 84 mg or placebo on 2 dosing days, immediately after their first morning oral carbidopa/levodopa dose."( Orally inhaled levodopa (CVT-301) for early morning OFF periods in Parkinson's disease.
Ellenbogen, A; Hauser, RA; Isaacson, SH; Kegler-Ebo, DM; Komjathy, SF; Oh, C; Safirstein, BE; Truong, DD; Zhao, P, 2019
)
1.05
" Adult Wistar rats treated with CPZ (3 mg/kg/day, IP) were orally dosed with diclofenac and L-dopa/carbidopa for 21 days."( Neuroprotective effect of diclofenac on chlorpromazine induced catalepsy in rats.
Khan, SS; Mirza, T; Naeem, S; Najam, R; Sikandar, B, 2019
)
0.51
"This series of studies demonstrates that small continuous dosing of subcutaneous CD has an unexpected effect on LD pharmacokinetics greater than the extent of decarboxylase inhibition achieved by additional oral CD administration."( Subcutaneous Administration of Carbidopa Enhances Oral Levodopa Pharmacokinetics: A Series of Studies Conducted in Pigs, Mice, and Healthy Volunteers.
Caraco, Y; LeWitt, PA; Nemas, M; Oren, S; Shaltiel-Karyo, R; Weinstock, I; Yacoby-Zeevi, O; Zawaznik, E,
)
0.38
" We investigated possible predictive factors for the successful reduction of antiparkinsonian drug dosage after STN-DBS."( Predictive Factors of Antiparkinsonian Drug Reduction after Subthalamic Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease.
Kawaguchi, M; Kawashima, M; Miyagi, Y; Okamoto, T; Samura, K; Yoshida, F, 2019
)
0.51
"Changing drug dosage is common in clinical practice."( Verbal communication about drug dosage balances drug reduction in Parkinson's disease: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidences.
Benedetti, F; Carlino, E; Frisaldi, E; Guerra, G; Lopiano, L; Piedimonte, A; Romagnolo, A; Vighetti, S, 2019
)
0.51
" In particular, the monitoring and optimization of levodopa dosage are critical to mitigate the onset of undesired fluctuations in the patients' physical and emotional conditions such as speech function, motor behavior, and mood stability."( Wearable Sweat Band for Noninvasive Levodopa Monitoring.
Bariya, M; Fan, Z; Hettick, M; Hou, L; Javey, A; Ji, W; Liaw, TS; Lin, Y; Nyein, HYY; Tai, LC; Yuan, Z; Zhao, C; Zhao, J, 2019
)
1.04
" The design and attractive analytical performance of the new orthogonal wearable microneedle sensor array hold considerable promise for reliable, continuous, minimally invasive monitoring of L-Dopa in the ISF toward optimizing the dosing regimen of the drug and effective management of Parkinson disease."( Wearable Electrochemical Microneedle Sensor for Continuous Monitoring of Levodopa: Toward Parkinson Management.
Goud, KY; Litvan, I; Mishra, RK; Moonla, C; Narayan, R; Wang, J; Yu, C, 2019
)
0.75
" As LD/BH sustained release suspension can synchronize sustained release of multiple active ingredients by oral administration, the suspension presents promising oral dosage forms for geriatric patients with PD."( Development, Optimization, and Evaluation In Vitro/In Vivo of Oral Liquid System for Synchronized Sustained Release of Levodopa/Benserazide.
Ding, YP; Lai, WL; Liu, HF; Qu, Y; Wang, L; Xin, YR; Xu, Y; Zhu, FQ; Zhu, Y, 2019
)
0.72
" Increasing the dosage of levodopa and prolonging the treatment can significantly improve the curative effect."( Systematic Evaluation of Levodopa Effect on Visual Improvement in Amblyopia: A Meta-analysis.
Li, QX; Li, S; Wang, SP,
)
0.73
" Lower maximal force, higher unintentional force production (enslaving) and higher inter-trial variance indices occurred in PD patients after one dosage of levodopa."( Synergic control of action in levodopa-naïve Parkinson's disease patients: I. Multi-finger interaction and coordination.
Corson, T; de Freitas, PB; Freitas, SMSF; Huang, X; Latash, ML; Lewis, MM; Reschechtko, S, 2020
)
1.04
" We chronically treated (over 6 months) mice lacking both chromogranins A and B (Cgs-KO) with a low oral dosage of L-DOPA/benserazide (10/2."( Combining the lack of chromogranins with chronic L-DOPA treatment affects motor activity in mice.
Borges, R; Castañeyra, A; Castañeyra-Ruiz, L; González-Santana, A; Machado, JD, 2020
)
0.56
" Devices such as continuous infusion pumps and new dosage forms have been developed to improve the treatment response to L-dopa."( [Current Status and Future Prospects of Therapeutic Development of Parkinson's Disease].
Mochizuki, H, 2020
)
0.56
" Clinically, accurately and objectively assessing the severity of PD symptoms is critical in controlling appropriate dosage of Levodopa to prevent unwanted side effect of switching between Dyskinesia and PD."( Improving Automatic Tremor and Movement Motor Disorder Severity Assessment for Parkinson's Disease with Deep Joint Training.
Chang, CM; Chen, JC; Huang, YL; Lee, CC, 2019
)
0.72
" Here, we present a lady with moderate PD and superimposed anxiety for whom this management strategy did not work well as it increased her anxiety significantly around dosing times."( Patient-controlled variable dosing of levodopa for Parkinson's disease.
Abdelhafiz, AH; Rose, J; Roycroft, M, 2020
)
0.83
" Dosing was individually titrated for 14 days after which the dose was kept stable for an additional 14 days."( A Phase 2a Trial Investigating the Safety and Tolerability of the Novel Cortical Enhancer IRL752 in Parkinson's Disease Dementia.
Bergquist, F; Dizdar, N; Grigoriou, S; Hansson, F; Johansson, A; Nyholm, D; Odin, P; Rinne, J; Sonesson, C; Svenningsson, P; Tedroff, J; Tsitsi, P; Wictorin, K, 2020
)
0.56
" Regression analysis showed a small, but significant relationship between levodopa and dopamine agonist dosage and total IGT score, indicating that medication level could be a marker of level of executive functions."( Applied strategy in the Iowa Gambling Task: Comparison of individuals with Parkinson's disease to healthy controls.
Borghammer, P; Callesen, MB; Damholdt, MF; Kjær, SW; Larsen, L; Østergaard, K, 2020
)
0.79
" Compared to NBR patients, BR patients had relatively low body weight, low BMI, long disease duration, high levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD), and high levodopa dose per weight (P < 0."( Analysis of factors associated with brittle response in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Chang, Y; Li, Y; Liu, X; Wang, L; Yan, Y; Zhang, L, 2020
)
0.77
" Therapeutically, this in turn leads to further fractioning of the levodopa dosage and a reduction of single-dose levels."( [New Therapeutic Options for the Individualised Titration of Levodopa].
Ebersbach, G; Jost, WH; Kassubek, J; Klebe, S; Tönges, L, 2021
)
1.1
" Patients with OFD used significantly higher levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD) than those without (p = 0."( Orofacial dystonia and asssociated bulbar symptoms in multiple system atrophy: A blinded video analysis.
Bhidayasiri, R; Panyakaew, P; Thongchuam, Y, 2020
)
0.82
"As a vital therapeutic agent for Parkinson's disease, dosage control of levodopa has always been a major obstacle in ensuring efficacy and curbing side effects."( Differential coulometry based on dual screen-printed strips for high accuracy levodopa determination towards Parkinson's disease management.
Cai, Y; Cao, Q; Fang, L; Liang, B; Tu, T; Ye, X; Yu, C, 2020
)
1.02
" Among PD patients, a clear and robust dose-response association was found between levodopa equivalent dose and UME, independent of potential confounding factors, including Parkinson's disease severity."( Melatonin secretion in patients with Parkinson's disease receiving different-dose levodopa therapy.
Kataoka, H; Kurumatani, N; Obayashi, K; Saeki, K; Sugie, K, 2020
)
1.01
" This model paves the way toward individualization of a dosing regimen."( Nonlinear pharmacodynamics of levodopa through Parkinson's disease progression.
Lévesque, D; Nekka, F; Robaey, P; Ursino, M; Véronneau-Veilleux, F, 2020
)
0.85
" However, using such data to overhaul the current static medication treatment planning approach and prescribe personalized medication timing and dosage that accounts for patient/care-giver/physician feedback/preferences remains an open question."( Optimizing Individualized Treatment Planning for Parkinson's Disease Using Deep Reinforcement Learning.
Khojandi, A; Ramdhani, R; Vasudevan, R; Watts, J, 2020
)
0.56
"We found that the 10 mg/kg l-dopa dosing regimen induced LID in all animals (n = 5) and induced significant angiogenesis in the striatum and substantia nigra."( The Vasomotor Response to Dopamine Is Altered in the Rat Model of l-dopa-Induced Dyskinesia.
Anderson, C; Booth, S; Jackson, MF; Kirouac, G; Ko, JH; Lu, L; Ramadan, A; Zhang, D, 2021
)
0.62
"ND0612 is a continuous, subcutaneous levodopa/carbidopa delivery system in development for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) experiencing motor fluctuationsObjective:Evaluate the efficacy and safety of two ND0612 dosing regimens in patients with PD."( Continuous Subcutaneous Levodopa Delivery for Parkinson's Disease: A Randomized Study.
Adar, L; Case, RJ; Ellenbogen, AL; Espay, AJ; Leinonen, M; Olanow, CW; Oren, S; Orenbach, SF; Poewe, W; Stocchi, F; Yardeni, T, 2021
)
1.2
" However, a U-shaped dose-response curve obtained with certain parameters may limit the therapeutic potential of this strategy and require further investigation."( Granisetron, a selective 5-HT3 antagonist, reduces L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine-induced abnormal involuntary movements in the 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned rat.
Bédard, D; Frouni, I; Hamadjida, A; Huot, P; Kwan, C, 2021
)
0.62
"To overcome the problem of incorrect levodopa (LD) dosage in the treatment of Parkinson's disease, a new analytical tool is urgently needed for accurately determining the concentration of LD in human fluids."( Single-atom electrocatalysts templated by MOF for determination of levodopa.
Gao, M; Li, Y; Liang, W; Tong, Y; Ye, BC, 2021
)
1.13
" Moreover, as the daily dosage of levodopa increased, the daily number of tablets increased for both overall anti-parkinsonian drugs and adjuvants to levodopa."( [Prescribing Patterns for Anti-Parkinsonian Drugs in Japan: Prescription-Based Database Study].
Hattori, A; Ibe, S; Kinoshita, F; Maeda, T; Tsunekawa, K; Yamamoto, J, 2021
)
0.9
" Personalized dose-response relationship is demonstrated within a group of human subjects, along with close pharmacokinetic correlation between the finger touch-based fingertip sweat and capillary blood samples."( Non-Invasive Sweat-Based Tracking of L-Dopa Pharmacokinetic Profiles Following an Oral Tablet Administration.
De la Paz, E; Huang, N; Litvan, I; Longardner, K; Mahato, K; Moon, JM; Sempionatto, JR; Sonsa-Ard, T; Teymourian, H; Wang, J, 2021
)
0.62
" For significantly different metrics, their associations with clinical [levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD), motor and visuospatial function] and SNc susceptibility MRI metrics [R2* and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM)] were explored."( Choroidal Thickness Correlates with Clinical and Imaging Metrics of Parkinson's Disease: A Pilot Study.
Bowie, EM; Brown, DA; Brown, GL; Camacci, ML; Du, G; Grillo, S; Huang, X; Kim, SD; Kong, L; Lewis, MM; Nguyen, JV; Sundstrom, JM; Ullah, SP, 2021
)
0.85
"75]) taking one of three types of non-ergot extended-release DAs (rotigotine 32; pramipexole 44; ropinirole 36) with or without L-dopa (median daily total dosage of antiparkinsonian drugs 525."( Antiparkinsonian drugs as potent contributors to nocturnal sleep in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Ando, H; Doyu, M; Fujikake, A; Fukuoka, T; Hayashi, M; Ito, C; Izumi, M; Kawagashira, Y; Koide, H; Nakashima, K; Niwa, JI; Ogawa, K; Oiwa, H; Okada, Y; Taguchi, S; Tokui, K; Tsunoda, Y; Yasumoto, A; Yuasa, T, 2021
)
0.62
"For the whole PD patient cohort, the PDSS-2 sleep disturbance domain score and the scores for item 1 assessing sleep quality and item 8 assessing nocturia were positively correlated with daily total dosage of antiparkinsonian drugs and dosage of L-dopa, but not with the dosage of DAs."( Antiparkinsonian drugs as potent contributors to nocturnal sleep in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Ando, H; Doyu, M; Fujikake, A; Fukuoka, T; Hayashi, M; Ito, C; Izumi, M; Kawagashira, Y; Koide, H; Nakashima, K; Niwa, JI; Ogawa, K; Oiwa, H; Okada, Y; Taguchi, S; Tokui, K; Tsunoda, Y; Yasumoto, A; Yuasa, T, 2021
)
0.62
" Thus, adjusting both the total dosage of antiparkinsonian drugs and the dose-ratio of L-dopa might be key actions for alleviating poor sleep quality in patients with PD."( Antiparkinsonian drugs as potent contributors to nocturnal sleep in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Ando, H; Doyu, M; Fujikake, A; Fukuoka, T; Hayashi, M; Ito, C; Izumi, M; Kawagashira, Y; Koide, H; Nakashima, K; Niwa, JI; Ogawa, K; Oiwa, H; Okada, Y; Taguchi, S; Tokui, K; Tsunoda, Y; Yasumoto, A; Yuasa, T, 2021
)
0.62
"Long-term therapeutic efficacy of STN-DBS could be achieved even with relatively low stimulation intensity and medication dosage for PD patients in southern China."( Eight-year follow-up outcome of subthalamic deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease: Maintenance of therapeutic efficacy with a relatively low levodopa dosage and stimulation intensity.
Chen, J; Chen, L; Chen, W; Fu, X; Gu, J; Guo, Q; Hu, Y; Jiang, L; Liu, J; Liu, Y; Qian, H; Wu, L; Xian, W; Xu, S; Yang, C; Ye, J; Zheng, Y, 2021
)
0.82
" Foslevodopa/foscarbidopa infusion provides stable LD and CD exposures compared to oral LD/CD dosing with the average steady-state exposure ranging from 747-4660 ng/mL for the different groups."( Foslevodopa/Foscarbidopa Is Well Tolerated and Maintains Stable Levodopa and Carbidopa Exposure Following Subcutaneous Infusion.
Facheris, MF; Liu, W; Neenan, M; Rosebraugh, M, 2021
)
1.8
" Voluntary oral dosing compliance was recorded and quantified throughout the study."( Voluntary oral dosing for precise experimental compound delivery in adult rats.
Allen, RA; Bales, KL; Chesler, KC; Motz, CT; Pardue, MT; Vo, HK, 2022
)
0.72
"BeyoND is an open-label study evaluating the long-term safety of two ND0612 dosing regimens."( Subcutaneous Levodopa Infusion for Parkinson's Disease: 1-Year Data from the Open-Label BeyoND Study.
Adar, L; Arkadir, D; Case, R; Ebersbach, G; Ellenbogen, AL; Espay, AJ; Fuchs Orenbach, S; Giladi, N; Isaacson, SH; Kieburtz, K; LeWitt, P; Olanow, CW; Oren, S; Poewe, W; Rosenfeld, O; Sasson, N; Simuni, T; Stocchi, F; Thomas, A; Yardeni, T; Zlotogorski, A, 2021
)
0.99
" She was diagnosed with dyskinesia-hyperpyrexia syndrome (DHS) due to increasing dosage of ropinirole and infection."( Rhabdomyolysis Associated with Severe Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia in Parkinson's Disease: A Report of Two Cases and Literature Review.
Pitakpatapee, Y; Sangpeamsook, T; Srikajon, J; Srivanitchapoom, P, 2021
)
0.89
" We measured serum zinc levels and analyzed correlations between serum zinc levels, the levodopa oral administration period, dosage, dosing frequency, and zinc deficiency symptoms including taste disorders."( Correlation between Serum Zinc Levels and Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease.
Hirata, Y; Ishikawa, H; Kato, N; Matsuura, K; Matsuyama, H; Narita, Y; Niwa, A; Tomimoto, H, 2021
)
1.11
"With the levodopa threshold effect for dyskinesia observed, threshold dosage of levodopa was identified in the general Parkinson's disease (PD) population."( Effect of onset age on the levodopa threshold dosage for dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease.
Chen, H; Feng, T; Kou, W; Liu, G; Ma, H; Su, D; Wang, D; Wang, X; Wang, Z; Zhang, Z; Zhao, J, 2022
)
1.44
"EOPD patients had lower levodopa threshold dosage comparing with LOPD patients."( Effect of onset age on the levodopa threshold dosage for dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease.
Chen, H; Feng, T; Kou, W; Liu, G; Ma, H; Su, D; Wang, D; Wang, X; Wang, Z; Zhang, Z; Zhao, J, 2022
)
1.33
" However prolonged administration and high dosing leads to the emergence of motor complications, which are involuntary movements, so called dyskinesia, and ‘OFF’ episodes."( GOCOVRI
Müller, T, 2022
)
0.72
" No correlation was found between the ESS scores and Levodopa Equivalent Dosage (LED) or between the scores obtained from the sleep scales and the scores obtained from the UPDRS and BDI."( Assessment of the Effect of Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation on Sleep Quality of Parkinson's Disease Patients.
Agan, K; Gunal, DI; Jafarova, S; Oner, OG; Seker, A; Sunter, G, 2022
)
0.97
" The P2B001 combination has the potential to provide greater efficacy than either pramipexole or rasagiline alone and a better tolerability profile compared to higher dosage dopamine agonist monotherapy, while maintaining the advantage of lower motor complication risk than levodopa."( P2B001 (Extended Release Pramipexole and Rasagiline): A New Treatment Option in Development for Parkinson's Disease.
Brotchie, J; Friedman, H; Giladi, N; Hauser, RA; Litman, P; Oren, S; Poewe, W, 2022
)
0.9
" The P2B001 combination has the potential to provide greater efficacy than either pramipexole or rasagiline alone and a better tolerability profile compared to higher dosage dopamine agonist monotherapy, while maintaining the advantage of lower motor complication risk than levodopa."( P2B001 (Extended Release Pramipexole and Rasagiline): A New Treatment Option in Development for Parkinson's Disease.
Brotchie, J; Friedman, H; Giladi, N; Hauser, RA; Litman, P; Oren, S; Poewe, W, 2022
)
0.9
" Expression of both networks was significantly elevated in participants with PD relative to healthy volunteers and were not related to levodopa dosage or motor severity."( Gait-Related Metabolic Covariance Networks at Rest in Parkinson's Disease.
Alcock, L; Brooks, DJ; Burn, DJ; Colloby, SJ; Firbank, MJ; Galna, B; Lawson, RA; Lord, S; O'Brien, JT; Pavese, N; Rochester, L; Sigurdsson, HP; Taylor, JP; Yarnall, AJ, 2022
)
0.92
" This is of particular concern as omitted medications and irregular dosing can cause an immediate increase in an individual's symptoms as well as other adverse outcomes such as swallowing difficulties, aspiration pneumonia, frozen gait and even potentially fatal neuroleptic malignant type syndrome."( Identifying rates and risk factors for medication errors during hospitalization in the Australian Parkinson's disease population: A 3-year, multi-center study.
Bakker, M; Corre, L; Johnson, JL; Johnson, ME; Li, X; Mill, DN; Woodman, RJ, 2022
)
0.72
" This difficulty is a result of levodopa's short half-life, a progressive narrowing of the therapeutic window, and major inter-patient and intra-patient variations in the dose-response relationship."( Closing the loop for patients with Parkinson disease: where are we?
Kotagiri, YG; Litvan, I; Longardner, K; Mahato, K; Moon, JM; Podhajny, T; Sempionatto, JR; Tehrani, F; Teymourian, H; Wang, J, 2022
)
1
" These include the timing, dosage and administration of levodopa, concomitant drugs, food, PD-associated non-motor symptoms, and various neurologic and non-neurologic comorbidities."( Practical pearls to improve the efficacy and tolerability of levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Bahroo, L; Di Maria, G; Jankovic, J; Lamotte, G; Lenka, A, 2022
)
1.21
" Carbidopa dosing is crucial as it not only enhances the entry of levodopa into the central nervous system but also reduces levodopa's peripheral adverse effects."( Practical pearls to improve the efficacy and tolerability of levodopa in Parkinson's disease.
Bahroo, L; Di Maria, G; Jankovic, J; Lamotte, G; Lenka, A, 2022
)
1.2
" Her symptoms were gradually remitted with reduced dosage of dopaminergic drugs."( Parkinsonism-Hyperpyrexia Syndrome and Dyskinesia-Hyperpyrexia Syndrome in Parkinson's Disease: Two Cases and Literature Review.
Hu, BL; Huang, JF; Huang, SS; Liu, RP; Wang, JY; Zhang, X; Zhu, JH; Zhu, SG, 2022
)
0.72
"As of 2019, no impulsive control disorders, motor fluctuations, or DBS-related complications were observed during a 4-year follow-up, with 66% Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III reduction at medication OFF state noted, whereas levodopa equivalent daily dosage decreased by almost half."( Long-term efficacy of bilateral subthalamic deep brain stimulation in the parkinsonism of SCA 3: A rare case report.
Kuo, MC; Tai, CH; Tseng, SH; Wu, RM, 2022
)
0.9
"01) in the second period, but with similar dosing frequency."( Ten-year trends of the characteristics in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease at the time of intestinal gel therapy introduction
Baróti, B; Constantin, V; Forró, T; Frigy, A; Kelemen, K; Metz, J; Mihály, I; Orbán-Kis, K; Szász, JA; Szász, RM; Szatmári, S; Török, Á, 2022
)
0.72
"To evaluate the effects of once-daily opicapone on levodopa plasma pharmacokinetics and motor response when added to two different levodopa dosing regimens."( Effect of Opicapone on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease.
Antonini, A; Ferreira, JJ; Guimarães, B; Moreira, J; Poewe, W; Rascol, O; Rocha, JF; Soares-da-Silva, P; Stocchi, F, 2022
)
1.28
" To show that generic drugs are equivalent to the originator drug, regulations usually refer to the bioavailability of active ingredients, which is influenced by the selected dosage form and the chosen excipients."( Different dissolution conditions affect stability and dissolution profiles of bioequivalent levodopa-containing oral dosage forms.
Langer, K; Rose, O; Weitzel, J; Wünsch, A, 2022
)
0.94
"Compared with TD subtype, patients with PIGD subtype have longer course of disease, higher disease severity, and higher daily dosage of levodopa."( The Importance of Early Identification for Parkinson's Disease Patients with Postural Instability and Gait Disturbance.
Gu, SC; Shi, R; Wang, CD; Wu, Y; Yang, YW; Ye, Q; Yuan, CX; Zhang, Y, 2022
)
0.92
" The dosage of levodopa was 696."( Use of
Cen, L; Dongfang, C; Xianzhi, M; Zhongke, H,
)
0.48
"609) and Levodopa dosage (P = 0."( Data-driven subtyping of Parkinson's disease: comparison of current methodologies and application to the Bochum PNS cohort.
Chen, Q; Gold, R; Mosig, A; Pitarokoili, K; Scherbaum, R; Tönges, L; Zella, S, 2023
)
1.33
" Increasing dosing of levodopa weakens the methylation potential in the brain as a result of the methyl group consuming conversion of levodopa to 3-O-methyldopa in glial cells."( The role of istradefylline in the Parkinson's disease armamentarium.
Müller, T, 2023
)
1.22
" Involuntary movements were assessed by two blinded raters prior and every 30 min after drug dosing using the Clinical Dyskinesia Rating Scale (CDRS)."( Comparison of dyskinesia profiles after L-DOPA dose challenges with or without dopamine agonist coadministration.
Cenci, MA; Espa, E; Grigoriou, S; Jakobsson, A; Odin, P; Timpka, J; von Grothusen, G, 2023
)
0.91
" Lower Levodopa Equivalent Dosage (LED) and calf circumference (CC) were independently associated with confirmed sarcopenia."( Screening Tools for Sarcopenia in Mild to Moderate Parkinson's Disease: Assessing the Accuracy of SARC-F and Calf Circumference.
Braga-Neto, P; Bruno, LB; Cunha, LCV; de Almeida, SB; de Luna, JRG; Feitosa, CX; Gomes, VC; Gradvohl, LB; Lima, DP; Lindsay Silva Marques, M; Marques da Silva, TA; Monteiro, PA; Montenegro-Júnior, RM; Roriz-Filho, JS; Viana-Júnior, AB, 2023
)
1.37
" Such a formulation is expected to produce steady concentrations and prolong therapeutic duration compared to a common CRF with a smaller dose per day and a lower overall dose of levodopa, thereby improving patient compliance with the dosage regime."( Model-based optimization of controlled release formulation of levodopa for Parkinson's disease.
Arav, Y; Zohar, A, 2023
)
1.34
" To study whether human equivalent doses of L-DOPA/Carbidopa administered during the crucial postnatal period of neuroplasticity can rescue visual function, OCA C57BL/6 J-c2J OCA1 mice were treated with a 28-day course of oral L-DOPA/Carbidopa at 3 different doses from 15 to 43 days postnatal age (PNA) and for 3 different lengths of treatment, to identify optimum dosage and treatment length."( Human equivalent doses of L-DOPA rescues retinal morphology and visual function in a murine model of albinism.
Griffiths, H; Keeling, E; Lee, H; Lotery, AJ; Lynn, SA; Macdonald, SL; Newall, T; Ratnayaka, JA; Sanchez-Bretano, A; Scott, JA; Self, JE; Soundara-Pandi, SP, 2023
)
0.91
[information is derived through text-mining from research data collected from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Roles (11)

RoleDescription
prodrugA compound that, on administration, must undergo chemical conversion by metabolic processes before becoming the pharmacologically active drug for which it is a prodrug.
haptenAny substance capable of eliciting an immune response only when attached to a large carrier such as a protein. Examples include dinitrophenols; oligosaccharides; peptides; and heavy metals.
neurotoxinA poison that interferes with the functions of the nervous system.
antiparkinson drugA drug used in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
dopaminergic agentA drug used for its effects on dopamine receptors, on the life cycle of dopamine, or on the survival of dopaminergic neurons.
antidyskinesia agentAny compound which can be used to treat or alleviate the symptoms of dyskinesia.
allelochemicalA class of secondary metabolites developed by many plants to influence the behaviour, growth or survival of herbivores, and thus acting as a defence against herbivory.
plant growth retardantnull
human metaboliteAny mammalian metabolite produced during a metabolic reaction in humans (Homo sapiens).
mouse metaboliteAny mammalian metabolite produced during a metabolic reaction in a mouse (Mus musculus).
plant metaboliteAny eukaryotic metabolite produced during a metabolic reaction in plants, the kingdom that include flowering plants, conifers and other gymnosperms.
[role information is derived from Chemical Entities of Biological Interest (ChEBI), Hastings J, Owen G, Dekker A, Ennis M, Kale N, Muthukrishnan V, Turner S, Swainston N, Mendes P, Steinbeck C. (2016). ChEBI in 2016: Improved services and an expanding collection of metabolites. Nucleic Acids Res]

Drug Classes (4)

ClassDescription
dopaA hydroxyphenylalanine carrying hydroxy substituents at positions 3 and 4 of the benzene ring.
L-tyrosine derivativeA proteinogenic amino acid derivative resulting from reaction of L-tyrosine at the amino group or the carboxy group, or from the replacement of any hydrogen of L-tyrosine by a heteroatom.
non-proteinogenic L-alpha-amino acidAny L-alpha-amino acid which is not a member of the group of 23 proteinogenic amino acids.
amino acid zwitterionThe zwitterionic form of an amino acid having a negatively charged carboxyl group and a positively charged amino group.
[compound class information is derived from Chemical Entities of Biological Interest (ChEBI), Hastings J, Owen G, Dekker A, Ennis M, Kale N, Muthukrishnan V, Turner S, Swainston N, Mendes P, Steinbeck C. (2016). ChEBI in 2016: Improved services and an expanding collection of metabolites. Nucleic Acids Res]

Pathways (21)

PathwayProteinsCompounds
Tyrosine Metabolism1657
Catecholamine Biosynthesis314
Aromatic L-Aminoacid Decarboxylase Deficiency314
Alkaptonuria1657
Hawkinsinuria1657
Tyrosinemia Type I1657
Disulfiram Action Pathway2366
Tyrosinemia, Transient, of the Newborn1657
Tyrosine Hydroxylase Deficiency314
Dopamine beta-Hydroxylase Deficiency1657
Monoamine Oxidase-A Deficiency (MAO-A)1657
Isoquinoline Alkaloid Biosynthesis513
Tyrosine metabolism ( Tyrosine metabolism )2841
GPR143 in melanocytes and retinal pigment epithelium cells713
17p13.3 (YWHAE) copy number variation214
Parkinson's disease03
Nicotine activity on dopaminergic neurons09
Nicotine effect on dopaminergic neurons09
Parkinson's disease pathway04
Dopamine metabolism032
Biochemical pathways: part I0466

Protein Targets (89)

Potency Measurements

ProteinTaxonomyMeasurementAverage (µ)Min (ref.)Avg (ref.)Max (ref.)Bioassay(s)
Chain A, MAJOR APURINIC/APYRIMIDINIC ENDONUCLEASEHomo sapiens (human)Potency1.99530.003245.467312,589.2998AID2517
Chain A, TYROSYL-DNA PHOSPHODIESTERASEHomo sapiens (human)Potency0.50120.004023.8416100.0000AID485290
Chain A, HADH2 proteinHomo sapiens (human)Potency2.14870.025120.237639.8107AID886
Chain B, HADH2 proteinHomo sapiens (human)Potency2.14870.025120.237639.8107AID886
Chain A, JmjC domain-containing histone demethylation protein 3AHomo sapiens (human)Potency39.81070.631035.7641100.0000AID504339
Chain A, 2-oxoglutarate OxygenaseHomo sapiens (human)Potency12.58930.177814.390939.8107AID2147
Chain A, ATP-DEPENDENT DNA HELICASE Q1Homo sapiens (human)Potency12.58930.125919.1169125.8920AID2549
LuciferasePhotinus pyralis (common eastern firefly)Potency32.19680.007215.758889.3584AID624030
dopamine D1 receptorHomo sapiens (human)Potency8.19950.00521.30228.1995AID624455
thioredoxin reductaseRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)Potency29.93490.100020.879379.4328AID488773; AID588453
15-lipoxygenase, partialHomo sapiens (human)Potency39.81070.012610.691788.5700AID887
WRNHomo sapiens (human)Potency5.49800.168331.2583100.0000AID651768; AID720497
phosphopantetheinyl transferaseBacillus subtilisPotency87.77230.141337.9142100.0000AID1490; AID2701; AID2707
GLS proteinHomo sapiens (human)Potency28.36270.35487.935539.8107AID624146; AID624170
AR proteinHomo sapiens (human)Potency9.57780.000221.22318,912.5098AID743036; AID743053; AID743054; AID743063
apical membrane antigen 1, AMA1Plasmodium falciparum 3D7Potency14.12540.707912.194339.8107AID720542
hypoxia-inducible factor 1, alpha subunit (basic helix-loop-helix transcription factor)Homo sapiens (human)Potency10.00000.00137.762544.6684AID914; AID915
EWS/FLI fusion proteinHomo sapiens (human)Potency0.37220.001310.157742.8575AID1259253
glucocorticoid receptor [Homo sapiens]Homo sapiens (human)Potency6.00700.000214.376460.0339AID720691
estrogen nuclear receptor alphaHomo sapiens (human)Potency15.08900.000229.305416,493.5996AID743078
vitamin D (1,25- dihydroxyvitamin D3) receptorHomo sapiens (human)Potency0.00350.023723.228263.5986AID588543
arylsulfatase AHomo sapiens (human)Potency37.93301.069113.955137.9330AID720538
pyruvate kinaseLeishmania mexicana mexicanaPotency25.11890.398113.744731.6228AID945; AID959
euchromatic histone-lysine N-methyltransferase 2Homo sapiens (human)Potency13.94800.035520.977089.1251AID504332
Bloom syndrome protein isoform 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency1.35800.540617.639296.1227AID720503
hexokinase-4 isoform 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency5.01192.511913.800328.1838AID743205
atrial natriuretic peptide receptor 1 precursorHomo sapiens (human)Potency23.93410.134610.395030.1313AID1347049
chromobox protein homolog 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency25.78770.006026.168889.1251AID488953; AID540317
glucokinase regulatory proteinHomo sapiens (human)Potency5.01192.511913.800328.1838AID743205
importin subunit beta-1 isoform 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency56.23415.804836.130665.1308AID540263
flap endonuclease 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency23.89720.133725.412989.1251AID488816; AID588795; AID720498
ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 2 isoform aHomo sapiens (human)Potency20.74910.65619.452025.1189AID463106
snurportin-1Homo sapiens (human)Potency56.23415.804836.130665.1308AID540263
peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase NIMA-interacting 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency63.52900.425612.059128.1838AID504536; AID504891
DNA polymerase eta isoform 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency19.59570.100028.9256213.3130AID588591; AID720502
DNA polymerase iota isoform a (long)Homo sapiens (human)Potency12.87290.050127.073689.1251AID588590; AID720496
gemininHomo sapiens (human)Potency3.16230.004611.374133.4983AID624297
DNA polymerase kappa isoform 1Homo sapiens (human)Potency10.50150.031622.3146100.0000AID588579
peripheral myelin protein 22Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)Potency3.21970.005612.367736.1254AID624032
M-phase phosphoprotein 8Homo sapiens (human)Potency7.51930.177824.735279.4328AID488949
muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M1Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)Potency0.07080.00106.000935.4813AID943
phosphoglycerate kinaseTrypanosoma brucei brucei TREU927Potency12.17390.07578.474229.0628AID504547; AID602233; AID686980
ATP-dependent phosphofructokinaseTrypanosoma brucei brucei TREU927Potency23.93410.060110.745337.9330AID485368
[prepared from compound, protein, and bioassay information from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Inhibition Measurements

ProteinTaxonomyMeasurementAverageMin (ref.)Avg (ref.)Max (ref.)Bioassay(s)
integrase, partialHuman immunodeficiency virus 1IC50 (µMol)0.59390.07953.52039.9390AID1053171; AID1053172
lens epithelium-derived growth factor p75Homo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)0.59390.07953.52039.9390AID1053171; AID1053172
ATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)133.00000.63154.45319.3000AID1473740
Multidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)133.00000.20005.677410.0000AID1473741
Bile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)133.00000.11007.190310.0000AID1473738
Epidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)451.44000.00000.536910.0000AID625184; AID69555
Tyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)3.72900.00021.317310.0000AID625187
Tyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)2.14600.00021.67898.6800AID625185
Polyunsaturated fatty acid lipoxygenase ALOX15Oryctolagus cuniculus (rabbit)IC50 (µMol)2.25800.11003.26419.0330AID625146
TyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)8,400.00000.02304.459310.0000AID215967
Solute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)141,200.00000.18000.19000.2000AID681608
Canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)IC50 (µMol)133.00002.41006.343310.0000AID1473739
[prepared from compound, protein, and bioassay information from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Other Measurements

ProteinTaxonomyMeasurementAverageMin (ref.)Avg (ref.)Max (ref.)Bioassay(s)
Carbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)KA1.67000.24000.81921.6700AID318346
Carbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)KA3.10000.02001.72197.4000AID1331203; AID1397319; AID268620; AID291061; AID307896; AID318343; AID365827; AID409984; AID462829; AID691713; AID725228
Carbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)KA11.40000.01101.42737.8000AID1331204; AID1397320; AID268621; AID291063; AID307897; AID318344; AID365828; AID409986; AID414329; AID462830; AID464319; AID691714; AID725229
Plasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)KA0.06300.04401.39744.3800AID305777
Carbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)KA13.50000.09100.72851.1200AID365829; AID409993
Carbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)Ka15.30000.07904.45607.3000AID365830; AID375786
Carbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)Ka18.00001.20005.82769.5400AID307898; AID462831
Adenosine receptor A1Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA11.40000.01101.32337.8000AID691714
Adenosine receptor A2aRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA11.40000.01101.32337.8000AID691714
Carbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)KA0.03600.01002.79269.8100AID305776
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 1 Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Carbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)KA58.30000.71003.875610.0000AID291065
Carbonic anhydraseSaccharomyces cerevisiae S288CKa90.00000.95005.12509.3000AID414331; AID464321
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2A Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2BRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2CRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Carbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)KA51.30000.00904.24939.7100AID318345
Carbonic anhydrase-like protein, putativeTrypanosoma cruzi strain CL BrenerKA0.83000.14002.80507.5400AID1397322
Carbonic anhydraseCandida albicans SC5314KA0.96000.96003.95338.4000AID458784
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2DRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Carbonic anhydrase Nakaseomyces glabratus CBS 138Ka23.30007.10008.30009.5000AID464322
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 3BRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Carbonic anhydrase 15Mus musculus (house mouse)KA6.50004.00007.68579.5000AID375787
Carbonic anhydrase 13Mus musculus (house mouse)KA43.00000.01301.51404.6000AID268622
Glutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 3ARattus norvegicus (Norway rat)KA58.30000.71003.79009.7400AID291065
Carbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)KA12.10000.01002.28947.2100AID291067
Carbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)KA0.06300.04402.120510.0000AID305777
[prepared from compound, protein, and bioassay information from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Biological Processes (265)

Processvia Protein(s)Taxonomy
xenobiotic metabolic processATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
bile acid and bile salt transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
glucuronoside transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
transmembrane transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
leukotriene transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
monoatomic anion transmembrane transportATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
transport across blood-brain barrierATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
prostaglandin secretionMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
cilium assemblyMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
platelet degranulationMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic metabolic processMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
bile acid and bile salt transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
prostaglandin transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
urate transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
glutathione transmembrane transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
transmembrane transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
cAMP transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
leukotriene transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
monoatomic anion transmembrane transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
export across plasma membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
transport across blood-brain barrierMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
guanine nucleotide transmembrane transportMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
estrous cycleCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
chloride ion homeostasisCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
fatty acid metabolic processBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
bile acid biosynthetic processBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic metabolic processBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transportBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
response to oxidative stressBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
bile acid metabolic processBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
response to organic cyclic compoundBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
bile acid and bile salt transportBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
canalicular bile acid transportBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
protein ubiquitinationBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of fatty acid beta-oxidationBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
carbohydrate transmembrane transportBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
bile acid signaling pathwayBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
cholesterol homeostasisBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
response to estrogenBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
response to ethanolBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic export from cellBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
lipid homeostasisBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
phospholipid homeostasisBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of bile acid secretionBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of bile acid metabolic processBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
transmembrane transportBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
cell surface receptor signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
epidermal growth factor receptor signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cell population proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
MAPK cascadeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ossificationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
embryonic placenta developmentEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of protein phosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
hair follicle developmentEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
translationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
signal transductionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
epidermal growth factor receptor signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
activation of phospholipase C activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
salivary gland morphogenesisEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
midgut developmentEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
learning or memoryEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
circadian rhythmEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cell population proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
diterpenoid metabolic processEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
peptidyl-tyrosine phosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cerebral cortex cell migrationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cell growthEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
lung developmentEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cell migrationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of superoxide anion generationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of peptidyl-serine phosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
response to cobalaminEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
response to hydroxyisoflavoneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to reactive oxygen speciesEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
peptidyl-tyrosine autophosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ERBB2-EGFR signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of epidermal growth factor receptor signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of protein catabolic processEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
vasodilationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of phosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ovulation cycleEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
hydrogen peroxide metabolic processEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of apoptotic processEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of MAP kinase activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
tongue developmentEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cyclin-dependent protein serine/threonine kinase activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of DNA repairEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of DNA replicationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of bone resorptionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of DNA-templated transcriptionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of vasoconstrictionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of mitotic cell cycleEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of transcription by RNA polymerase IIEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of JNK cascadeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
symbiont entry into host cellEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein autophosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
astrocyte activationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of fibroblast proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
digestive tract morphogenesisEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of smooth muscle cell proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
neuron projection morphogenesisEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
epithelial cell proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of epithelial cell proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of peptidyl-tyrosine phosphorylationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein insertion into membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
response to calcium ionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B signal transductionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B signal transductionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of synaptic transmission, glutamatergicEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of glial cell proliferationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
morphogenesis of an epithelial foldEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
eyelid development in camera-type eyeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
response to UV-AEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of mucus secretionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of ERK1 and ERK2 cascadeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of ERK1 and ERK2 cascadeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to amino acid stimulusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to mechanical stimulusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to cadmium ionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to epidermal growth factor stimulusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to estradiol stimulusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to xenobiotic stimulusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to dexamethasone stimulusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of canonical Wnt signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
liver regenerationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cell-cell adhesionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of protein kinase C activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of G1/S transition of mitotic cell cycleEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of non-canonical NF-kappaB signal transductionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of prolactin secretionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of miRNA transcriptionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of protein localization to plasma membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of cardiocyte differentiationEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
neurogenesisEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
multicellular organism developmentEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of kinase activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cell surface receptor protein tyrosine kinase signaling pathwayEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
morphogenesis of an epitheliumCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of synaptic transmission, GABAergicCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cellular pH reductionCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
angiotensin-activated signaling pathwayCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
regulation of monoatomic anion transportCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
secretionCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
regulation of intracellular pHCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
neuron cellular homeostasisCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of dipeptide transmembrane transportCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
regulation of chloride transportCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
carbon dioxide transportCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
Factor XII activationPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
proteolysisPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
blood coagulationPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
zymogen activationPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
plasminogen activationPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
fibrinolysisPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of fibrinolysisPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
protein phosphorylationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
intracellular zinc ion homeostasisTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
activation of cysteine-type endopeptidase activity involved in apoptotic processTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
response to xenobiotic stimulusTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
peptidyl-tyrosine phosphorylationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
hemopoiesisTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
platelet activationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
T cell differentiationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
T cell costimulationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of heterotypic cell-cell adhesionTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
intracellular signal transductionTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
peptidyl-tyrosine autophosphorylationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
Fc-gamma receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
T cell receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of T cell receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of T cell activationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
leukocyte migrationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
release of sequestered calcium ion into cytosolTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of lymphocyte activationTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of leukocyte cell-cell adhesionTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of intrinsic apoptotic signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
innate immune responseTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
cell surface receptor protein tyrosine kinase signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
B cell receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
response to singlet oxygenTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
neuron migrationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
stimulatory C-type lectin receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
adaptive immune responseTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of inflammatory response to antigenic stimulusTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
heart processTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
protein phosphorylationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
calcium ion transportTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
G protein-coupled glutamate receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
axon guidanceTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
learningTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
feeding behaviorTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of cell shapeTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
gene expressionTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of gene expressionTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of hydrogen peroxide biosynthetic processTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of neuron projection developmentTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
protein ubiquitinationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
peptidyl-tyrosine phosphorylationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
protein catabolic processTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
forebrain developmentTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
T cell costimulationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of protein ubiquitinationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
intracellular signal transductionTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to platelet-derived growth factor stimulusTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
Fc-gamma receptor signaling pathway involved in phagocytosisTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of protein catabolic processTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of tyrosine phosphorylation of STAT proteinTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
response to ethanolTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
vascular endothelial growth factor receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
ephrin receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
dendrite morphogenesisTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of peptidyl-tyrosine phosphorylationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
activated T cell proliferationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
modulation of chemical synaptic transmissionTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
T cell receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
leukocyte migrationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
detection of mechanical stimulus involved in sensory perception of painTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to hydrogen peroxideTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to transforming growth factor beta stimulusTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of protein targeting to membraneTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
dendritic spine maintenanceTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of protein localization to nucleusTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of glutamate receptor signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of oxidative stress-induced intrinsic apoptotic signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of dendritic spine maintenanceTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
response to amyloid-betaTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to amyloid-betaTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to L-glutamateTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cellular response to glycineTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of protein localization to membraneTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
regulation of calcium ion import across plasma membraneTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cysteine-type endopeptidase activityTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
innate immune responseTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cell differentiationTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cell surface receptor protein tyrosine kinase signaling pathwayTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
response to bacteriumCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
melanin biosynthetic process from tyrosineTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
eye pigment biosynthetic processTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
visual perceptionTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
cell population proliferationTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
response to UVTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
response to blue lightTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
response to vitamin DTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
melanin biosynthetic processTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
thymus developmentTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
response to cAMPTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
pigmentationTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
bicarbonate transportCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
detection of chemical stimulus involved in sensory perception of bitter tasteCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of synaptic transmission, GABAergicCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cellular pH reductionCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
neuron cellular homeostasisCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
regulation of chloride transportCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
regulation of intracellular pHCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
monoatomic ion transportSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
protein transportSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
peptide transportSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
dipeptide import across plasma membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
tripeptide import across plasma membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
proton transmembrane transportSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of cytokine production involved in immune responseLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of gene expressionLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of type II interferon productionLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of interleukin-17 productionLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of interleukin-4 productionLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of autophagyLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
response to muscle activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
neutral amino acid transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
isoleucine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-leucine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
methionine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
phenylalanine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
proline transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
tryptophan transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
tyrosine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
valine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
alanine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
cellular response to glucose starvationLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
response to hyperoxiaLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of glial cell proliferationLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
thyroid hormone transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
cellular response to lipopolysaccharideLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
amino acid import across plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
liver regenerationLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
transport across blood-brain barrierLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-histidine transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
cellular response to L-arginineLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-leucine import across plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-tryptophan transmembrane transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of vascular associated smooth muscle cell apoptotic processLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
positive regulation of L-leucine import across plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
amino acid transmembrane transportLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
response to hypoxiaCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
morphogenesis of an epitheliumCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
response to xenobiotic stimulusCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
response to testosteroneCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
secretionCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic metabolic processCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
negative regulation of gene expressionCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
bile acid and bile salt transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
bilirubin transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
heme catabolic processCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic export from cellCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
transmembrane transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
transepithelial transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
leukotriene transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
monoatomic anion transmembrane transportCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
transport across blood-brain barrierCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transport across blood-brain barrierCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
response to bacteriumCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
one-carbon metabolic processCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
[Information is prepared from geneontology information from the June-17-2024 release]

Molecular Functions (92)

Processvia Protein(s)Taxonomy
ATP bindingATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type xenobiotic transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
glucuronoside transmembrane transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type glutathione S-conjugate transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type bile acid transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ATP hydrolysis activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ATPase-coupled transmembrane transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ATPase-coupled inorganic anion transmembrane transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
icosanoid transmembrane transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type transporter activityATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
guanine nucleotide transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ATP bindingMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type xenobiotic transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
prostaglandin transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
urate transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
purine nucleotide transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type glutathione S-conjugate transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type bile acid transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
efflux transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
15-hydroxyprostaglandin dehydrogenase (NAD+) activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ATP hydrolysis activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
glutathione transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ATPase-coupled transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ATPase-coupled inorganic anion transmembrane transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type transporter activityMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
ATP bindingBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
ABC-type xenobiotic transporter activityBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
bile acid transmembrane transporter activityBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
canalicular bile acid transmembrane transporter activityBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
carbohydrate transmembrane transporter activityBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
ABC-type bile acid transporter activityBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
ATP hydrolysis activityBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
epidermal growth factor receptor activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
virus receptor activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
chromatin bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
double-stranded DNA bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
MAP kinase kinase kinase activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein tyrosine kinase activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
transmembrane signaling receptor activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
epidermal growth factor receptor activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
integrin bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
calmodulin bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ATP bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
enzyme bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
kinase bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein kinase bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein phosphatase bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein tyrosine kinase activator activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activator activityEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ubiquitin protein ligase bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
identical protein bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cadherin bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
actin filament bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ATPase bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
epidermal growth factor bindingEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
arylesterase activityCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
hydro-lyase activityCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
cyanamide hydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
arylesterase activityCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
cyanamide hydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
serine-type endopeptidase activityPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
protein bindingPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
phosphotyrosine residue bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
protein tyrosine kinase activityTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
non-membrane spanning protein tyrosine kinase activityTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
protein serine/threonine phosphatase activityTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
protein bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
ATP bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
phospholipase activator activityTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
protein kinase bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
protein phosphatase bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
SH2 domain bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
T cell receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
CD4 receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
CD8 receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
identical protein bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
phospholipase bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
ATPase bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
signaling receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
protein tyrosine kinase activityTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
non-membrane spanning protein tyrosine kinase activityTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
protein bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
ATP bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
phospholipase activator activityTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
enzyme bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
type 5 metabotropic glutamate receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
identical protein bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
alpha-tubulin bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
phospholipase bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
transmembrane transporter bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
metal ion bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
ephrin receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
tau protein bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
tau-protein kinase activityTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
growth factor receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
scaffold protein bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
disordered domain specific bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
signaling receptor bindingTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
nickel cation bindingCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
tyrosinase activityTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
copper ion bindingTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
protein bindingTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
identical protein bindingTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
protein homodimerization activityTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
protein bindingCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
G protein-coupled adenosine receptor activityAdenosine receptor A2aRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
proton-dependent oligopeptide secondary active transmembrane transporter activitySolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
peptide:proton symporter activitySolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
tripeptide transmembrane transporter activitySolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
dipeptide transmembrane transporter activitySolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
amino acid transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
aromatic amino acid transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
neutral L-amino acid transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-leucine transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-tryptophan transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
antiporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
thyroid hormone transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
peptide antigen bindingLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
L-amino acid transmembrane transporter activityLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
molecular function activator activityCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
protein bindingCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ATP bindingCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
organic anion transmembrane transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type xenobiotic transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
bilirubin transmembrane transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type glutathione S-conjugate transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ATP hydrolysis activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ATPase-coupled transmembrane transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
xenobiotic transmembrane transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ATPase-coupled inorganic anion transmembrane transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
ABC-type transporter activityCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
carbonate dehydratase activityCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
zinc ion bindingCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
[Information is prepared from geneontology information from the June-17-2024 release]

Ceullar Components (67)

Processvia Protein(s)Taxonomy
plasma membraneATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
basal plasma membraneATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
membraneATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 3Homo sapiens (human)
nucleolusMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
Golgi apparatusMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
platelet dense granule membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
external side of apical plasma membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneMultidrug resistance-associated protein 4Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
membraneCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 12Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
Golgi membraneBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
endosomeBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
cell surfaceBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
intercellular canaliculusBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
intracellular canaliculusBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
recycling endosomeBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
recycling endosome membraneBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
membraneBile salt export pumpHomo sapiens (human)
endosomeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
ruffle membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
Golgi membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
extracellular spaceEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
nucleusEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
endosomeEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
focal adhesionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cell surfaceEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
endosome membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cell junctionEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
clathrin-coated endocytic vesicle membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
early endosome membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
nuclear membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
membrane raftEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
perinuclear region of cytoplasmEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
multivesicular body, internal vesicle lumenEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
intracellular vesicleEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
protein-containing complexEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
receptor complexEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
Shc-EGFR complexEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
basal plasma membraneEpidermal growth factor receptorHomo sapiens (human)
cytosolCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeCarbonic anhydrase 1Homo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
cytosolCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
myelin sheathCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
apical part of cellCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
apical part of cellCarbonic anhydrase 2Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular regionPlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
extracellular spacePlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membranePlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomePlasma kallikreinHomo sapiens (human)
pericentriolar materialTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
immunological synapseTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
cytosolTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
membrane raftTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneTyrosine-protein kinase LckHomo sapiens (human)
membrane raftTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
dendriteTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
nucleusTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
mitochondrionTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
endosomeTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cytosolTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
actin filamentTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
postsynaptic densityTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
dendriteTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
perikaryonTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cell bodyTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
membrane raftTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
perinuclear region of cytoplasmTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
perinuclear endoplasmic reticulumTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
glial cell projectionTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
Schaffer collateral - CA1 synapseTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneTyrosine-protein kinase FynHomo sapiens (human)
cytosolCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
cytosolCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 3Homo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
lysosomeTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
Golgi-associated vesicleTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
melanosome membraneTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
melanosomeTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
intracellular membrane-bounded organelleTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
perinuclear region of cytoplasmTyrosinaseHomo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
rough endoplasmic reticulumCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi intermediate compartmentCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
Golgi apparatusCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
trans-Golgi networkCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
external side of plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
cell surfaceCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
transport vesicle membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
secretory granule membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
brush border membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
perinuclear region of cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 4Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular regionCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular spaceCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
cytosolCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular spaceCarbonic anhydrase 6Homo sapiens (human)
Golgi membraneAdenosine receptor A2aRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
mitochondrial matrixCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
mitochondrionCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
mitochondrionCarbonic anhydrase 5A, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 1 Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 1 Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
cytosolCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 7Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
brush borderSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneSolute carrier family 15 member 1Homo sapiens (human)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2A Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2A Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2BRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2BRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2CRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2CRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
lysosomal membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
cytosolLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
basal plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
microvillus membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
intracellular membrane-bounded organelleLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
extracellular exosomeLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
external side of apical plasma membraneLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
amino acid transport complexLarge neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1Homo sapiens (human)
nucleolusCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
membraneCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
microvillus membraneCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 9Homo sapiens (human)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2DRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 2DRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 3BRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 3BRattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
cell surfaceCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
intercellular canaliculusCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneCanalicular multispecific organic anion transporter 1Homo sapiens (human)
endoplasmic reticulum membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 3ARattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneGlutamate receptor ionotropic, NMDA 3ARattus norvegicus (Norway rat)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
membraneCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
basolateral plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
apical plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
plasma membraneCarbonic anhydrase 14Homo sapiens (human)
mitochondrionCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
mitochondrial matrixCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
mitochondrionCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
cytoplasmCarbonic anhydrase 5B, mitochondrialHomo sapiens (human)
[Information is prepared from geneontology information from the June-17-2024 release]

Bioassays (323)

Assay IDTitleYearJournalArticle
AID1346987P-glycoprotein substrates identified in KB-8-5-11 adenocarcinoma cell line, qHTS therapeutic library screen2019Molecular pharmacology, 11, Volume: 96, Issue:5
A High-Throughput Screen of a Library of Therapeutics Identifies Cytotoxic Substrates of P-glycoprotein.
AID1347154Primary screen GU AMC qHTS for Zika virus inhibitors2020Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 12-08, Volume: 117, Issue:49
Therapeutic candidates for the Zika virus identified by a high-throughput screen for Zika protease inhibitors.
AID1347101qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for BT-12 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1508630Primary qHTS for small molecule stabilizers of the endoplasmic reticulum resident proteome: Secreted ER Calcium Modulated Protein (SERCaMP) assay2021Cell reports, 04-27, Volume: 35, Issue:4
A target-agnostic screen identifies approved drugs to stabilize the endoplasmic reticulum-resident proteome.
AID1296008Cytotoxic Profiling of Annotated Libraries Using Quantitative High-Throughput Screening2020SLAS discovery : advancing life sciences R & D, 01, Volume: 25, Issue:1
Cytotoxic Profiling of Annotated and Diverse Chemical Libraries Using Quantitative High-Throughput Screening.
AID1347091qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for SJ-GBM2 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347089qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for TC32 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347082qHTS for Inhibitors of the Functional Ribonucleoprotein Complex (vRNP) of Lassa (LASV) Arenavirus: LASV Primary Screen - GLuc reporter signal2020Antiviral research, 01, Volume: 173A cell-based, infectious-free, platform to identify inhibitors of lassa virus ribonucleoprotein (vRNP) activity.
AID1347098qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for SK-N-SH cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347094qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for BT-37 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347083qHTS for Inhibitors of the Functional Ribonucleoprotein Complex (vRNP) of Lassa (LASV) Arenavirus: Viability assay - alamar blue signal for LASV Primary Screen2020Antiviral research, 01, Volume: 173A cell-based, infectious-free, platform to identify inhibitors of lassa virus ribonucleoprotein (vRNP) activity.
AID1347106qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for control Hh wild type fibroblast cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1745845Primary qHTS for Inhibitors of ATXN expression
AID1347096qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for U-2 OS cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347100qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for LAN-5 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347104qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for RD cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347097qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for Saos-2 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347086qHTS for Inhibitors of the Functional Ribonucleoprotein Complex (vRNP) of Lymphocytic Choriomeningitis Arenaviruses (LCMV): LCMV Primary Screen - GLuc reporter signal2020Antiviral research, 01, Volume: 173A cell-based, infectious-free, platform to identify inhibitors of lassa virus ribonucleoprotein (vRNP) activity.
AID1347108qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for Rh41 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347103qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for OHS-50 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347107qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for Rh30 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1346986P-glycoprotein substrates identified in KB-3-1 adenocarcinoma cell line, qHTS therapeutic library screen2019Molecular pharmacology, 11, Volume: 96, Issue:5
A High-Throughput Screen of a Library of Therapeutics Identifies Cytotoxic Substrates of P-glycoprotein.
AID1347095qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for NB-EBc1 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347093qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for SK-N-MC cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347102qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for Rh18 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347090qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for DAOY cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347105qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for MG 63 (6-TG R) cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347099qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for NB1643 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID1347092qHTS of pediatric cancer cell lines to identify multiple opportunities for drug repurposing: Primary screen for A673 cells2018Oncotarget, Jan-12, Volume: 9, Issue:4
Quantitative high-throughput phenotypic screening of pediatric cancer cell lines identifies multiple opportunities for drug repurposing.
AID588497High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Botulinum neurotoxin light chain F protease, MLPCN compound set2010Current protocols in cytometry, Oct, Volume: Chapter 13Microsphere-based flow cytometry protease assays for use in protease activity detection and high-throughput screening.
AID588497High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Botulinum neurotoxin light chain F protease, MLPCN compound set2006Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology, May, Volume: 69, Issue:5
Microsphere-based protease assays and screening application for lethal factor and factor Xa.
AID588497High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Botulinum neurotoxin light chain F protease, MLPCN compound set2010Assay and drug development technologies, Feb, Volume: 8, Issue:1
High-throughput multiplex flow cytometry screening for botulinum neurotoxin type a light chain protease inhibitors.
AID588501High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Lethal Factor Protease, MLPCN compound set2010Current protocols in cytometry, Oct, Volume: Chapter 13Microsphere-based flow cytometry protease assays for use in protease activity detection and high-throughput screening.
AID588501High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Lethal Factor Protease, MLPCN compound set2006Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology, May, Volume: 69, Issue:5
Microsphere-based protease assays and screening application for lethal factor and factor Xa.
AID588501High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Lethal Factor Protease, MLPCN compound set2010Assay and drug development technologies, Feb, Volume: 8, Issue:1
High-throughput multiplex flow cytometry screening for botulinum neurotoxin type a light chain protease inhibitors.
AID588499High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Botulinum neurotoxin light chain A protease, MLPCN compound set2010Current protocols in cytometry, Oct, Volume: Chapter 13Microsphere-based flow cytometry protease assays for use in protease activity detection and high-throughput screening.
AID588499High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Botulinum neurotoxin light chain A protease, MLPCN compound set2006Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology, May, Volume: 69, Issue:5
Microsphere-based protease assays and screening application for lethal factor and factor Xa.
AID588499High-throughput multiplex microsphere screening for inhibitors of toxin protease, specifically Botulinum neurotoxin light chain A protease, MLPCN compound set2010Assay and drug development technologies, Feb, Volume: 8, Issue:1
High-throughput multiplex flow cytometry screening for botulinum neurotoxin type a light chain protease inhibitors.
AID651635Viability Counterscreen for Primary qHTS for Inhibitors of ATXN expression
AID504749qHTS profiling for inhibitors of Plasmodium falciparum proliferation2011Science (New York, N.Y.), Aug-05, Volume: 333, Issue:6043
Chemical genomic profiling for antimalarial therapies, response signatures, and molecular targets.
AID504810Antagonists of the Thyroid Stimulating Hormone Receptor: HTS campaign2010Endocrinology, Jul, Volume: 151, Issue:7
A small molecule inverse agonist for the human thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor.
AID1347045Natriuretic polypeptide receptor (hNpr1) antagonism - Pilot counterscreen GloSensor control cell line2019Science translational medicine, 07-10, Volume: 11, Issue:500
Inhibition of natriuretic peptide receptor 1 reduces itch in mice.
AID504836Inducers of the Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Response (ERSR) in human glioma: Validation2002The Journal of biological chemistry, Apr-19, Volume: 277, Issue:16
Sustained ER Ca2+ depletion suppresses protein synthesis and induces activation-enhanced cell death in mast cells.
AID504812Inverse Agonists of the Thyroid Stimulating Hormone Receptor: HTS campaign2010Endocrinology, Jul, Volume: 151, Issue:7
A small molecule inverse agonist for the human thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor.
AID588378qHTS for Inhibitors of ATXN expression: Validation
AID1347050Natriuretic polypeptide receptor (hNpr2) antagonism - Pilot subtype selectivity assay2019Science translational medicine, 07-10, Volume: 11, Issue:500
Inhibition of natriuretic peptide receptor 1 reduces itch in mice.
AID1347049Natriuretic polypeptide receptor (hNpr1) antagonism - Pilot screen2019Science translational medicine, 07-10, Volume: 11, Issue:500
Inhibition of natriuretic peptide receptor 1 reduces itch in mice.
AID588349qHTS for Inhibitors of ATXN expression: Validation of Cytotoxic Assay
AID1079944Benign tumor, proven histopathologically. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'T.BEN' in source]
AID14434Peak plasma concentration expresses the ability of compound for the release of dopamine in the plasma of mouse after oral administration of 0.05 mmol/kg1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID1079940Granulomatous liver disease, proven histopathologically. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'GRAN' in source]
AID1194155Antioxidant activity assessed as rate constant for alkoxyl radical scavenging activity using DMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID409990Activation of Methanosarcina thermophila Zinc(2)-derived gamma-class CA by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase assay2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the archaeal beta-class (Cab) and gamma-class (Cam) carbonic anhydrases with amino acids and amines.
AID1329683Antiakinetic activity in 6-OHDA induced unilaterally lesioned Wistar rat Parkinson's disease model assessed as increase in double contacts at 10 mg/kg, ip qd administered 5 days prior to 6-OHDA-challenge measured on day 11 post 1.5 hr of last dosage by cy2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, 01-01, Volume: 25, Issue:1
A new target for Parkinson's disease: Small molecule SERCA activator CDN1163 ameliorates dyskinesia in 6-OHDA-lesioned rats.
AID588210Human drug-induced liver injury (DILI) modelling dataset from Ekins et al2010Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Dec, Volume: 38, Issue:12
A predictive ligand-based Bayesian model for human drug-induced liver injury.
AID1079947Comments (NB not yet translated). [column 'COMMENTAIRES' in source]
AID1398534Inhibition of LAT1-mediated [14C]-L-leucine uptake in human MCF7 cells after 5 mins by liquid scintillation counting method
AID1751483Antibiofilm activity against Staphylococcus aureus assessed as biofilm formation at 100 uM measured by crystal violet staining based microplate reader assay2021Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 09-15, Volume: 48Discovery of non-proteinogenic amino acids inhibiting biofilm formation by S. aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus.
AID318346Activation of human recombinant CA12 catalytic domain by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Apr-01, Volume: 16, Issue:7
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human tumor-associated isozymes IX and XII with amino acids and amines.
AID464321Activation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae recombinant Nce103p by stopped flow CO2 hydration method2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 20, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase from the pathogenic yeast Candida glabrata with amines and amino acids.
AID286915Antioxidant activity assessed as decrease in SOD activity in Wistar rat plasma at 184.79 mg/kg, po after 1.5 hrs2007Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-17, Volume: 50, Issue:10
Synthesis and study of L-dopa-glutathione codrugs as new anti-Parkinson agents with free radical scavenging properties.
AID437148Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse assessed as time elapsed until release of forepaw from bar at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge measured after 180 mins by bar test2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID307898Activation of human recombinant CA6 by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Aug-01, Volume: 15, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: the first activation study of the human secretory isoform VI with amino acids and amines.
AID1079942Steatosis, proven histopathologically. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'STEAT' in source]
AID26576pKa value of the compound. (extrapolated values)1998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID411017Tmax in Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as L-dopa level at 0.332 mmol/kg, po2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID1194161Antioxidant activity assessed as rate constant for singlet oxygen radical scavenging activity using 4-HO-TEMP spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID1131897Postural effect on caudectomized Swiss albino mouse assessed as time duration of asymmetric posture at 858 mg/kg, ip1979Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov, Volume: 22, Issue:11
Structure--activity relationships of n-substituted dopamine and 2-amino-6,7-dihydroxy-1,2,3,4-tetrahydronaphthalene analogues: behavioral effects in lesioned and reserpinized mice.
AID588211Literature-mined compound from Fourches et al multi-species drug-induced liver injury (DILI) dataset, effect in humans2010Chemical research in toxicology, Jan, Volume: 23, Issue:1
Cheminformatics analysis of assertions mined from literature that describe drug-induced liver injury in different species.
AID1329682Antiakinetic activity in 6-OHDA induced unilaterally lesioned Wistar rat Parkinson's disease model assessed as restoration of 6-OHDA-induced decrease in number of adjusting steps in contralateral forelimb administered ip qd for 5 days prior to 6-OHDA-chal2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, 01-01, Volume: 25, Issue:1
A new target for Parkinson's disease: Small molecule SERCA activator CDN1163 ameliorates dyskinesia in 6-OHDA-lesioned rats.
AID1594145Inhibition of Escherichia coli GroEL expressed in Escherichia coli DH5alpha/Escherichia coli GroES expressed in Escherichia coli BL21 (DE3) assessed as reduction in GroEL/GroES-mediated denatured rhodanese refolding by measuring rhodanese enzyme activity 2019Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 05-01, Volume: 29, Issue:9
HSP60/10 chaperonin systems are inhibited by a variety of approved drugs, natural products, and known bioactive molecules.
AID725227Activation of Sulfurihydrogenibium yellowstonense recombinant CA by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2013Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Feb-15, Volume: 23, Issue:4
The extremo-α-carbonic anhydrase (CA) from Sulfurihydrogenibium azorense, the fastest CA known, is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID548960Antioxidant activity of the compound assessed as reducing activity of DPPH at 0.1 mM after 20 mins2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Does conjugation of antioxidants improve their antioxidative/anti-inflammatory potential?
AID1079936Choleostatic liver toxicity, either proven histopathologically or where the ratio of maximal ALT or AST activity above normal to that of Alkaline Phosphatase is < 2 (see ACUTE). Value is number of references indexed. [column 'CHOLE' in source]
AID540211Fraction unbound in human after iv administration2008Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Jul, Volume: 36, Issue:7
Trend analysis of a database of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters in humans for 670 drug compounds.
AID437149Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge by bar test relative to haloperidol control2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID496828Antimicrobial activity against Leishmania donovani2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID540216Clearance in dog after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID496824Antimicrobial activity against Toxoplasma gondii2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID481446Effective permeability across human jejunum2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-13, Volume: 53, Issue:9
How well can the Caco-2/Madin-Darby canine kidney models predict effective human jejunal permeability?
AID1079941Liver damage due to vascular disease: peliosis hepatitis, hepatic veno-occlusive disease, Budd-Chiari syndrome. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'VASC' in source]
AID414331Activation of yeast recombinant CA by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2009Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-15, Volume: 19, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase Nce103 from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae with amines and amino acids.
AID14292Peak plasma concentration expresses the ability of compound for the release of L-Dopa in the plasma of mouse after oral administration of 0.05 mmol/kg1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID21264Effective permeability measured in human.1998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID511169Antiparkinsonian activity in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned Wistar rat assessed as number of rotation per 10 mins at 12.5 mg/kg, ip2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Sep, Volume: 45, Issue:9
Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of L-dopa amide derivatives as potential prodrugs for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
AID268622Activation of mouse recombinant CA13 by CO2 hydrase method2006Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 16, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of isozyme XIII with amino acids and amines.
AID24755Time of maximum L-Dopa plasma concentration was measured in mouse1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID497005Antimicrobial activity against Pneumocystis carinii2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID411026Antiparkinson activity in Wistar rat striatum assessed as dopamine levels per mg of tissue at 1 umol/kg, icv after 1 week2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID1079934Highest frequency of acute liver toxicity observed during clinical trials, expressed as a percentage. [column '% AIGUE' in source]
AID1079932Highest frequency of moderate liver toxicity observed during clinical trials, expressed as a percentage. [column '% BIOL' in source]
AID725229Activation of human recombinant CA2 by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2013Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Feb-15, Volume: 23, Issue:4
The extremo-α-carbonic anhydrase (CA) from Sulfurihydrogenibium azorense, the fastest CA known, is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID409992Activation of Methanosarcina thermophila cobalt(2)-derived gamma-class CA by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase assay2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the archaeal beta-class (Cab) and gamma-class (Cam) carbonic anhydrases with amino acids and amines.
AID1851449Neuroprotective effect in 6-OHDA-induced lesioned mouse model of Parkinson's disease assessed as decrease in time to turn at 80 mg/kg/day, po administered for 7 days measured by Pole test2022Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 10-15, Volume: 74In vitro and in vivo neuroprotective effect of novel mPGES-1 inhibitor in animal model of Parkinson's disease.
AID24202Distribution coefficient in octanol/water at pH 5.51998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID606413Antiparkinsonian effect against MPTP-induced hypokinesia in Wistar rat assessed as number of upright postures at 10 mg/kg, po administered 30 days post 20 mg/kg, ip MPTP challenge measured on 30th day 2 hrs post compound administration for 2 mins (Rvb = 12011Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-09, Volume: 54, Issue:11
Highly potent activity of (1R,2R,6S)-3-methyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl)cyclohex-3-ene-1,2-diol in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID24420Partition coefficient (logP)1998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID1808089Stability of compound in mini gut model assessed as half life by LC-MS analysis2021Journal of medicinal chemistry, 12-09, Volume: 64, Issue:23
Searching for New Microbiome-Targeted Therapeutics through a Drug Repurposing Approach.
AID365828Activation of human recombinant CA2 at 10 uM by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 18, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the human cytosolic isozyme III and membrane-associated isoform IV with amino acids and amines.
AID1398538Half-life in human in presence of COMT inhibitor entacapone
AID481440Dissociation constant, pKa of the compound2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-13, Volume: 53, Issue:9
How well can the Caco-2/Madin-Darby canine kidney models predict effective human jejunal permeability?
AID1079937Severe hepatitis, defined as possibly life-threatening liver failure or through clinical observations. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'MASS' in source]
AID496819Antimicrobial activity against Plasmodium falciparum2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID1813180Inhibition of melanin production in zebra fish assessed reduction in melanin level in eyes at 25 to 100 uM measured 48 hrs post fertilization2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID135327BBB penetration classification2000Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-01, Volume: 43, Issue:11
Predicting blood-brain barrier permeation from three-dimensional molecular structure.
AID606409Antiparkinsonian effect against MPTP-induced hypokinesia in Wistar rat assessed as time of locomotory activity at 10 mg/kg, po administered 30 days post 20 mg/kg, ip MPTP challenge measured on 30th day 2 hrs post compound administration for 2 mins (Rvb = 2011Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-09, Volume: 54, Issue:11
Highly potent activity of (1R,2R,6S)-3-methyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl)cyclohex-3-ene-1,2-diol in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID1451998Toxicity in 6-OHDA induced parkinsonian motor deficit Sprague-Dawley rat model assessed as induction of dyskinesia at 20 mg/kg, ip2017Journal of medicinal chemistry, 10-26, Volume: 60, Issue:20
Discovery, Structure-Activity Relationship, and Antiparkinsonian Effect of a Potent and Brain-Penetrant Chemical Series of Positive Allosteric Modulators of Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 4.
AID1473738Inhibition of human BSEP overexpressed in Sf9 cell membrane vesicles assessed as uptake of [3H]-taurocholate in presence of ATP measured after 15 to 20 mins by membrane vesicle transport assay2013Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, Nov, Volume: 136, Issue:1
A multifactorial approach to hepatobiliary transporter assessment enables improved therapeutic compound development.
AID1813153Protac activity at CRBN E3 ubiquitin ligase/tyrosinase in human A-375 cells assessed as induction of tyrosinase degradation at 50 uM measured after 24 hrs by immunoblotting analysis2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID437147Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse assessed as time elapsed until release of forepaw from bar at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge measured after 150 mins by bar test2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID1194153Antioxidant activity assessed as rate constant for superoxide anion radical scavenging activity using CYPMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID691715Activity of Sulfurihydrogenibium yellowstonense YO3AOP1 recombinant CA expressed in Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) after 15 mins by phenol red staining based stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2012Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Oct-15, Volume: 22, Issue:20
The first activation study of a bacterial carbonic anhydrase (CA). The thermostable α-CA from Sulfurihydrogenibium yellowstonense YO3AOP1 is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID14291Peak plasma concentration expresses the ability of compound for the release of L-Dopa in the plasma of monkey after oral administration of 0.05 mmol/kg1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID548958Inhibition of soybean lipoxygenase at 0.05 mM2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Does conjugation of antioxidants improve their antioxidative/anti-inflammatory potential?
AID1823715Neuroprotective activity in MPTP/probenecid -induced C57BL/6 mouse model of Parkinson's disease at 1 to 2 mg/kg, po pretreated with MPTP/probenecid for 32 days followed by compound addition for next 20 days and measured after 52 to 54 days post MPTP chall
AID588209Literature-mined public compounds from Greene et al multi-species hepatotoxicity modelling dataset2010Chemical research in toxicology, Jul-19, Volume: 23, Issue:7
Developing structure-activity relationships for the prediction of hepatotoxicity.
AID481442Transcellular permeability at pH 6.5 calculated from in vitro P app values in Caco-2 and/or MDCK cells2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-13, Volume: 53, Issue:9
How well can the Caco-2/Madin-Darby canine kidney models predict effective human jejunal permeability?
AID496820Antimicrobial activity against Trypanosoma brucei2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID540214Clearance in rat after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID515610Anxiolytic-like activity in Wistar rat assessed as ambulatory activity at 0.0149 uM/kg, icv by open field test2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Oct-01, Volume: 18, Issue:19
Novel imidazoline compounds as partial or full agonists of D2-like dopamine receptors inspired by I2-imidazoline binding sites ligand 2-BFI.
AID1194158Antioxidant activity assessed as methyl radical scavenging activity by measuring relative rate constant (kAOx/kST ratio) using DMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID361981Membrane permeability by PAMPA in presence of 20% 1-propanol2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Aug-28, Volume: 51, Issue:16
Toward an optimal blood-brain barrier shuttle by synthesis and evaluation of peptide libraries.
AID496825Antimicrobial activity against Leishmania mexicana2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID540215Volume of distribution at steady state in rat after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID511174Antiparkinsonian activity in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned Wistar rat assessed as area under curve measured as number of rotation per 10 mins at 12.5 mg/kg, po2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Sep, Volume: 45, Issue:9
Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of L-dopa amide derivatives as potential prodrugs for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
AID540219Volume of distribution at steady state in monkey after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID496818Antimicrobial activity against Trypanosoma brucei brucei2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID1079931Moderate liver toxicity, defined via clinical-chemistry results: ALT or AST serum activity 6 times the normal upper limit (N) or alkaline phosphatase serum activity of 1.7 N. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'BIOL' in source]
AID1150387Central dopaminergic activity in 6-OH-DA-lesioned specific pathogen-free Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as induction of rotational behavior measured as total time at 15 mg/kg, ip1976Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan, Volume: 19, Issue:1
Aporphines. 14 Dopaminergic and antinociceptive activity of aporphine derivatives. Synthesis of 10-hydroxyaporphines and 10-hydroxy-N-n-propylnoraporphine.
AID496826Antimicrobial activity against Entamoeba histolytica2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID458784Activation of Candida albicans beta-carbonic anhydrase Nce103 by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Feb, Volume: 18, Issue:3
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrases from the pathogenic fungi Candida albicans and Cryptococcus neoformans with amines and amino acids.
AID481439Absolute bioavailability in human2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-13, Volume: 53, Issue:9
How well can the Caco-2/Madin-Darby canine kidney models predict effective human jejunal permeability?
AID437146Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse assessed as time elapsed until release of forepaw from bar at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge measured after 120 mins by bar test2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID691713Activity of human recombinant CA1 cytosolic isoform after 15 mins by phenol red staining based stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2012Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Oct-15, Volume: 22, Issue:20
The first activation study of a bacterial carbonic anhydrase (CA). The thermostable α-CA from Sulfurihydrogenibium yellowstonense YO3AOP1 is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID540221Volume of distribution at steady state in human after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID1079946Presence of at least one case with successful reintroduction. [column 'REINT' in source]
AID681145TP_TRANSPORTER: uptake in Xenopus laevis oocytes2002Genomics, Jan, Volume: 79, Issue:1
The human T-type amino acid transporter-1: characterization, gene organization, and chromosomal location.
AID1452009Toxicity in 6-OHDA induced parkinsonian motor deficit Sprague-Dawley rat model assessed as induction of overacting rearing behavior at 20 mg/kg, ip2017Journal of medicinal chemistry, 10-26, Volume: 60, Issue:20
Discovery, Structure-Activity Relationship, and Antiparkinsonian Effect of a Potent and Brain-Penetrant Chemical Series of Positive Allosteric Modulators of Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 4.
AID361979Membrane permeability by PAMPA2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Aug-28, Volume: 51, Issue:16
Toward an optimal blood-brain barrier shuttle by synthesis and evaluation of peptide libraries.
AID1331205Activation of recombinant Methanosarcina thermophila gamma carbonic anhydrase at 10 uM incubated for 15 mins prior to testing by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 01-01, Volume: 27, Issue:1
Burkholderia pseudomallei γ-carbonic anhydrase is strongly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID1398531Stability in 75% rat plasma assessed as parent compound remaining after 6 hrs by HPLC analysis
AID536344Toxicity in Callithrix jacchus assessed as induction of dyskinesia at 12 mg/kg, po measured for 10 mins every 30 mins over 6 hrs2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov-25, Volume: 53, Issue:22
In vivo characterization of a dual adenosine A2A/A1 receptor antagonist in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID1813171Binding affinity to mushroom tyrosinase assessed as dissociation constant2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID588213Literature-mined compound from Fourches et al multi-species drug-induced liver injury (DILI) dataset, effect in non-rodents2010Chemical research in toxicology, Jan, Volume: 23, Issue:1
Cheminformatics analysis of assertions mined from literature that describe drug-induced liver injury in different species.
AID1331203Activation of recombinant human carbonic anhydrase 1 at 10 uM incubated for 15 mins prior to testing by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 01-01, Volume: 27, Issue:1
Burkholderia pseudomallei γ-carbonic anhydrase is strongly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID12234881-Octanol-water distribution coefficient, log D of the compound at pH 7.42012Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Feb, Volume: 40, Issue:2
Predicting phenolic acid absorption in Caco-2 cells: a theoretical permeability model and mechanistic study.
AID1398537Half-life in human in presence of AADC inhibitor carbidopa
AID1194160Antioxidant activity assessed as singlet oxygen radical scavenging activity by measuring relative rate constant (kAOx/kST ratio) using 4-HO-TEMP spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID1329687Antiakinetic activity in 6-OHDA induced unilaterally lesioned Wistar rat Parkinson's disease model assessed as reduction in 6-OHDA-induced increase in initiation time to move towards plane surface administered ip qd for 5 days prior to 6-OHDA-challenge me2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, 01-01, Volume: 25, Issue:1
A new target for Parkinson's disease: Small molecule SERCA activator CDN1163 ameliorates dyskinesia in 6-OHDA-lesioned rats.
AID414330Activation of Methanothermobacter thermautotrophicus recombinant Cab by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2009Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-15, Volume: 19, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase Nce103 from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae with amines and amino acids.
AID1473739Inhibition of human MRP2 overexpressed in Sf9 cell membrane vesicles assessed as uptake of [3H]-estradiol-17beta-D-glucuronide in presence of ATP and GSH measured after 20 mins by membrane vesicle transport assay2013Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, Nov, Volume: 136, Issue:1
A multifactorial approach to hepatobiliary transporter assessment enables improved therapeutic compound development.
AID24756Time of maximum L-Dopa plasma concentration was measured in mouse ofter oral administration of the compound1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID1751482Antibacterial activity in Staphylococcus aureus assessed as bacterial growth rate at 100 uM measured by UV absorbance based analysis2021Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 09-15, Volume: 48Discovery of non-proteinogenic amino acids inhibiting biofilm formation by S. aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus.
AID1331204Activation of recombinant human carbonic anhydrase 2 at 10 uM incubated for 15 mins prior to testing by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 01-01, Volume: 27, Issue:1
Burkholderia pseudomallei γ-carbonic anhydrase is strongly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID24204Distribution coefficient in octanol/water at pH 7.41998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID458014Aqueous solubility after 15 mins by shake flask method2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-01, Volume: 18, Issue:5
Design, synthesis, and preliminary pharmacological evaluation of new imidazolinones as L-DOPA prodrugs.
AID1079943Malignant tumor, proven histopathologically. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'T.MAL' in source]
AID458787Activation of Cryptococcus neoformans beta-carbonic anhydrase Can2 by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Feb, Volume: 18, Issue:3
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrases from the pathogenic fungi Candida albicans and Cryptococcus neoformans with amines and amino acids.
AID1131850Postural effect on caudectomized Swiss albino mouse assessed as latency to onset time of asymmetric postural effect at 858 mg/kg, ip1979Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov, Volume: 22, Issue:11
Structure--activity relationships of n-substituted dopamine and 2-amino-6,7-dihydroxy-1,2,3,4-tetrahydronaphthalene analogues: behavioral effects in lesioned and reserpinized mice.
AID268620Activation of human recombinant CA1 by CO2 hydrase assay2006Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 16, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of isozyme XIII with amino acids and amines.
AID464322Activation of Candida glabrata recombinant carbonic anhydrase by stopped flow CO2 hydration method2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 20, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase from the pathogenic yeast Candida glabrata with amines and amino acids.
AID1397319Activation of human CA1 by stopped-flow CO2 hydration assay
AID606411Antiparkinsonian effect against MPTP-induced hypokinesia in Wistar rat assessed as movement speed at 10 mg/kg, po administered 30 days post 20 mg/kg, ip MPTP challenge measured on 30th day 2 hrs post compound administration for 2 mins (Rvb = 3.0 +/- 0.2 c2011Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-09, Volume: 54, Issue:11
Highly potent activity of (1R,2R,6S)-3-methyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl)cyclohex-3-ene-1,2-diol in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID464319Activation of human recombinant carbonic anhydrase isoenzyme 2 by stopped flow CO2 hydration method2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 20, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase from the pathogenic yeast Candida glabrata with amines and amino acids.
AID1079945Animal toxicity known. [column 'TOXIC' in source]
AID1079939Cirrhosis, proven histopathologically. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'CIRRH' in source]
AID496827Antimicrobial activity against Leishmania amazonensis2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID977599Inhibition of sodium fluorescein uptake in OATP1B1-transfected CHO cells at an equimolar substrate-inhibitor concentration of 10 uM2013Molecular pharmacology, Jun, Volume: 83, Issue:6
Structure-based identification of OATP1B1/3 inhibitors.
AID1813181Inhibition of melanin production in zebra fish assessed reduction in melanin level in abdomen at 25 to 100 uM measured 48 hrs post fertilization2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID291067Activation of of human recombinant CA14 by CO2 hydrase assay2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 17, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human isoforms VII (cytosolic) and XIV (transmembrane) with amino acids and amines.
AID291061Activation of human recombinant CA1 by CO2 hydrase assay2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 17, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human isoforms VII (cytosolic) and XIV (transmembrane) with amino acids and amines.
AID462832Activation of Stylophora pistillata carbonic anhydrase STPCA by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators. The first activation study of a coral secretory isoform with amino acids and amines.
AID365829Activation of human recombinant CA3 at 10 uM by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 18, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the human cytosolic isozyme III and membrane-associated isoform IV with amino acids and amines.
AID548957Inhibition of soybean lipoxygenase at 0.1 mM2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Does conjugation of antioxidants improve their antioxidative/anti-inflammatory potential?
AID458015Octanol-water partition coefficient, log P at pH 7.4 by HPLC2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-01, Volume: 18, Issue:5
Design, synthesis, and preliminary pharmacological evaluation of new imidazolinones as L-DOPA prodrugs.
AID69555Inhibitory concentration of EGF dependent autophosphorylation of epidermal growth factor receptor kinase1989Journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 32, Issue:10
Tyrphostins I: synthesis and biological activity of protein tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
AID15711Calculated partition coefficient (clogP)1998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID414329Activation of human recombinant CA2 by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2009Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-15, Volume: 19, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase Nce103 from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae with amines and amino acids.
AID548959Antioxidant activity against AAPH-induced lipid peroxidation assessed as inhibition of conjugated diene hydroperoxide production at 0.1 mM by UV spectrophotometry2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Does conjugation of antioxidants improve their antioxidative/anti-inflammatory potential?
AID1150386Central dopaminergic activity in 6-OH-DA-lesioned specific pathogen-free Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as induction of rotational behavior measured as total time at 5 mg/kg, ip1976Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan, Volume: 19, Issue:1
Aporphines. 14 Dopaminergic and antinociceptive activity of aporphine derivatives. Synthesis of 10-hydroxyaporphines and 10-hydroxy-N-n-propylnoraporphine.
AID1398532Half life in 10% rat liver homogenate by HPLC method
AID286916Pro-oxidant effect on Fe(2+)/H2O2-induced deoxyribose degradation relative to control2007Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-17, Volume: 50, Issue:10
Synthesis and study of L-dopa-glutathione codrugs as new anti-Parkinson agents with free radical scavenging properties.
AID286914Antioxidant activity assessed as increase in glutathione peroxidase activity in Wistar rat plasma at 184.79 mg/kg, po after 1.5 hrs2007Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-17, Volume: 50, Issue:10
Synthesis and study of L-dopa-glutathione codrugs as new anti-Parkinson agents with free radical scavenging properties.
AID515611Anxiolytic-like activity in Wistar rat assessed as rearing activity at 0.0149 uM/kg, icv by open field test2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Oct-01, Volume: 18, Issue:19
Novel imidazoline compounds as partial or full agonists of D2-like dopamine receptors inspired by I2-imidazoline binding sites ligand 2-BFI.
AID409947Inhibition of human recombinant MAOB at 1 mM by fluorimetric method2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov-13, Volume: 51, Issue:21
Quantitative structure-activity relationship and complex network approach to monoamine oxidase A and B inhibitors.
AID977602Inhibition of sodium fluorescein uptake in OATP1B3-transfected CHO cells at an equimolar substrate-inhibitor concentration of 10 uM2013Molecular pharmacology, Jun, Volume: 83, Issue:6
Structure-based identification of OATP1B1/3 inhibitors.
AID291063Activation of human recombinant CA2 by CO2 hydrase assay2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 17, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human isoforms VII (cytosolic) and XIV (transmembrane) with amino acids and amines.
AID287510Activity of mushroom tyrosinase2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-01, Volume: 15, Issue:5
Modulating effects of a novel skin-lightening agent, alpha-lipoic acid derivative, on melanin production by the formation of DOPA conjugate products.
AID1194150Antioxidant activity assessed as hydroxyl radical scavenging activity by measuring relative rate constant (kAOx/kST ratio) using DMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID1473741Inhibition of human MRP4 overexpressed in Sf9 cell membrane vesicles assessed as uptake of [3H]-estradiol-17beta-D-glucuronide in presence of ATP and GSH measured after 20 mins by membrane vesicle transport assay2013Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, Nov, Volume: 136, Issue:1
A multifactorial approach to hepatobiliary transporter assessment enables improved therapeutic compound development.
AID437145Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse assessed as time elapsed until release of forepaw from bar at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge measured after 90 mins by bar test2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID411025Antiparkinson activity in Wistar rat striatum assessed as L-dopa levels per mg of tissue at 1 umol/kg, icv after 1 week2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID1194159Antioxidant activity assessed as rate constant for methyl radical scavenging activity using DMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID1194154Antioxidant activity assessed as alkoxyl radical scavenging activity by measuring relative rate constant (kAOx/kST ratio) using DMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID681608TP_TRANSPORTER: inhibition of Gly-Sar uptake (Gly-Sar: 20 uM) in PEPT1-expressing CHO cells1999Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Mar, Volume: 88, Issue:3
CHO/hPEPT1 cells overexpressing the human peptide transporter (hPEPT1) as an alternative in vitro model for peptidomimetic drugs.
AID1079933Acute liver toxicity defined via clinical observations and clear clinical-chemistry results: serum ALT or AST activity > 6 N or serum alkaline phosphatases activity > 1.7 N. This category includes cytolytic, choleostatic and mixed liver toxicity. Value is
AID268621Activation of human recombinant CA2 by CO2 hydrase assay2006Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 16, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of isozyme XIII with amino acids and amines.
AID540213Half life in human after iv administration2008Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Jul, Volume: 36, Issue:7
Trend analysis of a database of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters in humans for 670 drug compounds.
AID365830Activation of human recombinant truncated CA4 at 10 uM by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 18, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the human cytosolic isozyme III and membrane-associated isoform IV with amino acids and amines.
AID496831Antimicrobial activity against Cryptosporidium parvum2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID592681Apparent permeability across human Caco2 cell membrane after 2 hrs by LC-MS/MS analysis2011Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Apr-15, Volume: 19, Issue:8
QSAR-based permeability model for drug-like compounds.
AID411019AUC in Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as L-dopa level at 0.332 mmol/kg, po2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID409986Activation of human recombinant CA2 by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase assay2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the archaeal beta-class (Cab) and gamma-class (Cam) carbonic anhydrases with amino acids and amines.
AID1194156Antioxidant activity assessed as peroxyl radical scavenging activity by measuring relative rate constant (kAOx/kST ratio) using CYPMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID14293Peak plasma concentration expresses the ability of compound for the release of L-Dopa in the plasma of rat after oral administration of 0.05 mmol/kg1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID386623Inhibition of 4-(4-(dimethylamino)styryl)-N-methylpyridinium uptake at human OCT1 expressed in HEK293 cells at 100 uM by confocal microscopy2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct-09, Volume: 51, Issue:19
Structural requirements for drug inhibition of the liver specific human organic cation transport protein 1.
AID1813164Inhibition of melanin production in human A-375 cells assessed reduction in melanin level at 100 uM measured after 24 hrs by UV-visible absorption spectrophotometric method2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID540212Mean residence time in human after iv administration2008Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Jul, Volume: 36, Issue:7
Trend analysis of a database of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters in humans for 670 drug compounds.
AID540209Volume of distribution at steady state in human after iv administration2008Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Jul, Volume: 36, Issue:7
Trend analysis of a database of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters in humans for 670 drug compounds.
AID425653Renal clearance in human2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Aug-13, Volume: 52, Issue:15
Physicochemical determinants of human renal clearance.
AID681113TP_TRANSPORTER: inhibition of L-tryptophan uptake in Xenopus laevis oocytes2001The Journal of biological chemistry, May-18, Volume: 276, Issue:20
Expression cloning of a Na+-independent aromatic amino acid transporter with structural similarity to H+/monocarboxylate transporters.
AID291065Activation of human recombinant CA7 by CO2 hydrase assay2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 17, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human isoforms VII (cytosolic) and XIV (transmembrane) with amino acids and amines.
AID1397321Activation of Leishmania donovani chagasi CA preincubated for 15 mins followed by CO2 addition by stopped-flow assay
AID1813182Inhibition of melanin production in zebra fish assessed reduction in melanin level in tail at 25 to 100 uM measured 48 hrs post fertilization2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID437143Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse assessed as time elapsed until release of forepaw from bar at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge measured after 60 mins by bar test2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID1079948Times to onset, minimal and maximal, observed in the indexed observations. [column 'DELAI' in source]
AID521220Inhibition of neurosphere proliferation of mouse neural precursor cells by MTT assay2007Nature chemical biology, May, Volume: 3, Issue:5
Chemical genetics reveals a complex functional ground state of neural stem cells.
AID1079938Chronic liver disease either proven histopathologically, or through a chonic elevation of serum amino-transferase activity after 6 months. Value is number of references indexed. [column 'CHRON' in source]
AID1079949Proposed mechanism(s) of liver damage. [column 'MEC' in source]
AID60994Growth inhibition of Don-6 cell lines at 1.0 mM concentration1981Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun, Volume: 24, Issue:6
Synthesis and antitumor activity of cysteinyl-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanines and related compounds.
AID496823Antimicrobial activity against Trichomonas vaginalis2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID481444Octanol-water partition coefficient, log P of the compound2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-13, Volume: 53, Issue:9
How well can the Caco-2/Madin-Darby canine kidney models predict effective human jejunal permeability?
AID540218Clearance in monkey after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID702755Antiparkinsonian activity in C57BL/6 mouse assessed as decrease in MPTP-induced vertical rearing behavior impairment at 15 mg/kg, sc administered 30 mins on day 7 post MPTP challenge2012Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Oct-01, Volume: 22, Issue:19
Imidazopyridazinones as novel PDE7 inhibitors: SAR and in vivo studies in Parkinson's disease model.
AID462830Activation of human recombinant CA2by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators. The first activation study of a coral secretory isoform with amino acids and amines.
AID361980Membrane permeability assessed as passive transport after 4 hrs by PAMPA2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Aug-28, Volume: 51, Issue:16
Toward an optimal blood-brain barrier shuttle by synthesis and evaluation of peptide libraries.
AID1398533Stability in 10% rat liver homogenates assessed as parent compound remaining after 6 hrs by HPLC analysis
AID481441Aqueous diffusivity at 37C2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-13, Volume: 53, Issue:9
How well can the Caco-2/Madin-Darby canine kidney models predict effective human jejunal permeability?
AID1331210Activation of Burkholderia pseudomallei gamma carbonic anhydrase assessed as Kcat at 10 uM incubated for 15 mins prior to testing by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 01-01, Volume: 27, Issue:1
Burkholderia pseudomallei γ-carbonic anhydrase is strongly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID409993Activation of human recombinant CA3 by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase assay2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the archaeal beta-class (Cab) and gamma-class (Cam) carbonic anhydrases with amino acids and amines.
AID606408Antiparkinsonian effect against MPTP-induced hypokinesia in Wistar rat assessed as number of locomotory acts at 10 mg/kg, po administered 30 days post 20 mg/kg, ip MPTP challenge measured on 30th day 2 hrs post compound administration for 2 mins (Rvb = 802011Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-09, Volume: 54, Issue:11
Highly potent activity of (1R,2R,6S)-3-methyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl)cyclohex-3-ene-1,2-diol in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID1823714Neuroprotective activity in MPTP/probenecid -induced C57BL/6 mouse model of Parkinson's disease at 1 to 2 mg/kg, po pretreated with MPTP/probenecid for 32 days followed by compound addition for next 20 days and measured after 52 to 54 days post MPTP chall
AID1451996Protection against 6-OHDA induced parkinsonian motor deficit in Sprague-Dawley rat after 28 days post surgery2017Journal of medicinal chemistry, 10-26, Volume: 60, Issue:20
Discovery, Structure-Activity Relationship, and Antiparkinsonian Effect of a Potent and Brain-Penetrant Chemical Series of Positive Allosteric Modulators of Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 4.
AID14433Peak plasma concentration expresses the ability of compound for the release of dopamine in the plasma of monkey after oral administration of 0.05 mmol/kg1986Journal of medicinal chemistry, May, Volume: 29, Issue:5
A lymphotropic prodrug of L-dopa: synthesis, pharmacological properties, and pharmacokinetic behavior of 1,3-dihexadecanoyl-2-[(S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop anoyl] propane-1,2,3-triol.
AID69707Inhibition of EGF-dependent epidermal growth factor receptor autophosphorylation1989Journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 32, Issue:10
Tyrphostins I: synthesis and biological activity of protein tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
AID375787Activation of membrane associated mouse recombinant carbonic anhydrase 15 isoform by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2009Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Jul-01, Volume: 19, Issue:13
Carbonic anhydrase activators. Activation of the membrane-associated isoform XV with amino acids and amines.
AID606412Antiparkinsonian effect against MPTP-induced hypokinesia in Wistar rat assessed as number of holes explored at 10 mg/kg, po administered 30 days post 20 mg/kg, ip MPTP challenge measured on 30th day 2 hrs post compound administration for 2 mins (Rvb = 4.62011Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-09, Volume: 54, Issue:11
Highly potent activity of (1R,2R,6S)-3-methyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl)cyclohex-3-ene-1,2-diol in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID1281543Activation of Malassezia globosa beta-carbonic anhydrase incubated for 15 mins prior to testing by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2016Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 26, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the β-carbonic anhydrase from Malassezia globosa with amines and amino acids.
AID1194157Antioxidant activity assessed as rate constant for peroxyl radical scavenging activity using CYPMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID425652Total body clearance in human2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Aug-13, Volume: 52, Issue:15
Physicochemical determinants of human renal clearance.
AID462829Activation of human recombinant CA1 by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators. The first activation study of a coral secretory isoform with amino acids and amines.
AID307896Activation of human recombinant CA1 by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Aug-01, Volume: 15, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: the first activation study of the human secretory isoform VI with amino acids and amines.
AID409952Inhibition of human brain MAOB2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov-13, Volume: 51, Issue:21
Quantitative structure-activity relationship and complex network approach to monoamine oxidase A and B inhibitors.
AID411021Mean residence time in Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as L-dopa level at 0.332 mmol/kg, po2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID1150388Central dopaminergic activity in 6-OH-DA-lesioned specific pathogen-free Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as induction of rotational behavior measured as total time at 25 mg/kg, ip1976Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan, Volume: 19, Issue:1
Aporphines. 14 Dopaminergic and antinociceptive activity of aporphine derivatives. Synthesis of 10-hydroxyaporphines and 10-hydroxy-N-n-propylnoraporphine.
AID462831Activation of human full length CA6 by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Carbonic anhydrase activators. The first activation study of a coral secretory isoform with amino acids and amines.
AID511175Antiparkinsonian activity in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned Wistar rat assessed as area under curve measured as number of rotation per 10 mins at 12.5 mg/kg, ip2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Sep, Volume: 45, Issue:9
Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of L-dopa amide derivatives as potential prodrugs for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
AID411018Cmax in Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as L-dopa level at 0.332 mmol/kg, po2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID1194151Antioxidant activity assessed as rate constant for hydroxyl radical scavenging activity using DMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID725228Activation of human recombinant CA1 by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2013Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Feb-15, Volume: 23, Issue:4
The extremo-α-carbonic anhydrase (CA) from Sulfurihydrogenibium azorense, the fastest CA known, is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID1397320Activation of human CA2 by stopped-flow CO2 hydration assay
AID1398535Drug uptake in human MCF7 cells assessed as LAT1-mediated drug transportation rate at 3.125 to 100 uM after 10 mins by LC-MS analysis
AID464320Activation of archaea Methanobacterium thermoautotrophicum recombinant carbonic anhydrase by stopped flow CO2 hydration method2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 20, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the beta-carbonic anhydrase from the pathogenic yeast Candida glabrata with amines and amino acids.
AID286911Plasma concentration in Wistar rat at 65.46 mg/kg, po after 2 hrs2007Journal of medicinal chemistry, May-17, Volume: 50, Issue:10
Synthesis and study of L-dopa-glutathione codrugs as new anti-Parkinson agents with free radical scavenging properties.
AID311367Permeability coefficient in human skin2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Nov-15, Volume: 15, Issue:22
Transdermal penetration behaviour of drugs: CART-clustering, QSPR and selection of model compounds.
AID625295Drug Induced Liver Injury Prediction System (DILIps) validation dataset; compound DILI positive/negative as observed in Pfizer data2011PLoS computational biology, Dec, Volume: 7, Issue:12
Translating clinical findings into knowledge in drug safety evaluation--drug induced liver injury prediction system (DILIps).
AID1194152Antioxidant activity assessed as superoxide anion radical scavenging activity by measuring relative rate constant (kAOx/kST ratio) using CYPMPO spin trap by ESR spin-trapping method2015Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Apr-15, Volume: 25, Issue:8
Evaluation of scavenging rate constants of DOPA and tyrosine enantiomers against multiple reactive oxygen species and methyl radical as measured with ESR trapping method.
AID511085Antiparkinsonian activity in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned Wistar rat assessed as duration of rotation per 10 mins at 12.5 mg/kg, ip2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Sep, Volume: 45, Issue:9
Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of L-dopa amide derivatives as potential prodrugs for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
AID220082Growth inhibition of YT-nu cell lines at 1.0 mM concentration1981Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun, Volume: 24, Issue:6
Synthesis and antitumor activity of cysteinyl-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanines and related compounds.
AID511086Antiparkinsonian activity in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned Wistar rat assessed as duration of rotation per 10 mins at 12.5 mg/kg, po2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Sep, Volume: 45, Issue:9
Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of L-dopa amide derivatives as potential prodrugs for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
AID305776Activation of human recombinant carbonic anhydrase 5A by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 17, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: an activation study of the human mitochondrial isoforms VA and VB with amino acids and amines.
AID476929Human intestinal absorption in po dosed human2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Mar, Volume: 45, Issue:3
Neural computational prediction of oral drug absorption based on CODES 2D descriptors.
AID318345Activation of human recombinant CA9 catalytic domain by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Apr-01, Volume: 16, Issue:7
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human tumor-associated isozymes IX and XII with amino acids and amines.
AID361982Membrane permeability assessed as passive transport after 4 hrs by PAMPA in presence of 20% 1-propanol2008Journal of medicinal chemistry, Aug-28, Volume: 51, Issue:16
Toward an optimal blood-brain barrier shuttle by synthesis and evaluation of peptide libraries.
AID1871379Antiparkinson's activity in perphenazine (PPZ)-induced catatonia in rat assessed as catatonia score2022European journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-05, Volume: 227Adenosine receptor antagonists: Recent advances and therapeutic perspective.
AID318343Activation of human recombinant CA1 by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Apr-01, Volume: 16, Issue:7
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human tumor-associated isozymes IX and XII with amino acids and amines.
AID540210Clearance in human after iv administration2008Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Jul, Volume: 36, Issue:7
Trend analysis of a database of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters in humans for 670 drug compounds.
AID1473740Inhibition of human MRP3 overexpressed in Sf9 insect cell membrane vesicles assessed as uptake of [3H]-estradiol-17beta-D-glucuronide in presence of ATP and GSH measured after 10 mins by membrane vesicle transport assay2013Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, Nov, Volume: 136, Issue:1
A multifactorial approach to hepatobiliary transporter assessment enables improved therapeutic compound development.
AID365827Activation of human recombinant CA1 at 10 uM by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Aug-01, Volume: 18, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: Activation of the human cytosolic isozyme III and membrane-associated isoform IV with amino acids and amines.
AID215967Inhibitory activity against mushroom tyrosinase2003Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Jul-21, Volume: 13, Issue:14
Identification of oxidation product of arbutin in mushroom tyrosinase assay system.
AID496829Antimicrobial activity against Leishmania infantum2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID305777Activation of human recombinant carbonic anhydrase 5B by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Mar-01, Volume: 17, Issue:5
Carbonic anhydrase activators: an activation study of the human mitochondrial isoforms VA and VB with amino acids and amines.
AID496817Antimicrobial activity against Trypanosoma cruzi2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID18861GOF value represents multisets of log P data1998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID1594144Inhibition of Escherichia coli GroEL expressed in Escherichia coliDH5alpha/Escherichia coli GroES expressed in Escherichia coli BL21 (DE3) assessed as reduction in GroEL/GroES-mediated denatured soluble pig heart MDH refolding by measuring MDH enzyme acti2019Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 05-01, Volume: 29, Issue:9
HSP60/10 chaperonin systems are inhibited by a variety of approved drugs, natural products, and known bioactive molecules.
AID536343Inhibition of MPTP-induced motor disabilities in Callithrix jacchus at 12 mg/kg, po measured every 5 mins for 3 hrs2010Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov-25, Volume: 53, Issue:22
In vivo characterization of a dual adenosine A2A/A1 receptor antagonist in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID318344Activation of human recombinant CA2 by stopped-flow CO2 hydration method2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Apr-01, Volume: 16, Issue:7
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the human tumor-associated isozymes IX and XII with amino acids and amines.
AID409988Activation of Methanobacterium thermoautotrophicum beta-class CA by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase assay2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the archaeal beta-class (Cab) and gamma-class (Cam) carbonic anhydrases with amino acids and amines.
AID1397322Activation of Trypanosoma cruzi CA preincubated for 15 mins followed by CO2 addition by stopped-flow assay
AID1079935Cytolytic liver toxicity, either proven histopathologically or where the ratio of maximal ALT or AST activity above normal to that of Alkaline Phosphatase is > 5 (see ACUTE). Value is number of references indexed. [column 'CYTOL' in source]
AID1813179Inhibition of melanin production in zebra fish assessed reduction in melanin level in back at 25 to 100 uM measured 48 hrs post fertilization2021European journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-15, Volume: 226Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of tyrosinase-targeting PROTACs.
AID409984Activation of human recombinant CA1 by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase assay2008Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Carbonic anhydrase activators: activation of the archaeal beta-class (Cab) and gamma-class (Cam) carbonic anhydrases with amino acids and amines.
AID307897Activation of human recombinant CA2 by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2007Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Aug-01, Volume: 15, Issue:15
Carbonic anhydrase activators: the first activation study of the human secretory isoform VI with amino acids and amines.
AID437144Inhibition of haloperidol-induced catalepsy in Swiss albino mouse assessed as time elapsed until release of forepaw from bar at 100 mg/kg, po administered 30 min prior to haloperidol challenge measured after 30 mins by bar test2009European journal of medicinal chemistry, Oct, Volume: 44, Issue:10
Synthesis of some urea and thiourea derivatives of 3-phenyl/ethyl-2-thioxo-2,3-dihydrothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidine and their antagonistic effects on haloperidol-induced catalepsy and oxidative stress in mice.
AID725226Activation of Sulfurihydrogenibium azorense recombinant alpha carbonic anhydrase by stopped flow CO2 hydrase method2013Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Feb-15, Volume: 23, Issue:4
The extremo-α-carbonic anhydrase (CA) from Sulfurihydrogenibium azorense, the fastest CA known, is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID588212Literature-mined compound from Fourches et al multi-species drug-induced liver injury (DILI) dataset, effect in rodents2010Chemical research in toxicology, Jan, Volume: 23, Issue:1
Cheminformatics analysis of assertions mined from literature that describe drug-induced liver injury in different species.
AID375786Activation of human recombinant carbonic anhydrase 4 lacking 20 amino terminal residues by stopped-flow CO2 hydrase method2009Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Jul-01, Volume: 19, Issue:13
Carbonic anhydrase activators. Activation of the membrane-associated isoform XV with amino acids and amines.
AID1331206Activation of Burkholderia pseudomallei gamma carbonic anhydrase at 10 uM incubated for 15 mins prior to testing by stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2017Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 01-01, Volume: 27, Issue:1
Burkholderia pseudomallei γ-carbonic anhydrase is strongly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID496821Antimicrobial activity against Leishmania2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID1808091Drug metabolism in mini gut model assessed as metabolite formation by LC-MS/MS analysis2021Journal of medicinal chemistry, 12-09, Volume: 64, Issue:23
Searching for New Microbiome-Targeted Therapeutics through a Drug Repurposing Approach.
AID496830Antimicrobial activity against Leishmania major2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID540217Volume of distribution at steady state in dog after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID1823705Neuroprotective activity in MPTP/probenecid -induced C57BL/6 mouse model of Parkinson's disease at 1 to 2 mg/kg, po pretreated with MPTP/probenecid for 32 days followed by compound addition for next 20 days and measured after 52 to 54 days post MPTP chall
AID511173Antiparkinsonian activity in 6-hydroxydopamine lesioned Wistar rat assessed as number of rotation per 10 mins at 12.5 mg/kg, po2010European journal of medicinal chemistry, Sep, Volume: 45, Issue:9
Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of L-dopa amide derivatives as potential prodrugs for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.
AID548961Antioxidant activity of the compound assessed as reducing activity of DPPH at 0.1 mM after 60 mins2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Dec-01, Volume: 18, Issue:23
Does conjugation of antioxidants improve their antioxidative/anti-inflammatory potential?
AID691714Activity of human recombinant CA2 cytosolic isoform after 15 mins by phenol red staining based stopped flow CO2 hydration assay2012Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Oct-15, Volume: 22, Issue:20
The first activation study of a bacterial carbonic anhydrase (CA). The thermostable α-CA from Sulfurihydrogenibium yellowstonense YO3AOP1 is highly activated by amino acids and amines.
AID1150402Antinociceptive activity in albino CD-1 mouse at 1 to 10 mg/kg, ip up to 2 hrs by tail-flick method1976Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan, Volume: 19, Issue:1
Aporphines. 14 Dopaminergic and antinociceptive activity of aporphine derivatives. Synthesis of 10-hydroxyaporphines and 10-hydroxy-N-n-propylnoraporphine.
AID1808092Drug metabolism in human gut microbes assessed as metabolite formation by LC-MS/MS analysis2021Journal of medicinal chemistry, 12-09, Volume: 64, Issue:23
Searching for New Microbiome-Targeted Therapeutics through a Drug Repurposing Approach.
AID24448Partition coefficient value and its ionic species.1998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID411020AUMC in Sprague-Dawley rat assessed as L-dopa level at 0.332 mmol/kg, po2009Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jan-22, Volume: 52, Issue:2
Codrugs linking L-dopa and sulfur-containing antioxidants: new pharmacological tools against Parkinson's disease.
AID606410Antiparkinsonian effect against MPTP-induced hypokinesia in Wistar rat assessed as movement distance at 10 mg/kg, po administered 30 days post 20 mg/kg, ip MPTP challenge measured on 30th day 2 hrs post compound administration for 2 mins (Rvb = 367 +/- 212011Journal of medicinal chemistry, Jun-09, Volume: 54, Issue:11
Highly potent activity of (1R,2R,6S)-3-methyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl)cyclohex-3-ene-1,2-diol in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
AID1131929Reversal of reserpine-induced catalepsy in ip dosed Swiss albino (CD1) mouse1979Journal of medicinal chemistry, Nov, Volume: 22, Issue:11
Structure--activity relationships of n-substituted dopamine and 2-amino-6,7-dihydroxy-1,2,3,4-tetrahydronaphthalene analogues: behavioral effects in lesioned and reserpinized mice.
AID1223490Apparent permeability across human differentiated Caco2 cells2012Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals, Feb, Volume: 40, Issue:2
Predicting phenolic acid absorption in Caco-2 cells: a theoretical permeability model and mechanistic study.
AID1808090Stability in human gut microbes assessed as half life by LC-MS analysis2021Journal of medicinal chemistry, 12-09, Volume: 64, Issue:23
Searching for New Microbiome-Targeted Therapeutics through a Drug Repurposing Approach.
AID540220Clearance in human after iv administration2005Journal of pharmaceutical sciences, Jul, Volume: 94, Issue:7
Extrapolation of human pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey data: Molecular properties associated with extrapolative success or failure.
AID1851450Neuroprotective effect in 6-OHDA-induced lesioned mouse model of Parkinson's disease assessed as decrease in time for locomotion activity at 80 mg/kg/day, po administered for 7 days measured by Pole test2022Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, 10-15, Volume: 74In vitro and in vivo neuroprotective effect of novel mPGES-1 inhibitor in animal model of Parkinson's disease.
AID1864191Anti-parkinson activity in reserpine induced C57BL/6 mouse model assessed as decrease in locomotion at 100 to 400 mg/kg, ip measured for 60 mins2022Journal of medicinal chemistry, 09-22, Volume: 65, Issue:18
2-(Fluoromethoxy)-4'-(
AID24203Distribution coefficient in octanol/water at pH 6.51998Journal of medicinal chemistry, Dec-03, Volume: 41, Issue:25
Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach.
AID1398530Stability in pH 7.4 isotonic tris buffer assessed as parent compound remaining after 6 hrs by HPLC analysis
AID496832Antimicrobial activity against Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry, Mar-15, Volume: 18, Issue:6
Multi-target spectral moment QSAR versus ANN for antiparasitic drugs against different parasite species.
AID1347411qHTS to identify inhibitors of the type 1 interferon - major histocompatibility complex class I in skeletal muscle: primary screen against the NCATS Mechanism Interrogation Plate v5.0 (MIPE) Libary2020ACS chemical biology, 07-17, Volume: 15, Issue:7
High-Throughput Screening to Identify Inhibitors of the Type I Interferon-Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I Pathway in Skeletal Muscle.
AID1159550Human Phosphogluconate dehydrogenase (6PGD) Inhibitor Screening2015Nature cell biology, Nov, Volume: 17, Issue:11
6-Phosphogluconate dehydrogenase links oxidative PPP, lipogenesis and tumour growth by inhibiting LKB1-AMPK signalling.
AID1347059CD47-SIRPalpha protein protein interaction - Alpha assay qHTS validation2019PloS one, , Volume: 14, Issue:7
Quantitative high-throughput screening assays for the discovery and development of SIRPα-CD47 interaction inhibitors.
AID1347151Optimization of GU AMC qHTS for Zika virus inhibitors: Unlinked NS2B-NS3 protease assay2020Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 12-08, Volume: 117, Issue:49
Therapeutic candidates for the Zika virus identified by a high-throughput screen for Zika protease inhibitors.
AID1347058CD47-SIRPalpha protein protein interaction - HTRF assay qHTS validation2019PloS one, , Volume: 14, Issue:7
Quantitative high-throughput screening assays for the discovery and development of SIRPα-CD47 interaction inhibitors.
AID1347057CD47-SIRPalpha protein protein interaction - LANCE assay qHTS validation2019PloS one, , Volume: 14, Issue:7
Quantitative high-throughput screening assays for the discovery and development of SIRPα-CD47 interaction inhibitors.
AID1347410qHTS for inhibitors of adenylyl cyclases using a fission yeast platform: a pilot screen against the NCATS LOPAC library2019Cellular signalling, 08, Volume: 60A fission yeast platform for heterologous expression of mammalian adenylyl cyclases and high throughput screening.
AID1347405qHTS to identify inhibitors of the type 1 interferon - major histocompatibility complex class I in skeletal muscle: primary screen against the NCATS LOPAC collection2020ACS chemical biology, 07-17, Volume: 15, Issue:7
High-Throughput Screening to Identify Inhibitors of the Type I Interferon-Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I Pathway in Skeletal Muscle.
AID1159607Screen for inhibitors of RMI FANCM (MM2) intereaction2016Journal of biomolecular screening, Jul, Volume: 21, Issue:6
A High-Throughput Screening Strategy to Identify Protein-Protein Interaction Inhibitors That Block the Fanconi Anemia DNA Repair Pathway.
AID540299A screen for compounds that inhibit the MenB enzyme of Mycobacterium tuberculosis2010Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters, Nov-01, Volume: 20, Issue:21
Synthesis and SAR studies of 1,4-benzoxazine MenB inhibitors: novel antibacterial agents against Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
AID588519A screen for compounds that inhibit viral RNA polymerase binding and polymerization activities2011Antiviral research, Sep, Volume: 91, Issue:3
High-throughput screening identification of poliovirus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase inhibitors.
AID1794808Fluorescence-based screening to identify small molecule inhibitors of Plasmodium falciparum apicoplast DNA polymerase (Pf-apPOL).2014Journal of biomolecular screening, Jul, Volume: 19, Issue:6
A High-Throughput Assay to Identify Inhibitors of the Apicoplast DNA Polymerase from Plasmodium falciparum.
AID1794808Fluorescence-based screening to identify small molecule inhibitors of Plasmodium falciparum apicoplast DNA polymerase (Pf-apPOL).
[information is prepared from bioassay data collected from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Research

Studies (16,746)

TimeframeStudies, This Drug (%)All Drugs %
pre-19904472 (26.70)18.7374
1990's3133 (18.71)18.2507
2000's3768 (22.50)29.6817
2010's3952 (23.60)24.3611
2020's1421 (8.49)2.80
[information is prepared from research data collected from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Market Indicators

Research Demand Index: 93.75

According to the monthly volume, diversity, and competition of internet searches for this compound, as well the volume and growth of publications, there is estimated to be very strong demand-to-supply ratio for research on this compound.

MetricThis Compound (vs All)
Research Demand Index93.75 (24.57)
Research Supply Index9.89 (2.92)
Research Growth Index4.58 (4.65)
Search Engine Demand Index209.46 (26.88)
Search Engine Supply Index2.36 (0.95)

This Compound (93.75)

All Compounds (24.57)

Study Types

Publication TypeThis drug (%)All Drugs (%)
Trials1,900 (10.69%)5.53%
Reviews2,229 (12.54%)6.00%
Case Studies1,802 (10.14%)4.05%
Observational85 (0.48%)0.25%
Other11,758 (66.15%)84.16%
[information is prepared from research data collected from National Library of Medicine (NLM), extracted Dec-2023]

Clinical Trials (242)

Trial Overview

TrialPhaseEnrollmentStudy TypeStart DateStatus
Sustained Release Oral Formulation for Treatment of Parkinson's Disease [NCT05471609]Early Phase 16 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-12-01Not yet recruiting
Neurobiological Drivers of Mobility Resilience: The Dopaminergic System [NCT04325503]Phase 1/Phase 214 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-10-18Completed
An Open-Label, 12-Month Safety and Efficacy Study of Levodopa - Carbidopa Intestinal Gel in Levodopa-Responsive Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease and Severe Motor Fluctuations Despite Optimized Treatment With Available Parkinson's Disease Medicat [NCT00335153]Phase 3354 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-01-31Completed
A Phase 1 Study of the Safety and Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Levodopa Following Administration of CVT 301 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) in Adults With Asthma [NCT02633007]Phase 125 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-12-31Completed
A Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind, Cross-over Study of Zolpidem for Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT01351168]Phase 20 participants (Actual)InterventionalWithdrawn(stopped due to study not funded)
A Dose-finding Study for Levodopa, Carbidopa and ODM-104 Test Formulations After Repeated Administration in Healthy Males [NCT03055936]Phase 156 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-02-21Completed
A Trial of tPCS on Parkinson's Disease OFF State [NCT04054960]15 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2019-09-30Not yet recruiting
Clinical Study to Compare the Possible Safety and Efficacy of Pentoxifylline in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Treated With Conventional Treatment [NCT05962957]Phase 250 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-08-07Recruiting
Clock and Narcolepsy Genetic Variants and the Effects of Stalevo® (Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone) on Sleep Disorders in Parkinson's Disease [NCT02452606]100 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2015-03-31Recruiting
[NCT01361373]Phase 450 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2010-05-31Recruiting
An Open Label Extension Study of the Safety and Clinical Utility of IPX066 in Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT01096186]Phase 3617 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-03-31Completed
An Open Label Phase 2 Study to Assess the Pharmacokinetics of the Accordion Pill Carbidopa-Levodopa Compared to Immediate Release Carbidopa-Levodopa in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT03576638]Phase 212 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2018-07-31Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Blood Dopamine Levels in Idiopathic Parkinson's Patients Receiving Levodopa Carbidopa Entacapone or Levodopa Benserazide [NCT06115538]Phase 496 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-10-01Enrolling by invitation
An Open-label, Randomized 26-Week Study Comparing Levodopa-Carbidopa INteStInal Gel (LCIG) THerapy to Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT) on Non-Motor Symptoms (NMS) in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease - INSIGHTS Study [NCT02549092]Phase 389 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-10-26Completed
Study of the Efficacy of Co-administration of an NSAID With a Dopamine Agonist in the Alleviation of Acute Cutaneous Inflammatory Pain in Healthy Subjects [NCT02116790]Phase 20 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-05-31Withdrawn
A Randomized, Parallel Group, Multicentre, Multinational, Prospective, Open-label Exploratory Study to Evaluate the add-on Effect of Opicapone 50 mg or Levodopa 100 mg as First Strategy for the Treatment of Wearing-off in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT04990284]Phase 4106 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-11-29Active, not recruiting
Pharmacokinetics of Levodopa After Repeated Doses of Different Pellet Formulations; An Open, Randomized Study With Crossover Design in Healthy Male Subjects [NCT03140956]Phase 120 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-04-19Completed
The Correlation of Reduction of Levodopa and Non-motor Symptoms of Parkinson's Disease After Deep Brain Stimulation [NCT05901350]338 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-06-01Completed
A Long-term Health Economics Study of Intraduodenal Levodopa (Duodopa®) in Routine Care for Patients With Advanced Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease With Severe Motor Fluctuations and Hyper-/Dyskinesia [NCT00141518]Phase 477 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-03-31Completed
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Active-Controlled Study Comparing the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of ABBV-951 to Oral Carbidopa/Levodopa in Advanced Parkinson's Disease Patients [NCT04380142]Phase 3174 participants (Actual)Interventional2020-10-19Completed
1/2-Dopaminergic Dysfunction in Late-Life Depression (The D3 Study) [NCT04493320]Phase 45 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-02-10Terminated(stopped due to Study terminated by sponsor (NIMH))
Targeting Dopaminergic Mechanisms of Slowing to Improve Late Life Depression [NCT03761030]Phase 451 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-01-09Terminated(stopped due to The project end date was reached prior to the full sample enrollment)
A Single Period Investigation to Assess the Tolerability of Healthy Subjects to Oral Sinemet® (Levodopa/Carbidopa) Doses Administered Using a Divided Dose Approach [NCT02486432]Phase 16 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-04-30Completed
A Phase I/II, Open-Label Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Striatum Transplantation of Human Embryonic Stem Cells-derived Neural Precursor Cells in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT03119636]Phase 1/Phase 250 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2017-05-31Recruiting
Gait Pattern Analysis in Neurological Disease [NCT02994719]120 participants (Anticipated)Observational2016-03-01Active, not recruiting
A Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Study of the Safety and Efficacy of SYN115 as Adjunctive Therapy in Levodopa-treated Parkinson's Subjects With End of Dose Wearing Off [NCT01283594]Phase 2/Phase 3420 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-03-31Completed
Randomized Controlled Trial on Discontinuation of Vasoactive Drugs in Patients With Hypotensive Reflex Syncope [NCT02137278]Phase 358 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-03-31Completed
Research on Translational Outcomes of Alcohol (Project RETRO) [NCT04742348]Phase 40 participants (Actual)Interventional2023-02-28Withdrawn(stopped due to COVID-19 and expiration of funding)
An Open-label, Randomized 12 Week Study Comparing Efficacy of Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel/Carbidopa-Levodopa Enteral Suspension and Optimized Medical Treatment on Dyskinesia in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease DYSCOVER (DYSkinesia COmparat [NCT02799381]Phase 363 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-02-09Completed
A Phase 2, Two-Part Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy of SAGE-217 in Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT03000569]Phase 229 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-11-30Completed
A Phase 1 Single-Dose, Open-label, Sequential, Three-Period Crossover Study to Evaluate the Pharmacokinetics of WD-1603 Tablets in Healthy Subjects [NCT03761004]Phase 18 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-01-14Completed
Pharmacokinetics of Levodopa, Carbidopa, 3-OMD and ODM-104 After Repeated Doses of Different Formulations: an Open, Randomised, Multicentre Study With Crossover Design in Healthy Males [NCT02312232]Phase 120 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-11-30Completed
An Exploratory Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacodynamic and Safety Study of XP21279 (With Lodosyn®) and Sinemet® in Parkinson's Disease Subjects With Motor Fluctuations [NCT00914602]Phase 1/Phase 214 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-05-31Completed
A Phase 1 Single Dose Pharmacokinetic Bridging Study to Compare Two Dose Strengths of CVT-301 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) With an Oral Dose of Sinemet® (Carbidopa-levodopa) Tablets [NCT02812394]Phase 124 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-06-30Completed
Fasting Comparative Bioavailability of Two Tablet Formulations of Levodopa /Benserazide in Healthy Volunteers: A Single- Dose Randomized- Sequence, Open -Label Crossover Study [NCT01327261]Phase 424 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-08-31Completed
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel Group Study of SLV308 as Adjunct Therapy to Levodopa in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Experiencing Motor Fluctuations. [NCT00406588]Phase 3295 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-03-31Completed
A Phase 1, Open-Label Study to Assess the Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, Safety and Tolerability of Repeated Doses of Opicapone, and Effect on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT03496870]Phase 116 participants (Actual)Interventional2018-02-08Completed
Dopaminergic Modulation of Cognition and Psychomotor Function [NCT01218425]20 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-11-30Completed
Neurobiological Principles Applied to the Rehabilitation of Stroke Patients [NCT00715520]33 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-04-30Completed
Treating Early Stage Diabetic Retinopathy [NCT05132660]Early Phase 1244 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2022-07-01Enrolling by invitation
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability Study of Levodopa - Carbidopa Intestinal Gel in Levodopa-Responsive Parkinson's Subjects Receiving Optimized Treatments With Parkinson Medicinal Products Who Continue to Experienc [NCT00357994]Phase 336 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-01-31Completed
Pilot Study of L-DOPA Safety and Tolerability in Patients With AMD, and Proof of Concept That L-DOPA Improves Surrogate Biomarkers in Patients With Moderate to Advanced AMD [NCT02873351]Phase 20 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-09-30Withdrawn(stopped due to Decided to do studies in patients with AMD)
Mucuna Pruriens Therapy in Parkinson's Disease: a Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomized, Crossover Study. [NCT02680977]Phase 218 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-02-29Completed
Utility of 18F-DOPA PET/MRI Metrics as a Biomarker for Treatment Response Assessment in Sarcoma Patients: A Pilot Study [NCT05560009]10 participants (Anticipated)Observational2022-11-10Recruiting
The Effect of L-Dopa on the Progression of Retinitis Pigmentosa [NCT02837640]Phase 250 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2016-06-30Recruiting
Phase II Study of Short Course Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy Incorporating 18F-DOPA-PET/MRI for Elderly Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma [NCT03778294]Phase 243 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-03-28Completed
L-Dopa Modulated Striatal Functional Connectivity in Schizotypal Adults: a Randomized Double-blind Placebo-controlled Study [NCT03333369]Early Phase 165 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-05-15Completed
Open-label, Two-treatment, 4-period Replicated Crossover Study in Healthy Subjects to Investigate the Plasma Pharmacokinetics of Levodopa and Carbidopa After Oral Administration of Single Doses of Two Fixed-dose Combination Products [NCT02116465]Phase 112 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-03-31Completed
Combinational Rehabilitative Therapy and Functional Brain Imaging for Patients Recovering From Motor Stroke [NCT02073773]Phase 39 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-01-31Completed
Extension of Protocol 002, Carbidopa-levodopa in Neovascular Extension of Protocol 002, Carbidopa-levodopa in Neovascular AMD [NCT03197493]Phase 232 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-08-01Completed
Dopaminergic Therapy for Inflammation-Related Anhedonia in Depression [NCT04723147]Phase 420 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-01-29Completed
Single-Center, Open, Randomized, Single-Dose, Completely Repeated Crossover Bioequivalence Study to Evaluate the Effects of the Test/Reference Preparation, Entacapone,Levodopa and Carbidopa Tablets (II) in Healthy Adult Subjects [NCT05976737]Phase 168 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-08-17Not yet recruiting
Determining the Natural History of Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia (LID) [NCT01003002]0 participants (Actual)Observational2010-12-31Withdrawn(stopped due to Funding not secured.)
Open-Label, 12-Month Safety and Efficacy Study of Levodopa - Carbidopa Intestinal Gel in Levodopa-Responsive Parkinson's Disease Subjects [NCT00360568]Phase 362 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-06-30Completed
Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic Interaction Between Three Different Single Doses of BIA 3-202 and a Single-dose of Controlled-release 100/25 mg Levodopa/Benserazide (Madopar® HBS 125): a Double-blind, Randomised, Four-way Crossover, Placebo-controlled Stu [NCT02778594]Phase 117 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-09-30Completed
The Role of Dopamine in the Central Neural Signature of Chronic Pain [NCT05285683]Phase 210 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-01-01Recruiting
Observational, Cross-sectional Clinical Study in Parkinson's Disease (PD) Patients and Healthy Controls (HC) to Identify PD Specific Microbial and Metabolic Fingerprints in Small Intestinal (SI) Fluid and Blood [NCT06003608]100 participants (Anticipated)Observational2023-10-31Not yet recruiting
Dopaminergic Effects on Cortical Function in Tourette's (Levodopa Protocol) [NCT00634556]Phase 149 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-02-28Completed
A Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo- and Active-controlled, Cross-over Study to Investigate the Effect of Two Multiple-dose Regimens of BIA 3-202 on the Pharmacokinetics and Motor Response of Levodopa, and on the Erythrocyte Comt Activity in Parkinson's D [NCT02834507]Phase 219 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-03-31Completed
A Placebo-Controlled Study To Evaluate The Safety And Efficacy Of IPX066 In Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT00880620]Phase 3381 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-04-30Completed
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled, Parallel Group Clinical Study Investigating the Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of Continuous Subcutaneous ND0612 Infusion Given as Adjunct Treatment to Oral Levodopa in Patients With Parkins [NCT02782481]Phase 30 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-08-31Withdrawn(stopped due to Decision to change the study design)
Identifying Circuit Dynamics Underlying Motor Dysfunction in Parkinson's Disease Using Real-Time Neural Control [NCT06013956]Phase 430 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-08-29Recruiting
Single-Center, Open, Randomized, Single-Dose, Completely Repeated Crossover Bioequivalence Study to Evaluate the Effects of the Test/Reference Preparation, Entacapone,Levodopa and Carbidopa Tablets (II) in the Postprandial State in Healthy Adult Subjects [NCT06180720]Phase 136 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-12-20Not yet recruiting
A Phase 2, 12-Week, Double-Blind, Dose-Finding, Placebo-Controlled Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of a Range of SCH 420814 Doses in Subjects With Moderate to Severe Parkinson's Disease Experiencing Motor Fluctuations and Dyskinesias [NCT00406029]Phase 2253 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-11-20Completed
A Phase 2, 36-Week, Open-Label, Uncontrolled Safety Follow-up Study Assessing SCH 420814 (Preladenant) 5 mg BID (P05175) [NCT00537017]Phase 2140 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-11-23Completed
A Dose-escalation Tolerability Study of Levodopa/Carbidopa in Angelman Syndrome [NCT00829439]Phase 116 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-01-31Completed
Dual Release Gastric Retentive AP09004, Vs. Active Control; a Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic, Comparative, Safety Evaluation in Parkinson's Patients [NCT00918177]Phase 272 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2009-07-31Completed
1) To Identify the Concentration of CD That Provides Optimal Bioavailability of a Concomitant Fixed Concentration of LD Infused SC Continuously; 2) To Compare the Bioavailability of the Optimal LD/CD Solution to That of LD/CD Intestinal Gel [NCT02604914]Phase 136 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-05-31Completed
An Open-Label,Multi-Center, Follow-Up Study Designed to Evaluate the Long-Term Effects of AP-CD/LD in Fluctuating Parkinson's Disease Subjects Who Completed Study IN 11 004 [NCT02615873]Phase 3460 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2016-07-31Recruiting
Phase 3 Multicenter Randomized Double-Blind, Double-dummy, Active-Controlled Study Comparing Efficacy/Safety of Gastric-retentive, Controlled-release Accordion Pill Carbidopa/Levodopa to Immediate Release in Fluctuating Parkinson's Patients [NCT02605434]Phase 3420 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2016-03-31Active, not recruiting
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability Study of Levodopa - Carbidopa Intestinal Gel in Levodopa-Responsive Parkinson's Subjects Receiving Optimized Treatments With Parkinson Medicinal Products Who Continue to Experienc [NCT00660387]Phase 335 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-12-31Completed
Effect of Fecal Microbiota Transfer on Progression of Parkinson Disease [NCT05204641]Phase 1/Phase 260 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-11-01Active, not recruiting
Efficacy and Safety of Opicapone in Clinical Practice in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Wearing-off Motor Fluctuations [NCT02847442]Phase 4518 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-11-23Completed
AN OPEN LABEL, BALANCED, RANDOMISED, FOUR-TREATMENT, FOUR-PERIOD, FOUR-SEQUENCE, SINGLE INTRA-ORAL AND ORAL DOSE, CROSSOVER PHARMACOKINETICS STUDY OF WD-1603 EXTENDED-RELEASE CARBIDOPA/LEVODOPA TABLETS 25/100MG IN NORMAL, HEALTHY, ADULT HUMAN SUBJECTS UND [NCT04513340]Phase 18 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2020-08-13Recruiting
Pilot Study to Evaluate ActiMyo Measured Activity in Parkinson Disease Patients & Healthy Volunteers [NCT02785978]30 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-06-30Completed
Dopaminergic Dysfunction in Late-Life Depression [NCT04469959]Phase 280 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-02-15Recruiting
A Pilot Open-label, Randomized, Crossover, Comparative Bioavailability Study of Levodopa Administered Via Levodopa Cyclops™ (Test Product) Relative to INBRIJA® (Reference Product) in Healthy Adult Subjects [NCT06037590]Phase 126 participants (Actual)Interventional2023-09-25Completed
Tri-therapy (SPINALON)-Elicited Spinal Locomotor Network Activation: Phase I-IIa Clinical Trial in Patients With Chronic Spinal Cord Injury [NCT01484184]Phase 1/Phase 250 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-07-31Completed
Bioavailability of a Formulation of Oseltamivir Phosphate 75 mg Tablets With Regards to the Reference Product [NCT05250141]Phase 144 participants (Actual)Interventional2022-02-14Completed
Treatment in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: Continuous Intrajejunal Levodopa INfusion VErsus Deep Brain STimulation [NCT02480803]Phase 466 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2014-12-19Active, not recruiting
Comparison of Orally Dissolving Carbidopa/Levodopa (Parcopa) to Conventional Oral Carbidopa/Levodopa: A Single-Dose, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Trial [NCT00590122]Phase 420 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-10-31Completed
Open-label, Multicenter, Effectiveness and Safety Study of Once Daily AZILECT® as Mono- or Adjunct Therapy in Patients With Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease (PD) [NCT00399477]Phase 4200 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-10-31Completed
Levodopa Concentration Profile After Repeated Doses of Stalevo [NCT00693862]Phase 119 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-12-31Completed
Pharmacokinetics of Levodopa After Repeated Doses of Carbidopa, ODM-104 and Levodopa: an Open, Randomised Study With Crossover Design in Healthy Males and Females [NCT02554734]Phase 115 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-08-31Completed
Dopamine Buffering Capacity Measured by phMRI as a Novel Biomarker of Disease Progression in PD [NCT03205956]Phase 131 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-10-19Completed
Efficacy and Safety of ODM-104 Compared to a Standard Combination (Stalevo®); a Randomized Double-blind, Crossover Proof-of-concept Study in Patients With Parkinson's Disease and End-of-dose Wearing-off [NCT02764125]Phase 284 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-04-08Completed
Effect of Dopaminergic Medication on Recovery of Aphasia [NCT00941265]12 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-02-28Completed
Effect of Levodopa on Human Multifocal Electroretinogram [NCT00812760]Phase 420 participants (Actual)Interventional2001-10-31Completed
Effect of Duodenal Levodopa Infusion on Quality of Life and Autonomic Dysfunction in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT00914134]Phase 412 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-04-30Completed
A Phase 2a Multicentre Randomized Double Blind Placebo Controlled Study Followed by an Open Label Period, to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability and Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Levodopa-treated Parkinson's Disease Patients With Motor Fluctuations, Administ [NCT01883505]Phase 230 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-01-31Completed
[NCT01937169]30 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2014-01-31Not yet recruiting
Effect of Antiglutamatergic Treatment in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00013624]Phase 220 participants Interventional2001-03-31Completed
An 8-week, Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Active-controlled, Multi-center Comparison Study of the Effects of Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone Versus Immediate Release Carbidopa/Levodopa on Non-motor Symptoms in Patients With Idiopathic [NCT00642356]Phase 414 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-03-31Terminated(stopped due to slow enrollment)
Different Dyskinesias in Parkinson's Disease and Their Relation to Levodopa Pharmacokinetics [NCT00888186]Phase 45 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-02-29Completed
Pharmacokinetics of Levodopa in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Treated With Levodopa/Carbidopa Infusion With and Without Oral COMT Inhibitors [NCT00906828]Phase 410 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2008-10-31Completed
A Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Two-period, Two-sequence-crossover Interaction Study to Assess the Effect of Safinamide on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics in Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT01026428]Phase 1/Phase 224 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-09-30Completed
A 3-month, Multi-center, Double-blind, Randomized Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone vs Levodopa/Carbidopa in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Impairment of Activities of Daily Living and Early Wearing-off With Levodopa [NCT00391898]Phase 495 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-10-31Completed
Motor Activation in Patients With Multi Systemic Atrophy and Comparison With Parkinson Disease and Dopaminergic Challenge [NCT01044992]38 participants (Actual)Interventional2002-05-31Completed
A Long Term, Double-blind, Randomized, Parallel-group, Carbidopa/Levodopa Controlled, Multi-center Study to Evaluate the Effect of Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Requiring Initiation of Levodopa Therapy [NCT00099268]Phase 3747 participants (Actual)Interventional2004-09-30Completed
Post-Marketing Clinical Study of REQUIP (Ropinirole Hydrochloride) Tablets in Patients With Parkinson's Disease- Evaluation of Long-Term Efficacy and Safety - [NCT00485069]Phase 4123 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-06-30Completed
Levodopa Concentration Profile After Repeated Doses of Different Stalevo® Strengths With 3.5 Hours Dosing Frequency; an Open, Randomised, Crossover, Levodopa/Carbidopa Controlled Single Centre Study in Healthy Subjects, Two Parallel Groups [NCT01070628]Phase 120 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2009-12-31Completed
Quantification of Levodopa Induced Dyskinesia in Parkinson Disease: Developing Objective Measures of Levodopa Induced Dyskinesia (Study One) [NCT00467597]36 participants (Actual)Observational2006-04-30Completed
Multicentre, Randomised, Double-Blind Study to Compare Stalevo to Levodopa/Carbidopa in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Experiencing Symptoms of Early Wearing-Off [NCT00125567]Phase 4223 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-08-31Completed
An Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamic Relationship Study of L-Dopa/Carbidopa in a Novel Release Formulation in Parkinson's Disease Patients [NCT00558337]Phase 278 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-11-30Completed
Behavioral Strategies to Maximize the Efficacy of Pharmacotherapy for Cocaine Dependence: Relapse Prevention With Contingency Management Procedures [NCT00218075]Phase 2200 participants Interventional2000-03-31Completed
A Multicenter, Parallel-group, Rater-blinded, Randomized Clinical Study Investigating the Efficacy, Safety, Tolerability and Pharmacokinetics of 2 Dosing Regimens of ND0612H [ ] in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT02577523]Phase 238 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-12-29Completed
A Phase I/II Pharmacokinetic (PK) Study of ND0612, a Liquid Formulation of Levodopa/Carbidopa (LD/CD), Delivered as a Continuous Subcutaneous in Parkinson's Disease (PD) Patients Treated With LD [NCT02096601]Phase 1/Phase 216 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-08-31Completed
A Phase I/IIa, Single Dose, Single-centre, Randomized, Crossover, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Evaluating Safety, Tolerability and Levodopa Plasma Concentration Following Administration of Subcutaneous Continuously-delivered Levodopa/Carbidopa S [NCT01725802]Phase 1/Phase 28 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-12-31Completed
Evaluation and Treatment of Autonomic Failure. [NCT00223691]Phase 1389 participants (Actual)Interventional2002-03-31Completed
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Scanning in Dopamine Disorders: Parkinson's Disease and Schizophrenia [NCT00024622]580 participants (Anticipated)Observational2002-03-15Recruiting
A Randomized, Two-Way Crossover Study to Investigate the Bioavailability of a Single Oral Dose of 12.5 mg Carbidopa, 50 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entacapone Compared to a Single Oral Combined Dose of Both 12.5 mg Carbidopa and 50 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entac [NCT00415831]Phase 142 participants Interventional2006-06-30Completed
Adenosine A2A Blockade With KW-6002 in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00006337]Phase 216 participants Interventional2000-10-31Completed
The Effects of Mood Symptoms Treatment on Quality of Life and Motor Function in de Novo Parkinson's Disease Patients [NCT04590612]30 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-01-31Not yet recruiting
An Open Label, Balanced, Randomised, Four-treatment, Four-period, Four-sequence, Single Oral Dose, Crossover PK Study of WD-1603 in Normal, Healthy, Adult Human Subjects Under Fed Conditions [NCT04591535]Phase 18 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2020-09-28Recruiting
Carbidopa-Levodopa in Dry Age Related Macular Degeneration With Geographic Atrophy [NCT03451500]Phase 27 participants (Actual)Interventional2018-07-01Active, not recruiting
Proof of Concept and Dose Ranging Study of Carbidopa-levodopa in Neovascular AMD [NCT03023059]Phase 235 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-05-02Completed
Molecular Basis of Loss Aversion [NCT06034158]60 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-09-18Recruiting
A Study to Assess the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of a Single Dose of IPX203 in Patients With Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT02271503]Phase 226 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-11-30Completed
A Randomized, Two-Way Crossover Study to Investigate the Bioavailability of a Single Oral Dose of 25 mg Carbidopa, 100 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entacapone Compared to a Single Oral Combined Dose of Both 25 mg Carbidopa and 100 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entacap [NCT00415844]Phase 142 participants Interventional2006-06-30Completed
Transition From Acute to Chronic Back Pain : Effect of L-dopa,Gender,and Associated Brain Plasticity [NCT04082715]Phase 20 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-10-31Withdrawn(stopped due to we don't have enough research funding.)
Levetiracetam Treatment of L-dopa Induced Dyskinesias [NCT00076674]Phase 240 participants Interventional2004-01-31Completed
Expectation and Response to Levodopa & Acupuncture in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00692328]63 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-08-31Completed
The Effect of Dopamine on Diabetic Retinopathy [NCT02706977]Phase 160 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-01-31Completed
Efficacy of Levodopa/Benserazide Dispersible Tablet on Response Fluctuations in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Delayed ON: a Multicenter Randomized Open-label Cross-over Trial [NCT02769793]Phase 440 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-06-30Completed
Clinical and Pharmacokinetics Study to Evaluate the Therapeutic Equivalence and Bioequivalence of Levodopa Benserazide Generic Formulation (Teva Italia) Versus the Originator (Madopar®) [NCT02741947]Phase 444 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-04-30Completed
A Randomized Trial of Levodopa as Treatment for Residual Amblyopia (ATS 17) [NCT01190813]Phase 3139 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-09-30Completed
A Double-Blind, Randomized, Active-Controlled Multicenter Efficacy Trial for the Treatment of Patients With Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) [NCT00625547]Phase 3361 participants (Actual)Interventional2003-01-31Completed
Evaluation of the Analgesic Effects of Prolonged-release Oxycodone and of Levodopa, Versus Placebo, on Central Neuropathic Pain in Parkinson's Disease: OXYDOPA Trial [NCT02601586]Phase 2/Phase 367 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-09-30Completed
Clinical Evaluation of 18F-DOPA Positron Emission Tomography in Medullary Thyroid Cancer. [NCT00647140]Phase 229 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-08-31Terminated(stopped due to Insuffisent recruitment)
Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Cross-Over Phase IIa Trial to Evaluate Efficacy of CVXL-0107 on Parkinson-Related Symptoms and Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia in Advanced Parkinson's Disease Patients Using a Levodopa Challenge Test [NCT02641054]Phase 221 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-02-29Completed
A Study To Evaluate The Safety And Efficacy Of IPX066 In Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT00974974]Phase 3471 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-09-30Completed
Effects of Monoamine Reuptake Inhibitor NS2330 in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00006077]Phase 250 participants Interventional2000-08-31Completed
A Phase 2b, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of Inhaled CVT 301 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Motor Response Fluctuations (OFF Phenomena) [NCT01777555]Phase 289 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-04-30Completed
A Double-Blind, Randomized, Comparative Study of Cabaser and Sinemet CR For The Treatment Of Nocturnal Disability In Levodopa -Treated Parkinson's Disease Patients. [NCT00174239]Phase 4220 participants Interventional2004-07-31Terminated(stopped due to See Detailed Description for termination reason.)
5HT2A/C Serotonin Blockade in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00086294]Phase 240 participants Interventional2004-06-25Completed
A Phase IIa, Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled, Single Ascending Dose, Safety and Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Study of INP103 (POD L-dopa) Administered in the Presence of DCI to L-dopa Responsive Parkinson's Disease Patients [NCT03541356]Phase 232 participants (Actual)Interventional2018-05-08Completed
Sinemet in ALS and PLS [NCT03929068]Phase 115 participants (Actual)Interventional2019-05-13Completed
Enhancement of Stroke Rehabilitation With Levodopa (ESTREL): a Randomized Placebo-controlled Trial [NCT03735901]Phase 3610 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2019-06-14Recruiting
Effect of Levodopa on Cardiovascular Autonomic Function in Parkinson's Disease With and Without Orthostatic Hypotension: a Cross-over Study [NCT05487300]Phase 2/Phase 340 participants (Actual)Interventional2022-05-11Completed
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, 2-Period Crossover Study to Evaluate Effectiveness of Single-Dose MK0657 in Combination With Levodopa on Motor Symptoms and Dyskinesias in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT00505843]Phase 118 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-05-31Completed
Assessing the Pharmacokinetics, Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Continuous Oral Levodopa Via the DopaFuse® Delivery System in Parkinson's Disease Patients [NCT04778176]Phase 217 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-06-16Completed
A Pharmacokinetic Study of Levodopa and Carbidopa Intestinal Gel in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT01484990]Phase 119 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-04-30Completed
Investigating Effects of Short-term Treatment With Pramipexole or Levodopa on [123I]B-CIT and SPECT Imaging in Early Parkinson's [NCT00096720]Phase 2112 participants (Actual)Interventional2004-02-29Completed
Effect of BIA 9-1067 at Steady-state on the Pharmacokinetics of a Single-dose of Immediate-release 100/25 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa and 100/25 mg Levodopa/Benserazide in Healthy Subjects [NCT01533116]Phase 152 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-03-31Completed
Dopaminergic Enhancement of Learning and Memory (LL_001, Project on Dementia/MCI) [NCT00306124]Phase 4120 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2006-01-31Recruiting
Transcutaneous Lisuride Therapy of Parkinson's Disease [NCT00089622]Phase 240 participants Interventional2004-08-04Completed
Improved Language Acquisition Through Neuromodulation, Project Stage Ia [NCT00102284]Phase 4100 participants Interventional2004-03-31Terminated
Dopaminergic Enhancement of Learning and Memory (LL_001, Project on Aphasia) [NCT00102869]Phase 412 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-01-31Completed
Improved Language Acquisition With Levodopa [NCT00103805]Phase 420 participants Interventional2003-03-31Completed
Dopaminergic Enhancement of Learning and Memory (LL_001, Project on Dyslexia) [NCT00111371]Phase 4100 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2005-01-31Recruiting
An Open Label, Multiple-Dose Study ot Determine the Plasma Levodopa Profiles of Sinemet® CR (Carbidopa/Levodopa) at 4 Daily Dose Levels in Healthy Subjects [NCT00460954]20 participants (Anticipated)Observational2007-06-30Completed
A 39 Week Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel Group, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Effect of Fixed Dose Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone 100 mg t.i.d. vs. Immediate Release Carbidopa/Levodopa 25/100 mg (t.i.d.) in Parkinson's Disease Patients Requiring Le [NCT00134966]Phase 3493 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-08-31Completed
Dopamine Turnover Rate Measured With F-Dopa-PET as Surrogate Parameter for Diagnosis and Progression Analysis of Early Parkinson's Disease [NCT00153972]Phase 439 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-02-28Completed
Swiss Restless Legs Syndrome Trial (SRLS) A Double-blind, Randomised, Crossover Trial Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of the Dopamine Agonist Pramipexole (Sifrol®, 0.25-0.75 mg Per Day) Versus Levodopa / Benserazide (Madopar® DR, 125-375 mg Per Day) [NCT00144209]Phase 358 participants (Actual)Interventional2003-02-28Completed
A Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo-controlled, Cross-over Study to Investigate the Tolerability and Effect of Three Single-dose Regimens of BIA 9-1067 on the Levodopa Pharmacokinetics, Motor Response, and Erythrocyte Soluble Catechol-O-methyltransferase [NCT01568034]Phase 210 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-04-30Completed
Clinical Trial to Evaluate Levodopa as Treatment to Improve Vision in Individuals With Albinism [NCT01176435]Phase 245 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-09-30Completed
A Pilot Study to Evaluate Levodopa as Treatment for Residual Amblyopia in 8 to 17 Year Olds [NCT00789672]Phase 233 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-01-31Completed
A Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo- and Active-controlled Multiple-dose Study of BIA 9-1067 to Investigate Its Effect on Levodopa Pharmacokinetics Following a Levodopa/Carbidopa 100/25 mg Single-dose in Healthy Subjects [NCT01519284]Phase 182 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-11-30Completed
A Study to Compare IPX066 and Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone (CLE) Followed by an Open-Label Safety Study of IPX066 in Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT01130493]Phase 3110 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-05-31Completed
A 12-Week, Multi-center, Randomized, Prospective, Open-Label, Blinded Rater, Crossover Study of the Effects of Immediate-Release Carbidopa/Levodopa Versus Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone on Markers of Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) in Patients With Idiopat [NCT00601978]Phase 40 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-08-31Withdrawn(stopped due to Business decision brand strategy; no patients enrolled)
Stereotactic Accelerated Radiotherapy in GlioblastomA (SAGA) [NCT05781321]Phase 2170 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-03-23Recruiting
AMPA Receptor Antagonist Treatment of Parkinson's Disease [NCT00108667]Phase 240 participants Interventional2005-04-30Completed
A Single-blinded Assessment of the Short-term Effects of Cabergoline vs. Carbidopa/Levodopa on SPECT Dopamine Transporter Density in Out-patient Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT00129181]30 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-01-31Completed
Effect of Serotoninergic Treatment in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00009048]Phase 230 participants Interventional2001-01-31Completed
Background Incidence of Cardiovascular Ischaemic Events in Treated Parkinson's Disease Patients in the Impact Database [NCT01545856]1 participants (Actual)Observational2011-09-30Completed
Study to Compare the Effect of Treatment With Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone on the Quality of Life of Patients With Parkinson's Disease. [NCT00143026]Phase 4184 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-07-31Completed
A Multinational, Multicentre, Prospective Non-interventional Study to Assess Safety and Effectiveness of Opicapone Plus Standard of Care in Elderly Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT03959540]39 participants (Actual)Observational2020-04-28Completed
Alpha-2 Adrenergic Antagonist Treatment of Parkinson's Disease [NCT00040209]Phase 230 participants Interventional2002-06-30Completed
A Phase 4, Open-Label, Efficacy and Safety Study of Apokyn® for Rapid and Reliable Improvement of Motor Symptoms in Parkinson Disease Subjects With Delayed Onset of L-Dopa Action [NCT01770145]Phase 4127 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-12-31Completed
Dopamine Enhancement of Fear Extinction Learning in PTSD (1R21MH108753) [NCT02560389]Phase 4103 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-03-31Completed
A Prospective, Multi-center, Randomized, Open-label Study With Blinded Raters to Evaluate the Effects of Immediate Versus Delayed Switch to Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone on Motor Function and Quality of Life in Patients With Parkinson's Disease With End-o [NCT00219284]Phase 4359 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-01-31Completed
Acute Effects of Pharmacological Neuromodulation on Leg Motor Activity in Patients With Spinal Cord Injury Treated With Epidural Electrical Stimulation [NCT04052776]Phase 13 participants (Actual)Interventional2020-09-11Completed
A Phase 3, Randomized Study Investigating the Safety of CVT-301 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) in Parkinson's Disease (PD) Patients With Motor Response Fluctuations (OFF Phenomena) Compared to an Observational Cohort Control [NCT02352363]Phase 3408 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-03-31Completed
Clinical Study of Stalevo in the Treatment of Early Parkinson's Disease [NCT04952194]Phase 4180 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2022-01-01Recruiting
A Study to Compare Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of IPX066 to Standard Carbidopa-Levodopa [NCT00869791]Phase 227 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-11-30Completed
Assessment of Carbidopa/l-Dopa and Carbidopa/l Dopa/Entacapone on Synaptic Dopamine in Parkinson's Patients: An Open-Label Feasibility/Pilot Study With [123I]-IBZM SPECT (DOPA-SYN) [NCT00200447]Phase 23 participants (Actual)Interventional2004-03-31Completed
A Randomized, Two-Way Crossover Study to Investigate the Bioavailability of a Single Oral Dose of 12.5 mg Carbidopa, 50 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entacapone Compared to a Single Oral Combined Dose of Both 12.5 mg Carbidopa and 50 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entac [NCT00415740]Phase 142 participants Interventional2006-05-31Completed
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Study to Compare IPX054 200 mg and 250 mg to CD-LD IR 200 (2x100) mg Tablets and CD-LD CR 200 mg Tablet in Subjects With Parkinson's Disease [NCT00279825]Phase 216 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-01-31Completed
The REmission of the Impulse Control Disorder and the Changes of the Neuropsychiatric Characteristics After Switching Into Levodopa/Carbidopa in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Who Have Developed Impulse Control Disorders Due to the Dopamine Replacement [NCT01683253]Phase 4150 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-11-30Completed
Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamic Effects of Single and Repeated Escalating Doses of ODM-103: a Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo- and Entacapone-controlled Single Centre First-in-man Study in Healthy Volunteers. [NCT01688089]Phase 167 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-09-30Completed
Continuous Delivery of Levodopa/Carbidopa (Duodopa) in Patients With Advanced Idiopathic Parkinsons Disease - a Health Economic Evaluation [NCT00272688]Phase 410 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-01-31Completed
A Randomized, Two-Way Crossover Study to Investigate the Bioavailability of a Single Oral Dose of 37.5 mg Carbidopa, 150 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Entacapone Compared to a Single Oral Combined Dose of Both 37.5 mg Carbidopa and 150 mg Levodopa and 200 mg Ent [NCT00415922]Phase 142 participants Interventional2006-07-31Completed
Clinical Study to Investigate the Possible Efficacy and Safety of Montleukast in Parkinson Disease [NCT06113640]Phase 2/Phase 360 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-11-05Recruiting
Evaluation of the Role of the Noradrenergic System in Pain Perception in Parkinson's Disease [NCT01504178]Phase 328 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-05-31Completed
Augmentation of Antipsychotics With L-Dopa (Sinemet) [NCT01636037]Phase 213 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-09-30Completed
The Effect of BIA 9-1067 at Steady-state on the Levodopa Pharmacokinetics When Administered With Immediate-release 100/25 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa in Healthy Subjects [NCT02170376]Phase 180 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-09-30Completed
Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamic Effects of Single and Repeated Escalating Doses of ODM-104: a Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo- and Entacapone-controlled Single Centre First-in-man Study in Healthy Volunteers. [NCT01840423]Phase 1101 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-05-31Completed
A Pilot Study of the Drug Effects on Brain Connectivity of Parkinson's Disease [NCT01528592]18 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-06-30Completed
A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of CVT 301 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Motor Response Fluctuations (OFF Phenomena) (SPAN-PD™) [NCT02240030]Phase 3351 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-11-30Completed
Levodopa Response and Gut Microbiome in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT04956939]38 participants (Actual)Observational2018-07-17Completed
Contingency Management Plus Levodopa/Carbidopa for Treatment of Cocaine Dependence [NCT00713583]Phase 285 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-01-31Completed
A Randomized, Single-blind Trial on the Efficacy and Safety of L-dopa Monotherapy Versus Dopamine Agonists Monotherapy After Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease [NCT02347059]Phase 240 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2015-01-31Recruiting
A 6-week, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomized, Multicenter Study to Explore the Efficacy and Safety of AFQ056 When Combined With Increased Doses of L-dopa in Parkinson's Disease Patients With OFF Time and Moderate-severe L-dopa Induced Dyskinesia [NCT01092065]Phase 223 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-03-31Completed
A Phase 2 Efficacy, Safety and Pharmacokinetic Study of XP21279 BL2 and Sinemet® in Parkinson's Disease Subjects With Motor Fluctuations [NCT01171313]Phase 235 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-07-31Completed
A Pharmacodynamics and Safety Study of DSP-9632P in Patients With Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia in Parkinson's Disease [NCT05435729]Phase 17 participants (Actual)Interventional2022-05-31Completed
"Efficacy and Safety of BIA 9-1067 in Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease Patients With Wearing-off Phenomenon Treated With Levodopa Plus a Dopa Decarboxylase Inhibitor (DDCI): a Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group, Multicentre Clinica [NCT01227655]Phase 3427 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-03-31Completed
A Phase II Randomized, Parallel, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multi-center Clinical Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of WD-1603 Carbidopa-Levodopa Extended-Release Tablets in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT05036473]Phase 240 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-10-12Recruiting
Improving Therapeutic Learning for PTSD [NCT04558112]Phase 2120 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-02-18Recruiting
Effect of Long-acting Levodopa on Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Parkinson's Disease [NCT03111485]Phase 442 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2017-05-24Recruiting
Project 1 Aim 2, Adaptations of the Brain in Chronic Pain With Opioid Exposure [NCT05463367]Phase 280 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-01-01Recruiting
"Efficacy and Safety of BIA 9-1067 in Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease Patients With Wearing-off Phenomenon Treated With Levodopa Plus a Dopa Decarboxylase Inhibitor (DDCI): a Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo- and Active-controlled, Parallel-group, Multice [NCT01568073]Phase 3600 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-03-31Completed
A Phase IIa Study to Assess the Safety, Tolerability, Plasma Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy of Intermittent Oral Administration of Standard Levodopa/Carbidopa vs. Semi-continuous Intra-oral Administration of Levodopa/Carbidopa in Patients With Advanced Par [NCT02763137]Phase 218 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-07-30Completed
Interventional Study of Levodopa Replacement on Retinal Function in Oculocutaneous Albinism [NCT01663935]Phase 220 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-10-17Terminated(stopped due to Lack of funding)
Screening Medications for Cocaine Cessation and Relapse Prevention [NCT00218023]Phase 2101 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-03-31Completed
Open-Label Continuation Treatment Study With Levodopa - Carbidopa Intestinal Gel In Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease And Severe Motor-Fluctuations Who Have Exhibited A Persistent And Positive Effect To Treatment In Previous Studies [NCT00660673]Phase 3262 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-11-13Completed
Evaluation of the Subjective and Objective Painful Threshold in Multiple System Atrophy Pain and Multiple System Atrophy [NCT01577992]42 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-12-31Completed
A Phase 2 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Levodopa in Angelman Syndrome [NCT01281475]Phase 2/Phase 367 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-01-31Completed
"A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2 Study of the Safety, Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of CVT-310 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) in Patients With Parkinson's Disease and Motor Response Fluctuations (Off Episodes)" [NCT01617135]Phase 225 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-05-31Completed
Motor Network Physiology Characterization During Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery [NCT04957095]120 participants (Anticipated)Observational2022-02-18Recruiting
Effect of Levodopa-Carbidopa on Visual Function in Patients With Recent-Onset Nonarteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy [NCT00432393]Phase 40 participants Interventional2002-06-30Completed
"Inflammation-related Alterations in Neurocircuitry: Reversal With Levodopa; Inflammation Effects on Corticostriatal Connectivity and Reward: Role of Dopamine" [NCT02513485]Phase 457 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-10-09Completed
An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Baseline-Controlled, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of ABT-SLV187 Monotherapy in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease and Persistent Motor-Complications Despite Optimized Treatment With [NCT01960842]Phase 331 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-10-31Completed
Proof of Mecahism Study for the Treatment of Social Anhedonia in ASD [NCT03243552]Phase 256 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2017-06-01Active, not recruiting
Effect of Three Multiple-dose Regimens of BIA 9 1067 at Steady-state on the Levodopa Pharmacokinetics of a Single-dose of Immediate Release 100/25 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa and 100/25 mg Levodopa/Benserazide in Healthy Subjects [NCT02169414]Phase 174 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-02-28Completed
Combination Treatment With L-DOPA and Exercise for Mood and Mobility Problems in Late-Life [NCT04650217]Phase 41 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-10-07Terminated(stopped due to Study terminated by sponsor (NIMH))
Clinical Trial of Levodopa/Carbidopa ( Sinemet) Therapy in Angel Man Syndrome [NCT03235037]10 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-11-26Completed
An Open-label, Balanced, Randomized, Five-treatment, Five-period, Five-sequence, Multiple Oral Dose, Crossover Comparative Bioavailability Study of Different Strengths of Carbidopa/Levodopa Extended-release Tablets With Carbidopa and Levodopa Tablets in N [NCT05128175]Phase 115 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-10-29Recruiting
A Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo-controlled, Rising Multiple Dose Study in Healthy Volunteers to Investigate the Effect of BIA 6-512 at Steady-state on the Levodopa Pharmacokinetics When Administered in Combination With a Single-dose of Levodopa/Benser [NCT03097211]Phase 138 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-07-17Completed
An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Baseline-Controlled, Multicenter Study to Explore the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy of ABT-SLV187 in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT01479127]Phase 28 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-10-31Completed
Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between BIA 9-1067 and Standard-release Levodopa/Carbidopa in Healthy Subjects [NCT01533077]Phase 118 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-03-31Completed
Cognitive-enhancing DA Medications for Cocaine Dependence [NCT01393457]Phase 2119 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-06-30Completed
Augmenting Language Therapy for Aphasia: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Levodopa in Combination With Speech-Language Therapy [NCT01429077]Phase 2/Phase 336 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-10-31Completed
Clinical Study to Evaluate the Possible Efficacy of Metformin in Patients With Parkinson's Disease [NCT05781711]Phase 260 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-01-06Recruiting
Short Term Effects of Carbidopa-levodopa in Neovascular AMD [NCT03022318]Phase 221 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-05-02Completed
"A Multicentre, Double-blind, Randomised, Active- and Placebo-controlled Trial to Investigate the Efficacy and Tolerability of Nebicapone in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Wearingoff Phenomenon Treated With Levodopa/Carbidopa or Levodopa/Benserazide" [NCT03103399]Phase 2254 participants (Actual)Interventional2006-09-26Completed
Earlier Versus Later L-Dopa in Parkinson's Disease [NCT00004733]Phase 30 participants Interventional1998-01-31Completed
A Study of L-DOPA for Depression and Slowing in Older Adults [NCT02744391]Phase 447 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-08-24Completed
a Pilot Follow-up Study of Investigating the Effect of Pramipexole on Metabolic Network Activity Compared With Levodopa in Chinese Patients With Early Parkinson's Disease [NCT01470859]30 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-12-31Completed
Acute Effects of SCH 420814 on Dyskinesia and Parkinsonism in Levodopa Treated Patients [NCT00845000]Phase 112 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-04-21Completed
Corticostriatal Plasticity in the Transition to Chronic Pain: Effect of L-dopa [NCT01951105]Phase 472 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-02-24Completed
Imaging the Neurobiology of Behavioral and Medication Treatment for Cocaine Dependence [NCT01468012]Phase 2/Phase 323 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-07-31Completed
The Effect of Combining Robotic-Assisted Therapy With Levodopa/Carbidopa in Chronic Post-Stroke Upper-Limb Hemiparesis [NCT02346630]Phase 40 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-03-31Withdrawn(stopped due to We didn't receive the expected funding to support the study.)
Striatal Effective Connectivity to Predict Treatment Response in Cocaine Misuse [NCT02080819]Phase 2131 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-02-28Completed
Preventing Levodopa Induced Dyskinesia in Parkinson?s Disease With Statins [NCT04064294]120 participants (Anticipated)Observational2019-06-01Recruiting
Vigor and the LDR in Parkinson Disease [NCT04821830]40 participants (Anticipated)Observational2020-02-12Recruiting
"Multicentre, Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo-controlled Study in Four Parallel Groups of PD Patients Treated With Standard-release Levodopa/Carbidopa 100/25 mg (Sinemet®) or Levodopa/Benserazide 100/25 mg (Madopar®/Restex®) and With Motor Fluctuations [NCT01568047]Phase 240 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-02-28Completed
A 12 Month, Dose-Level Blinded Study Investigating the Safety and Efficacy of CVT 301 (Levodopa Inhalation Powder) in Parkinson's Disease Patients With Motor Response Fluctuations (OFF Phenomena) [NCT02242487]Phase 3325 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-03-31Completed
A Fixed Dose, Dose-response Study of Ropinirole Prolonged Release (PR) as Adjunctive Treatment to L-dopa in Patients With Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT01494532]Phase 4352 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-04-02Completed
Dopaminergic Therapy for Inflammation-Related Anhedonia in Depression - 2 [NCT06075771]Phase 470 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-11-30Not yet recruiting
Novel Non-opioid Post-surgical Pain Treatment in Females [NCT05087914]Phase 260 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-11-01Recruiting
An Open-Label, Two Part, Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG) for the Treatment of Non-Motor Symptoms in Subjects With Advanced Parkinson's Disease [NCT01736176]Phase 339 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-03-31Completed
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Parallel-group, Placebo-controlled Study of The Efficacy And Safety of Rotigotine Transdermal Patch In Chinese Subjects With Advanced-stage, Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease Who Are Not Well Controlled On Levodopa [NCT01646255]Phase 3346 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-07-31Completed
[information is prepared from clinicaltrials.gov, extracted Sep-2024]

Trial Outcomes

TrialOutcome
NCT00099268 (6) [back to overview]Occurrence of Dyskinesia
NCT00099268 (6) [back to overview]Occurrence of Wearing-off
NCT00099268 (6) [back to overview]Time to First Occurrence of Dyskinesia
NCT00099268 (6) [back to overview]Time to First Occurrence of Wearing-off
NCT00099268 (6) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score (Parts II and III)
NCT00099268 (6) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Health-related Quality of Life Assessed Using the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39)
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging: Worst Stage From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Social Support Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Stigma Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score, and UPDRS Subscores I, II, III, and IV at Baseline and Month 12
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]UPDRS Part I Score, up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]UPDRS Part II Score, up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Free Tapping - Speed) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Off Magnitude) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Off Time) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (On Time) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Satisfied With Function) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Self-assessment) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Tapping, Increased Speed - Accuracy) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Free Tapping - Accuracy) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Tapping, Random Chase - Accuracy) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Tapping, Random Chase - Speed) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Walking) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]EQ-5D Descriptive Systems Summary Index Score, up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline and Month 12
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score, up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Euro QoL 5 Dimensions Quality of Life Instrument (EQ-5D) Descriptive Systems Summary Index Score at Baseline and Month 12
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Indirect Monthly Costs Per Participant (Only Applied to Participants Younger Than 65) by Study Month, SEK 2010
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Apparent Sadness Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Concentration Difficulties Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Inability to Feel Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Inner Tension Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Lassitude Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Pessimistic Thoughts Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Reduced Appetite Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Reduced Sleep Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Reported Sadness Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MADRS Suicidal Thoughts Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) Total Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MMSE Attention and Calculation Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MMSE Language Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MMSE Recall Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MMSE Registration Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging: Best Stage From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging: Current Stage From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) Summary Index Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]UPDRS Part IV Score, up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]UPDRS Total Score up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Activities of Daily Living Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Bodily Discomfort Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Cognition Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Communication Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Emotional Well Being Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]PDQ-39 Mobility Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]MMSE Orientation Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]UPDRS Part III Score, up to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Direct Monthly Non-medical Costs Per Participant, SEK 2010
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Monthly Direct Medical Cost (Excluding Drug Costs) Per Participant, SEK 2010
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Monthly Drug Costs Per Participant, SEK 2010
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Total Monthly Cost Per Participant, in Swedish Crowns (SEK) 2010
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]"Schwab and England Scale: Best On Period Stage From Baseline to Month 36"
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Cramps) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Drawing Impairment [Wavelet Method]) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Dyskinetic Magnitude) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00141518 (60) [back to overview]Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Dyskinetic Time) From Baseline to Month 36
NCT00218023 (2) [back to overview]Mean Percentage of Cocaine-positive Urines Over Course of 12 Week Treatment in Subgroup NOT Achieving Abstinence at Baseline
NCT00218023 (2) [back to overview]Mean Percentage of Cocaine-positive Urines Over Course of 12 Week Treatment in Subgroup Achieving Abstinence at Baseline
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score From Baseline to Week 4
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score From Baseline to End of Treatment
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to Week 8
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to Week 4
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to End of Treatment
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Score From Baseline to Week 8
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score From Baseline to Week 8
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Score From Baseline to End of Treatment
NCT00219284 (9) [back to overview]Change in Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Score From Baseline to Week 4
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Month 12
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Endpoint"
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Deaths and Discontinuations Due to AEs
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Device Complications During the Nasojejunal (NJ) Test Period
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Device Complications During the Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy - With Jejunal Extension Tube (PEG-J) Surgery and Post-PEG Long Term Treatment Periods
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Clinical Chemistry Parameters
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Hematology Parameters
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Parameters
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks at Baseline
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks During the Post-PEG Long-Term Treatment Period
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Summary of Minnesota Impulsive Disorder Interview (MIDI) Assessment of Intense Impulsive Behavior at Baseline (BL) and During the Post-PEG Long-term Treatment (PPLT) Period
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants Taking at Least 1 Concomitant Medication During the Study
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Confirmed Cases of Melanoma
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Endpoint"
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Off Time at Endpoint"
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Total Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00335153 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Employment Impairment (EMP) II Status at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Average Daily Normalized Off Time"
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQual Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Questions 32, 33, and 34 at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 12
NCT00357994 (24) [back to overview]Employment Impairment (EMP) I Status at Baseline
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Findings
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Neurological Examination Findings
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Device Complications
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Clinical Chemistry Parameters
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Off Time at Endpoint"
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Hematology Parameters
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Parameters
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks at Baseline and Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Summary of Minnesota Impulsive Disorder Interview (MIDI) Assessment of Intense Impulsive Behavior at Baseline (BL) and Post-baseline (PBL)
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants Taking at Least 1 Concomitant Medication During the Study
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Confirmed Cases of Melanoma
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Endpoint"
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Month 12"
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Total Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Endpoint
NCT00360568 (34) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), Deaths and Discontinuations Due to AEs
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Change in the UPDRS Part I (Mentation, Behavior, and Mood) Score From Baseline to Month 3
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Change in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living [ADL]) Score From Baseline to Month 3
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to Month 3
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Patient and Investigator Global Evaluation of the Patient
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Change in the UPDRS Part IV (Complications of Therapy) Score From Baseline to Month 3
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Change in the UPDRS Part III (Motor Function) Score From Baseline to Month 3
NCT00391898 (7) [back to overview]Change on the QUICK Questionnaire (QQ) Score From Baseline to Month 3
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Absolute Duration of Dyskinesias
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State (Without Troublesome Dyskinesias)"
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State (With Troublesome Dyskinesias)"
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State (no Dyskinesias)"
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the Off State at Each Visit"
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline to Endpoint of 12 Weeks in the 3-day Average of Awake Time Per Day Spent in the Off State"
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 6
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 4
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 3 (2 Hours Post-dose)
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 3 (1 Hour Post-dose)
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 2
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part 1
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 8
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State"
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 4
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 2
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 12
NCT00406029 (19) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 10
NCT00467597 (1) [back to overview]Gaitmat Stance Measurements (AUC)
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part IV Total Score at Week 52 and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline in the Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale Score by Clinician at Week 52 and FAP in ROP Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part I Total Score at Week 52 and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part IV Total Score at Week 52 and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part III Total Score (in On State for the ROP+L-Dopa Group) at Week 52 and FAP"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Mean Change From Baseline in the Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale Score by Clinician at Week 52 and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Total Score (in On State for the ROP+L-Dopa Group) at Week 52 and Final Assessment Point (FAP)"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Mean Change From Baseline in Awake Time Off (Hours) and Awake Time On (Hours) at Week 52 and FAP in the ROP+L-Dopa Group Excluding Participants With 0 Off (Hour) at Baseline"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Japanese UPDRS Part III Mean Total Score (in On State for the ROP+L-Dopa Group) at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Japanese UPDRS Part II Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Number of Participants at Each Stage of the Modified Hoehn & Yahr Scale at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP in the ROP Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Number of Participants Scored as Responders on the Clinician's Global Impression (CGI) Scale at Week 52 and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants Remaining in the Study on the Indicated Days in the ROP Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants Remaining in the Study on the Indicated Days in the ROP+L-Dopa Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Japanese UPDRS Part IV Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP in the ROP Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP in the ROP Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part I Total Score at Week 52 and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Japanese UPDRS Part II Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP in ROP Group
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]Japanese UPDRS Part I Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP
NCT00485069 (23) [back to overview]"Number of Participants at Each Stage of the Modified Hoehn & Yahr Scale at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]"Time Spent in Off State Per Day"
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]"Time Spent in the on State Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]"Time Spent in the on State With no Dyskinesias"
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]"Time Spent in the on State With Troublesome Dyskinesias"
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]Total Sleep Time
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]Number of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]Absolute Duration of Dyskinesias
NCT00537017 (8) [back to overview]"Awake Time Per Day in the on State"
NCT00590122 (1) [back to overview]"Measurement of Time in Minutes From When a Patient Was in a Clinical Off State, Took Their Medication and Went Into a Clinical on State"
NCT00642356 (2) [back to overview]Change From Baseline on the Non-motor Score of the Quantitative Wearing-Off Questionnaire 9 Item (QWOQ-9)
NCT00642356 (2) [back to overview]Change From Baseline on the Motor Score of the Quantitative Wearing-Off Questionnaire 9 Item (QWOQ-9)
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQual Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Average Daily Normalized Off Time"
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Questions 32, 33, and 34 at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Employment Impairment (EMP) II Status at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Employment Impairment (EMP) I Status at Baseline
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660387 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Week 12
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Intense Impulsive Behavior
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Chemistry Laboratory Values
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Hematology Laboratory Values
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants Who Developed Melanoma
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]"Change in Average Daily Off Time Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary at End of Treatment"
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants Receiving Concomitant Anti-Parkinson's Disease Medications by Treatment Year
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]"Change in Average Daily On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary at End of Treatment"
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]"Change in Average Daily On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary at End of Treatment"
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Scores at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Dyskinesia Score at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at End of Treatment
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Values
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (TE AESI)
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Vitamin Levels Outside of the Normal Range
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Any Suicidal Ideation or Behavior
NCT00660673 (22) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Device Complications
NCT00713583 (1) [back to overview]Confirmed Abstinence From Cocaine as Assessed by Treatment Effectiveness Score (TES)
NCT00715520 (6) [back to overview]Aim 2: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements With Respect to Pulse
NCT00715520 (6) [back to overview]Aim 2: Mean Peak Acceleration for rTMS Treatment With Respect to Frequency
NCT00715520 (6) [back to overview]Aim 1: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements
NCT00715520 (6) [back to overview]Aim 1: Mean Parameter Estimate for Maximal Motor Evoked Potential (MEPmax) Derived From Stimulus Response Curves (SRC)
NCT00715520 (6) [back to overview]Aim 2: Mean Sum of Normalized Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) With Respect to Pulse
NCT00715520 (6) [back to overview]Aim 2: Mean Sum of Normalized Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) for rTMS Treatment With Respect to Frequency
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 4 Weeks Post Enrollment
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Distribution of Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Tolerability of Study Medication-Adverse Event Reporting
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Distribution of Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Distribution of Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Scores at 4 Weeks Post Enrollment
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 4 Weeks After Enrollment
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 4 Weeks Post Enrollment
NCT00789672 (13) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa
NCT00829439 (1) [back to overview]Maximum Dose of Levodopa/Carbidopa That Can be Tolerated (Without Any Dose Limiting Toxicity) by at Least 3 Subjects.
NCT00845000 (4) [back to overview]Mean Peak Dyskinesia Score
NCT00845000 (4) [back to overview]Mean Peak Finger Tapping Score
NCT00845000 (4) [back to overview]Mean Peak Tremor Score
NCT00845000 (4) [back to overview]Mean Peak Walking Speed
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]"Off Time Hours Reported by Subjects Using Parkinson's Patient Diary"
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]8-Hour Efficacy Using Day 1 Tapping
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]8-Hour Efficacy Using Day 1 Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III Score
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]Pharmacokinetics Measurements to Determine Area Under the Concentration-time Curve for the Dosing Interval for LD and CD Concentrations From Blood Collected Pre-dose and at Different Time Points on Day 1 and Day 8 of Periods 1 and 2 of Treatment Arms.
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]Pharmacokinetics Measurements to Determine Cmax for Carbidopa (CD) and Levodopa (LD) Plasma Concentrations From Samples Collected Pre-dose and at Different Time Points on Day 1 and Day 8 of Periods 1 and 2 of Both Treatment Arms.
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]Pharmacokinetics Measurements to Determine Tmax for Levodopa and Carbidopa Plasma Concentrations From Samples Collected Pre-dose and at Different Time Points on Day 1 and Day 8 of Periods 1 and 2 of Both Treatment Arms.
NCT00869791 (7) [back to overview]Result Summary of Day 1 Dyskinesia Evaluated by Investigator Assessment for Each Treatment Period
NCT00880620 (2) [back to overview]Summary of Change From Baseline to End of Study in Mean Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) Score
NCT00880620 (2) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in the Sum of UPDRS Part II + UPDRS Part III at Week 30
NCT00974974 (3) [back to overview]"Off Time"
NCT00974974 (3) [back to overview]"On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"
NCT00974974 (3) [back to overview]"Percentage of Off Time During Waking Hours at End of Study"
NCT01096186 (3) [back to overview]Total UPDRS Parts I-IV
NCT01096186 (3) [back to overview]Patient Global Impression (PGI)
NCT01096186 (3) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in the Sum of UPDRS Part II + UPDRS Part III
NCT01130493 (5) [back to overview]"Percentage of OFF Time During Waking Hours"
NCT01130493 (5) [back to overview]"Total OFF Time During Waking Hours"
NCT01130493 (5) [back to overview]"Total On With No Troublesome Dyskinesia"
NCT01130493 (5) [back to overview]Subject Preference
NCT01130493 (5) [back to overview]UPDRS Part II Plus Part III
NCT01176435 (1) [back to overview]Improved Vision
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Systemic Adverse Events
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at Enrollment
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 4 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopia Resolution at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopia Resolution at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopia Resolutionat 4 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 16 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 4 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 10 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 16 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 4 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 10 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 16 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 10 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 4 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 16 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 10 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 4 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at Enrollment
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 10 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 16 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopia Resolution at 16 Weeks
NCT01190813 (43) [back to overview]Amblyopia Resolution at 10 Weeks
NCT01227655 (4) [back to overview]UPDRS (Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale) Sections I (ON), II (ON and OFF), and III (ON)
NCT01227655 (4) [back to overview]Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)
NCT01227655 (4) [back to overview]Efficacy of 2 BIA 9-1067 (25 mg, and 50 mg) Compared With Placebo, When Administered With the Existing Treatment of L-DOPA Plus a DDCI (DOPA Decarboxylase Inhibitor)
NCT01227655 (4) [back to overview]Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS)
NCT01281475 (2) [back to overview]Bayley Cognitive Age Equivalent at 1 Year
NCT01281475 (2) [back to overview]Presence of Tremors
NCT01393457 (2) [back to overview]Cocaine Use Based on Urine Drug Screening
NCT01393457 (2) [back to overview]Number of Participants Who Completed the 10 Week Trial
NCT01429077 (1) [back to overview]Language Quotient (LQ) on the Western Aphasia Battery
NCT01468012 (1) [back to overview]Retention in Treatment
NCT01470859 (5) [back to overview]Hoehn&Yahr (H&Y) Staging
NCT01470859 (5) [back to overview]Longitudinal Change of Brain Network Activity
NCT01470859 (5) [back to overview]Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ39)
NCT01470859 (5) [back to overview]Patients With Clinical Improvement as Evaluated by Global Impression Scale (CGI).
NCT01470859 (5) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Score (UPDRS II, III)
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging at Baseline and End of Treatment
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs Leading to Discontinuation During the Run-in Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With AEs, SAEs, and AEs Leading to Discontinuation During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With PCS Blood Biochemistry Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale at Baseline and End of Treatment
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax), Average Plasma Concentration (Cavg), Trough Plasma Concentration (Cmin), and Cmin Within 2 and 12 Hours (Cmin [2-12 Hours]) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Time to Reach Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax) After Administration of Oral Levodopa/Carbidopa (L/C) Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Hematology Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Vital Signs Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Urinalysis Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Product Quality Complaints (PQC) During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Parkinson's Disease Diary Assessment
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Baseline and Endpoint (End of Treatment) Video Scoring of Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Items and Dyskinesia
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]AUC0-12/Dose0-12, AUC0-16/Dose0-16 After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]"Mean Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Percentage of Ratings in the OFF and Dyskinesia States on the TRS I and the Normal, OFF, and Dyskinesia States on the TRS II"
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Ratio of Metabolite 3-OMD to Levodopa (M/P [AUC0-12]) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]"Mean Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Percentage of Ratings in the Normal State on the Treatment Response Scale (TRS) I"
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Number of Participants With PCS Values in Special Laboratory Parameters During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in the Japanese Version of Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ-39) Total Score and Domain Scores
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]The Area Under the Concentrations-time Curve From 0 to 12 and 0 to 16 Hours (AUC0-12, AUC0-16) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Baseline and End of Treatment
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Degree of Fluctuation (2-12 Hours) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187
NCT01479127 (24) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in UPDRS Total Scores and Subscores
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]Responder Rate According to the Clinical Global Impression-global Improvement (CGI-I) Scale at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Absolute Awake Time Spent on Without Troublesome Dyskinesia (TD) at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline (BL) in Total Awake Time Spent Off at Week 4 of Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Absolute Awake Time Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in the Percent Awake Time Spent Off at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in the Percent Awake Time Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in the Percent Awake Time Spent on Without TD at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in the Percent of a 24- Hour Day Spent on Without TD at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in the Percent of a 24-hour Day Spent Off at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in the Percent of a 24-hour Day Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Motor Score With Participants in an on State, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in UPDRS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Score With Participants in an on State, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in UPDRS ADL Score With Participants in an Off State, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Percent Change From Baseline in Awake Time Spent Off at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Percent Change From Baseline in Awake Time Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Percent Change From Baseline in Awake Time Spent on Without TD at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]=1 Hour Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"-NCT01494532">"Percentage of Participants With a >=1 Hour Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]=2 Hours Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"-NCT01494532">"Percentage of Participants With a >=2 Hours Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]"Responder Rate Defined as the Percentage of Participants With a 20% Reduction in Baseline (BL) Off Time at Week-4 of Maintenance Period"
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline for Total Sleep Time During the Night Time Hours of Sleep at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time During the Night Time Hours of Sleep as a Percentage of a 24-hour Day, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part I at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]Percent Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time During the Night Time Hours of Sleep, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period
NCT01494532 (24) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants Withdrawn From the Study Due to Lack of Efficacy
NCT01519284 (4) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to the Last Sampling Time at Which the Drug Concentration Was at or Above the Lower Limit of Quantification.
NCT01519284 (4) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to Infinity
NCT01519284 (4) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa
NCT01519284 (4) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa
NCT01528592 (1) [back to overview]Correlation Coefficient Between UPDRS III Score and Independent Components Analysis Network Strength in Left Parietal Cortex.
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (3-OMD)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (BIA 9-1067)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (Carbidopa)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Occurrence of Cmax (3-OMD)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (3-OMD)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (BIA 9-1067)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (Carbidopa)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (L-DOPA)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (3-OMD)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (BIA 9-1067)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Carbidopa)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (L-DOPA)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Tmax - Time of Occurrence of Cmax Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (L-DOPA)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Occurrence of Cmax (Carbidopa)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero to Infinity (L-DOPA)
NCT01533077 (16) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Occurrence of Cmax (BIA 9-1067)
NCT01533116 (5) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point
NCT01533116 (5) [back to overview]tEmax - Time of Occurrence of Maximum Observed Effect on S-COMT Activity
NCT01533116 (5) [back to overview]AUEC0-24 - Area Under the Effect-time Curve (AUEC) to 24 h Post-dose
NCT01533116 (5) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration
NCT01533116 (5) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration
NCT01568034 (3) [back to overview]Tmax = Time to Cmax Day 3
NCT01568034 (3) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration Day 3
NCT01568034 (3) [back to overview]AUC0-6 - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 6 Hours Post-dose (Day 3)
NCT01568047 (3) [back to overview]AUC0-6 - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero to to 6 h Postdose (AUC [0-6])
NCT01568047 (3) [back to overview]Cmax - Observed Maximum Concentration
NCT01568047 (3) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Observed Maximum Concentration
NCT01568073 (4) [back to overview]Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS)
NCT01568073 (4) [back to overview]Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)
NCT01568073 (4) [back to overview]Total UPDRS SCORE (I, II (ON), and III)
NCT01568073 (4) [back to overview]Efficacy of 3 BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 25 mg, and 50 mg) Compared With 200 mg of Entacapone or Placebo,
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]Percentage of Responders From Baseline to the End of the Doubleblind Maintenance Period
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Change in Absolute Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Change in Relative Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Change in the Number of Off Periods From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS Part III Motor Examination) During on Periods From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Percent Change in Absolute Time Spent Off From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Percent Change in Absolute Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Percent Change in Relative Time Spent Off From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]"Percent Change in Relative Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]Absolute Change in Absolute Time Spent 'Off' From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]Change in Status of the Subject (Off) After Wake-up From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]Change in Status of the Subject (on) After Wake-up With Troublesome Dyskinesia From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period
NCT01646255 (13) [back to overview]Change in Status of the Subject (on) After Wake-up Without Troublesome Dyskinesia From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period
NCT01663935 (2) [back to overview]Visual Acuity Change
NCT01663935 (2) [back to overview]Contrast Sensitivity
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Health-related Productivity
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline for Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia Based on PD Diary"
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 Item (PDQ-39) Summary Index
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Normalized Off Time Based on Parkinson's Disease Diary"
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 60 in the Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS) Total Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS) Total Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in CANTAB Spatial Working Memory Strategy Score at Week 12
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) Spatial Working Memory Between Errors Score at Week 12
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Social Support Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Cardiovascular Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With a Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Response of Improved
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Adverse Events
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Number of Participants Who Used Healthcare Resources Through Week 60
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Number of Participants Who Used Healthcare Resources During the First 4 Weeks
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part V: Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part IV: Complications of Therapy Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III: Motor Examination Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part II: Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part I: Mentation, Behavior, and Mood Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in UPDRS Dyskinesia Items Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Stigma Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Mobility Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Emotional Well-Being Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) Verbal Fluency Scores at Week 60
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Communication Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Cognition Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Bodily Discomfort Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Activities of Daily Living Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Urinary Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Sleep/Fatigue Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Attention/Memory Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Sexual Function Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Perceptual Problems/Hallucinations Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Mood/Cognition Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Miscellaneous Domain Score
NCT01736176 (37) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in NMSS Gastrointestinal Tract Domain Score
NCT01770145 (1) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Time to on (TTO) by Subject Diary."
NCT01951105 (2) [back to overview]Percent of Residual Pain Stratified by Gender for Individuals Receiving Treatment
NCT01951105 (2) [back to overview]Number of Participants With 20% Reduction in Pain on the NRS Pain Intensity Scale
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility, Emotional Well-Being, Stigma, Social Support, Cognition, Communication, and Bodily Discomfort Domain Scores: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IIl Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]"Average Daily Normalized Off Time at Baseline and Each Visit: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]"Average Daily Normalized Off Time Excluding Subjects Who Did Not Receive LCIG During the Entire PEG-J Period: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]"Average Daily Normalized Off Time Including All PD Diaries Regardless if They Were Completed After the Subject Had Used a Concomitant Anti-Parkinsonian Medication: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]"Average Daily Normalized Off Time: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]"Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]"Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Parameters
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG)
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Clinical Chemistry Parameters
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Hematology Parameters
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression - Change (CGI-I) Score at the Final PEG-J Visit
NCT01960842 (20) [back to overview]Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) Score at the Final PEG-J Visit
NCT02080819 (1) [back to overview]Cocaine Treatment Outcome
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to Infinity (Levodopa/Benserazide)
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to Infinity (Levodopa/Carbidopa)
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to the Last Sampling Time at Which the Drug Concentration Was at or Above the Lower Limit of Quantification. (Levodopa/Benserazide)
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to the Last Sampling Time at Which the Drug Concentration Was at or Above the Lower Limit of Quantification. (Levodopa/Carbidopa)
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Benserazide )
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Benserazide)
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]Tmax - Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Carbidopa)
NCT02169414 (8) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Carbidopa)
NCT02170376 (6) [back to overview]AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero up to Infinity With Extrapolation of the Terminal Phase
NCT02170376 (6) [back to overview]AUC0-5 - AUC Over 5 Hours
NCT02170376 (6) [back to overview]AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time Zero to the Time (t) Corresponding to the Last Quantifiable Concentration.
NCT02170376 (6) [back to overview]Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa
NCT02170376 (6) [back to overview]t1/2 - Terminal Plasma Half-life
NCT02170376 (6) [back to overview]Tmax - Time of Occurrence of Maximum Plasma Concentration
NCT02240030 (6) [back to overview]PD Patient Diary
NCT02240030 (6) [back to overview]Proportion of Patients Achieving Resolution of an OFF to an ON State Within 60 Minutes.
NCT02240030 (6) [back to overview]Proportion of Subjects Who Improved PGIC With CVT-301 vs. Placebo at Week 12
NCT02240030 (6) [back to overview]Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III
NCT02240030 (6) [back to overview]UPDRS Part III at 10 Min.
NCT02240030 (6) [back to overview]UPDRS Part III Motor Score at 20 Minutes
NCT02242487 (5) [back to overview]Pulmonary Safety of CVT-301 Change From Baseline for FEV1.
NCT02242487 (5) [back to overview]Count of Patients Achieving Resolution of an OFF to an ON State Within 60 Minutes.
NCT02242487 (5) [back to overview]Change From Baseline in OFF Time.
NCT02242487 (5) [back to overview]Pulmonary Safety for CVT-301 Change From Baseline for (FEV1/FVC).
NCT02242487 (5) [back to overview]Pulmonary Safety for CVT-301 Change From Baseline for FVC.
NCT02352363 (4) [back to overview]Pulmonary Safety Assessed by Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second [FEV1]
NCT02352363 (4) [back to overview]Pulmonary Safety Assessed by Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second / Forced Vital Capacity Ratio.
NCT02352363 (4) [back to overview]Pulmonary Safety Assessed by Forced Vital Capacity [FVC].
NCT02352363 (4) [back to overview]Diffusion Capacity of the Lungs for Carbon Monoxide (DLco).
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Reaction Time Task (CANTAB) Neurocognitive Test
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), Anhedonia Subscale Score
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Change in Functional Corticostriatal Connectivity
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Change in Motivation and Pleasure (MAP) Scale Score
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Correlation Coefficient Between Change in Corticostriatal Connectivity and Levels of Plasma C-reactive Protein and Other Immune Markers
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Digit Symbol Task Neurocognitive Test
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Effort-Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT) Neurocognitive Test
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Finger Tapping Task (FTT) Neurocognitive Test
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Self Report (IDS-SR) Questionnaire
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) Self-report Questionnaire
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Profile of Mood States (POMS) Scale
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) Self-report Questionnaire
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) State Scale
NCT02513485 (14) [back to overview]The Trail Making Test (TMT) Neurocognitive Assessment
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the NMSS Total Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the Modified PDSS-2 Total Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 26 in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-8) Summary Index Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline at Week 26 in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline at Week 26 in Parkinson's Anxiety Scale (PAS) Total Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline at Week 26 in Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline at Week 26 in UPDRS Parts I, III, and IV Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the NMSS Domain Scores
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the Modified PDSS-2 Domain Scores
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Change From Baseline at Week 26 in King's PD Pain Scale (KPPS) Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Final Score
NCT02549092 (12) [back to overview]Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Final Score
NCT02560389 (3) [back to overview]Functional Activation of Anterior Cingulate Cortex
NCT02560389 (3) [back to overview]Percentage Change in Functional Activation of Amygdala
NCT02560389 (3) [back to overview]Galvanic Skin Response
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]Change in Morning UPDRS Part III (Motor) Scores
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]"Change in Daily Good ON Time as Assessed by a Blinded Rater"
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]"Change in Daily OFF Time"
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) Score as Assessed by Investigator
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]Change in PDQ-39 Summary Index and the 8-dimension Scores
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]Change in PDSS-2 Total Score
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]Change in UPDRS Part II (ADL) Scores
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]"Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved at Least Certain Percent Reduction in Average Daily Normalized OFF Time"
NCT02577523 (9) [back to overview]"The Percentage of Subjects With Full ON at Approximately 08:00 and Approximately 09:00, as Determined by the Subject"
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (24 Item)
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Pattern Comparison
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Pattern Comparison
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Post-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Limbic Striatum
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Post-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Sensorimotor Striatum
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Pre-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Associative Striatum
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Pre-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Limbic Striatum
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Single Task Gait Speed
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Single Task Gait Speed
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Letter Comparison
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Digit Symbol Substitution Test
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Pre-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Sensorimotor Striatum
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Digit Symbol Substitution Test
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Dual Task Gait Speed
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Dual Task Gait Speed
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Letter Comparison
NCT02744391 (19) [back to overview]Post-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Associative Striatum
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS) Total Score
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-8 (PDQ-8) Summary Index
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score (Motor Examination)
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in ON Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in OFF Time
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Score at Week 12
NCT02799381 (7) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score (Activities of Daily Living)
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate RR Interval - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate RR Interval - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate QTcF Interval - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate QTcF Interval - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate QT Interval - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate QT Interval - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate QRS Duration - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate QRS Duration - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate PR Interval - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aggregate PR Interval - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With TEAEs - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in ECG Mean Heart Rate - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With TEAEs, Graded by Severity - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With a Response of 'Yes' to Any Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Suicidal Ideation or Suicidal Behavior Item - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With a Response of 'Yes' to Any C-SSRS Suicidal Ideation or Suicidal Behavior Item - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]MDS-UPDRS Part III Total Score - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Change From Baseline (CFB) in Basophils - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Urea Nitrogen - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Urea Nitrogen - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Urate - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Urate - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part II/III Score - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part III Total Score - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part II Total Score - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part I-IV Total Score - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part I Total Score - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Temperature - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Eosinophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Temperature - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Supine Systolic Blood Pressure - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Supine Systolic Blood Pressure - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Supine Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Supine Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS) Score - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Standing Systolic Blood Pressure - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Standing Systolic Blood Pressure - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Standing Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Standing Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Specific Gravity - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Specific Gravity - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Sodium - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Monocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Sodium - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Reticulocytes to Erythrocytes Ratio (%) - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Monocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Monocytes - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Monocytes - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Magnesium - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Magnesium - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Lymphocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Lymphocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Lymphocytes - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Lymphocytes - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Reticulocytes to Erythrocytes Ratio (%) - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Reticulocytes - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Reticulocytes - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Respiratory Rate - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Respiratory Rate - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Pulse Oximetry- Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Pulse Oximetry - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Prothrombin Time - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Prothrombin Time - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Prothrombin International Normalized Ratio - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Prothrombin International Normalized Ratio - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Protein - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Protein - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Lipase - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Lipase - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Leukocytes - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Leukocytes - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Hemoglobin - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Hemoglobin - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Hematocrit - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]Percentage of Participants With TEAEs, Graded by Severity - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Hematocrit - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Heart Rate - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Heart Rate - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Erythrocytes - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Erythrocytes - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Eosinophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Eosinophils - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Eosinophils - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Mean Heart Rate - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Creatinine - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Creatinine - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Chloride - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Chloride - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Calcium - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Calcium - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Bilirubin - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Bilirubin - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Bicarbonate - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Bicarbonate - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Basophils to Leukocytes Ratio [Percentage (%)] - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Basophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Basophils - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aspartate Aminotransferase - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Aspartate Aminotransferase - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Alkaline Phosphatase - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Alkaline Phosphatase - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Albumin - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Albumin - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Alanine Aminotransferase - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Potassium - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Potassium - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Platelets - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Platelets - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Phosphate - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Phosphate - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in pH - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in pH - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Neutrophils- Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Neutrophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Neutrophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Neutrophils - Part B
NCT03000569 (119) [back to overview]CFB in Alanine Aminotransferase - Part A
NCT03055936 (3) [back to overview]Fluctuation of Levodopa Cmax/Cmin, Tau
NCT03055936 (3) [back to overview]Levodopa Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the 24 h PK Sample (AUC0-24) Time 0 to the 24 h PK Sample (AUC0-24)
NCT03055936 (3) [back to overview]Levodopa Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Cmax of L-dopa
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Duration of Response, Where Response is Defined as an Improvement of 30% in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score From Baseline.
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Mean Maximum Change From Baseline in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Mean Change From Baseline in MDS-UPDRS Score Over 2 Hours for C1, C2, C3 and Change From Baseline at 30, 60, 90, 120 Minutes for C4, in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Time to Response (Defined as Improvement of 30% in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score From Baseline)
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Cumulative Number of Responders (Defined as Improvement of 30% in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score From Baseline)
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Change From Baseline in MDS-UPDRS Part III Scores
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Tmax of Carbidopa
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Cmax of Carbidopa
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Tmax of L-dopa
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]"Assessment of Time to ON as Evaluated by Subject Self-assessment"
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]"Subjective Time to ON as Evaluated by the Investigator"
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]AUC0-2h for Carbidopa
NCT03541356 (15) [back to overview]AUC0-2hr for L-dopa
NCT03761030 (6) [back to overview]Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self Report (IDS-SR)
NCT03761030 (6) [back to overview]Letter Comparison Test
NCT03761030 (6) [back to overview]Single Task Gait Speed
NCT03761030 (6) [back to overview]Pattern Comparison Test
NCT03761030 (6) [back to overview]Change From Baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 24-Item Scale to Study Completion (8 Weeks)
NCT03761030 (6) [back to overview]Digit Symbol Test
NCT03778294 (2) [back to overview]Progression Free Survival
NCT03778294 (2) [back to overview]Overall Survival (OS)
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Wechsler Adult Intelligence System Digit Symbol Substitution Test
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Mini Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest)
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Average Gait Speed
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Cognitive Z-score
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part III Total
NCT04325503 (7) [back to overview]Short Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale Score
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Interquartile Range of Bradykinesia Score (BK75-BK25) as Assessed by the PKG Wearable Device
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Number of Participants With TEAEs During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Interquartile Range of Dyskinesia Score (DK75-DK25) as Assessed by the PKG Wearable Device
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Median Dyskinesia Score (DK50) as Assessed by the PKG Wearable Device
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part II Score
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Quality of Life Assessed by Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 Item (PDQ-39) Summary Index Score
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Quality of Life Assessed by the EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) Summary Index
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Dyskinesia (Hours)"
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Number of Participants With a Subscore > 5 For Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson's Disease - Ration Scale (QUIP-RS) at Any Time During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Average Daily Normalized Off Time (Hours)"
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) During the Oral LD/CD Stabilization Period
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Changes From Baseline in Hematology, Chemistry, Urinalysis, Special Laboratory Parameters, Vital Signs, and Electrocardiograms (ECGs)
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Median Bradykinesia Score (BK50) as Assessed by the Parkinson's KinetiGraph/Personal KinetiGraph (PKG) Wearable Device
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]"Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]"Early Morning Off Status (Morning Akinesia) at Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period"
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Irritation Grade Numeric Grade >= 5 or Letter Grade >= D on the Infusion Site Irritation Scale Across All Study Post-Baseline Visits
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale-2 (PDSS-2) Total Score
NCT04380142 (18) [back to overview]Number of Participants With Affirmative Responses on the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Across All Study Post-Baseline Visits During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Single Task Gait Speed Test Following Step 2
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview][18F]-FDOPA PET Measure in Striatal Region of Interest
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) Following Step 2
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Letter Comparison Test Following Step 2
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale Following Step 2
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Single Task Gait Speed Test Following Step 1
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Pattern Comparison Test Following Step 1
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Pattern Comparison Test Following Step 2
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale Following Step 1
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Letter Comparison Test Following Step 1
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT) Following Step 1
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Digit Symbol Test Following Step 2
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Digit Symbol Test Following Step 1
NCT04493320 (14) [back to overview]Change in Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) Following Step 1
NCT04650217 (1) [back to overview]Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)

Occurrence of Dyskinesia

"Dyskinesia was assessed by a blinded rater at each visit. Time to dyskinesia was defined as the visit at which the rater first answered yes to the following question: In your opinion, does this patient have dyskinesia?" (NCT00099268)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 208

InterventionParticipants (Number)
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone128
Carbidopa/Levodopa103

[back to top]

Occurrence of Wearing-off

Wearing-off is defined as a perception of loss of mobility or dexterity, usually taking place gradually over minutes (up to an hour) and usually bearing a close temporal relationship to the timing of anti-parkinsonian medications; it does not include early-morning akinesia. To ascertain its occurrence, a blinded rater questioned the patient as to whether he/she had noticed that the benefits of the study drug were wearing-off. (NCT00099268)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 134

InterventionParticipants (Number)
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone139
Carbidopa/Levodopa161

[back to top]

Time to First Occurrence of Dyskinesia

"Dyskinesia was assessed by a blinded rater at each visit. Time to dyskinesia was defined as the visit at which the rater first answered yes to the following question: In your opinion, does this patient have dyskinesia? Time to dyskinesia was estimated by Kaplan-Meier product limit estimate that takes into consideration patients who did not experience dyskinesia by censoring them at the end of the study." (NCT00099268)
Timeframe: Treatment duration for an individual patient varied between a minimum of 134 weeks for those patients recruited last and a maximum of 208 weeks for those patients recruited first

Interventionweeks (Number)
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone90.7
Carbidopa/Levodopa117.1

[back to top]

Time to First Occurrence of Wearing-off

Wearing off is defined as a perception of loss of mobility or dexterity, usually taking place gradually over minutes (up to an hour) and usually bearing a close temporal relationship to the timing of anti-parkinsonian medications; it does not include early-morning akinesia. To ascertain its occurrence, a blinded rater questioned the patient whether he/she had noticed that the benefits of the study drug wear-off. A motor complications and patient questionnaire card were provided to assist the blinded rater in determining whether a patient had experienced wearing-off. (NCT00099268)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (134-208 weeks of treatment)

InterventionWeeks (Mean)
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone131.7
Carbidopa/Levodopa129.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score (Parts II and III)

The UPDRS is a standardized assessment scale used to measure the patient's disease state. It was to be completed by a blinded rater. There are 6 parts to the UPDRS. Part II (items 5-17; total score 0-52 units on the scale) measures the patient's activities of daily living and part III (items 18-31; total score 0-56 units on the scale) measures the motor function of the patient. The total score ranges from 0 to 108 units on the scale. A higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00099268)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 6 and Week 130

,
InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Change from baseline to Week 6Change from baseline to Week 130
Carbidopa/Levodopa21.822.8
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone21.923.2

[back to top] [back to top]

Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging: Worst Stage From Baseline to Month 36

The worst PD stage that the participant experienced during the last month was characterized according to Modified Hoehn and Yahr criteria, measured on the following 8-point scale for staging: 0=no signs of disease; 1=unilateral disease; 1.5=unilateral plus axial involvement; 2=bilateral disease; 2.5=mild bilateral disease; 3=mild to moderate bilateral disease; 4=severe disability; and 5=wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve3.83.63.83.73.73.63.83.94.03.93.9
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA3.73.73.73.83.83.93.84.04.04.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA4.04.14.04.04.24.34.44.54.64.5

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Social Support Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27,0,0Month 0; n=27, 22, 17Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=24, 20, 16Month 12; n=23, 20, 17Month 18; n=22, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 14Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve8.310.310.812.710.212.112.715.718.218.321.8
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA12.912.513.113.819.617.920.616.211.714.4
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA22.116.724.325.528.418.821.718.829.527.9

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Stigma Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 19, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=21, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve24.816.216.120.815.517.815.615.816.420.519.5
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA16.518.819.012.819.413.823.514.012.915.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA22.919.823.624.625.418.815.418.224.425.0

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score, and UPDRS Subscores I, II, III, and IV at Baseline and Month 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. For Parts I-III and Total Score, each question is measured on a 5-point scale of 0 (normal or no disease effect) to 4 (maximum negative effect); for Part IV, questions are measured on a 5- or 2-point scale (0 or 1). Part I score is the sum of answers to 'Mentation, Behavior and Mood' questions, with a score range from 0-16. Part II score is the sum of answers to 'Activities of Daily Living' questions, with a score range from 0-52. Part III score is the sum of answers to 'Motor Examination' questions, with a score range from 0-108. Part IV score is the sum of answers to 'Complications of Therapy' questions, with a score range from 0-23. Total Score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale, with a score range from 0-176. Higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Month 12

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Total Score, Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Total Score, Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Part I, Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Part I, Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Part II, Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Part II, Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Part III, Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Part III, Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Part IV, Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Part IV, Month 12; n=25, 20, 17
Duodopa Naïve52.142.52.93.115.412.224.421.59.45.7
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA44.0NA2.6NA13.4NA21.2NA7.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA48.2NA3.2NA14.3NA23.5NA7.2

[back to top]

UPDRS Part I Score, up to Month 36

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. For Parts I-III and Total Score, each question is measured on a 5-point scale of 0 (normal or no disease effect) to 4 (maximum negative effect). Part I score is the sum of answers to 'Mentation, Behavior and Mood' questions, with a score range from 0-16. Higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint visit; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve2.42.52.93.04.13.94.13.93.9
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years2.02.02.32.92.73.03.53.93.5
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years2.73.22.93.33.33.52.83.84.0

[back to top]

UPDRS Part II Score, up to Month 36

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. For Parts I-III and Total Score, each question is measured on a 5-point scale of 0 (normal or no disease effect) to 4 (maximum negative effect). Part II score is the sum of answers to 'Activities of Daily Living' questions, with a score range from 0-52. Higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint visit; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve12.312.012.411.813.312.914.013.914.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years13.712.813.413.012.912.214.614.615.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years15.415.014.314.415.617.216.916.817.3

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Free Tapping - Speed) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. Free tapping is defined as voluntary repetitive finger tapping on computer-generated fields. 'Free tapping speed' is a count of the number of taps per 20 seconds. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventiontaps/20 seconds (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve39.939.744.443.546.847.450.750.347.248.149.348.744.046.947.347.649.449.546.345.541.843.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA39.240.242.243.243.443.045.748.044.546.643.146.345.548.742.242.644.745.641.243.2
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA40.640.346.343.248.047.646.847.047.046.646.745.938.741.549.352.651.450.543.141.4

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Off Magnitude) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Off time' is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. Magnitude scores were 1 (worst) to 5 (best). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; 19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; 16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve2.72.83.63.63.53.63.43.83.73.83.73.63.73.83.63.73.83.83.13.53.33.5
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA3.23.52.83.63.23.73.33.63.33.63.33.73.53.63.33.63.53.83.43.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA3.43.33.13.33.73.43.33.23.43.43.23.53.13.42.93.23.23.03.33.1

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Off Time) From Baseline to Month 36

"The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug, and is represented as a percentage of total time awake per day." (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage of 'off' time (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve41.235.423.420.826.423.025.621.923.919.525.324.021.117.929.122.023.421.635.124.730.724.8
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA30.621.434.322.730.121.832.321.528.019.528.921.625.421.329.424.029.418.828.522.3
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA25.125.725.720.218.620.923.622.823.823.524.920.130.424.928.023.031.523.627.125.9

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (On Time) From Baseline to Month 36

"The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug, and is represented as a percentage of total time of the last __ hours." (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage of 'on' time (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve40.240.358.461.861.662.657.762.260.559.761.159.561.961.561.362.364.862.454.559.152.956.0
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA49.860.252.058.355.557.352.359.557.563.055.257.659.557.449.356.955.361.854.656.5
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA55.246.549.855.055.853.247.950.849.051.451.152.541.342.758.658.851.955.149.946.2

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Satisfied With Function) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Satisfied with function' scores were 1 (worst) to 5 (best). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve2.52.63.33.43.43.53.53.63.43.53.63.53.43.53.43.63.63.53.43.53.23.4
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA3.23.43.03.43.33.43.33.43.43.63.43.63.63.53.43.63.33.53.33.4
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA3.83.33.43.33.73.53.63.43.53.63.33.43.13.33.63.63.53.53.43.1

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Self-assessment) From Baseline to Month 36

"The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Self-assessment' scores were -3 (Off) to +3 (dyskinetic). 'Off' time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. 'Dyskinetic' time is time with involuntary muscle movement. 0 is defined as the normal ON state without dyskinesia (the desired motor state). Everything closer to 0 means improvement, everything more away from 0 means either less mobility (in the negative score) or involuntary movements (dyskinesia, in the positive score)." (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve-0.9-0.3-0.4-0.2-0.2-0.3-0.4-0.2-0.20.2-0.3-0.3-0.3-0.2-0.5-0.2-0.4-0.3-0.9-0.2-0.6-0.3
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA-0.1-0.1-0.6-0.1-0.20.0-0.4-0.0-0.20.10.1-0.2-0.0-0.1-0.2-0.3-0.00.2-0.2-0.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA0.20.10.00.30.30.30.4-0.10.40.1-0.00.10.1-0.00.2-0.30.3-0.20.20.2

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Tapping, Increased Speed - Accuracy) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Tapping at increased speed - accuracy' is the percentage of accurate taps per all taps on computer-generated fields. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage of accurate taps (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve74.673.783.780.483.181.387.187.886.486.087.081.881.382.185.785.387.388.677.970.779.574.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA71.073.973.574.774.273.678.278.880.177.577.978.779.482.073.574.571.772.870.472.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA73.273.268.869.373.373.077.175.674.672.471.472.169.070.079.880.681.077.968.067.5

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Free Tapping - Accuracy) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Free tapping' is defined as ____. 'Free tapping accuracy' is the percentage of accurate free taps per 20 seconds(?). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage of tapping accuracy (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve70.771.971.470.173.470.067.665.767.065.468.764.758.961.262.364.466.366.860.750.363.760.1
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA69.870.770.369.766.266.163.669.971.571.765.469.166.269.167.267.360.364.658.762.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA63.865.263.565.864.866.765.867.561.560.465.861.461.962.462.167.961.263.659.360.3

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Tapping, Random Chase - Accuracy) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. Tapping: Random chase speed' is defined as the number of correct taps of fields randomly selected by the computer per 20 seconds. 'Tapping random chase - accuracy' is the percentage of accurate random chase taps. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage of accurate taps (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve92.091.894.692.990.592.595.294.691.292.492.291.290.291.691.792.995.193.683.582.187.887.3
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA90.091.389.288.689.088.790.893.190.792.588.892.192.293.485.988.685.988.483.886.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA92.692.389.189.890.589.291.892.590.689.286.885.489.090.790.591.289.788.887.586.7

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Tapping, Random Chase - Speed) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. Tapping: Random chase speed' is defined as the number of correct taps of fields randomly selected by the computer per 20 seconds. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventiontaps/20 seconds (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; 23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve24.524.226.326.327.227.228.328.227.227.027.226.326.226.327.026.727.427.926.525.225.125.1
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA22.623.423.824.424.224.424.425.625.526.424.925.924.826.524.425.123.123.922.723.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA22.722.024.324.024.425.325.025.623.824.724.825.022.723.825.127.025.126.322.823.0

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Walking) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. Walking scores ranged from 1 (worst) to 5 (best). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=14, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve2.73.13.33.73.53.73.54.03.64.03.63.73.33.83.43.93.43.82.33.12.83.4
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA3.23.73.03.63.23.73.33.83.53.83.53.93.53.93.44.03.64.03.43.8
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA3.43.33.13.33.33.43.13.13.13.13.43.52.92.83.63.93.73.73.03.0

[back to top]

EQ-5D Descriptive Systems Summary Index Score, up to Month 36

The EQ-5D is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 to 1.00 with positive change indicating improvement. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 18, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint visit; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.670.610.640.610.640.580.550.520.54
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years0.680.700.710.660.660.670.690.570.60
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years0.620.570.570.590.530.470.520.510.46

[back to top]

EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline and Month 12

The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' The scale was normalized to a scale of 0 to 1, with higher values indicating a better health state. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Month 12

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 12; n=25, 19, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.440.63
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.64
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.64

[back to top]

EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score, up to Month 36

The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint visit; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.680.650.600.680.620.640.560.560.57
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years0.650.630.650.690.600.600.670.610.61
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years0.580.580.590.580.550.630.650.620.57

[back to top]

Euro QoL 5 Dimensions Quality of Life Instrument (EQ-5D) Descriptive Systems Summary Index Score at Baseline and Month 12

The EQ-5D is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Month 12

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 12; n=25, 20, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.570.59
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.66
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.51

[back to top]

Indirect Monthly Costs Per Participant (Only Applied to Participants Younger Than 65) by Study Month, SEK 2010

Indirect costs consist of sick-leave and early retirement due to PD, are applied to individuals only up to the age of 65 since the main indirect cost item - early retirement due to disability - is only available for individuals 30-64 years old. Sixty-five is also a common retirement age in Sweden. The average rate for US Dollar (USD) to SEK on 31 December 2010 was 1 USD = 6.734 SEK. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (month -3) for Duodopa-naïve participants, then at Month 0, and monthly thereafter until Month 36

InterventionSEK 2010 (Mean)
Month -3; n=15/37Month 0; n=23/67Month 1; n=23/67Month 2; n=22/65Month 3; n=23/65Month 4; n=23/65Month 5; n=22/65Month 6; n=21/65Month 7; n=24/65Month 8; n=24/63Month 9; n=22/62Month 10; n=22/62Month 11; n=22/62Month 12; n=22/62Month 13; n=22/62Month 14; n=22/62Month 15; n=22/61Month 16; n=22/61Month 17; n=22/61Month 18; n=22/61Month 19; n=22/60Month 20; n=20/59Month 21; n=20/58Month 22; n=18/57Month 23; n=18/57Month 24; n=17/56Month 25; n=16/54Month 26; n=18/54Month 27; n=16/53Month 28; n=15/53Month 29; n=16/53Month 30; n=16/53Month 31; n=15/50Month 32; n=14/50Month 33; n=14/50Month 34; n=14/49Month 35; n=14/49Month 36; n=15/49
Total1703214109141091389614543145431389613250155121600514569145691439914399142301456914808148081446314463147041352913763125301253012003120591361512683118901268312683126041176311763120031200312432

[back to top]

MADRS Apparent Sadness Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Apparent sadness scores rate despondency, gloom and despair (more than just ordinary transient low spirits), reflected in speech, facial expression, and posture. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.70.40.81.00.90.40.81.01.21.11.1
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.50.60.60.70.90.60.61.00.80.8
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.80.50.50.90.80.80.70.61.31.0

[back to top]

MADRS Concentration Difficulties Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Concentration Difficulties scores rate difficulties in collecting one's thoughts mounting to an incapacitating lack of concentration. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve1.01.00.91.21.00.91.51.51.51.61.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA1.51.31.41.11.21.41.72.11.91.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.91.21.21.31.41.41.71.51.21.6

[back to top]

MADRS Inability to Feel Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Inability to Feel scores rate the subjective experience of reduced interest in the surroundings, or activities that normally give pleasure. The ability to react with adequate emotion to circumstances or people is reduced. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.50.40.60.60.50.60.50.50.40.60.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.20.60.40.60.40.50.60.70.50.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.80.60.80.70.50.81.10.70.70.9

[back to top]

MADRS Inner Tension Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Inner Tension scores rate feelings of ill-defined discomfort, edginess, inner turmoil, mental tension mounting to either panic, dread or anguish. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve1.31.31.51.10.91.11.21.01.11.71.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA1.00.80.90.60.70.70.81.10.60.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.90.91.20.91.50.81.31.51.31.5

[back to top]

MADRS Lassitude Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Lassitude scores rate difficulty in getting started or slowness in initiating and performing everyday activities. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve1.31.41.71.51.31.61.81.72.01.91.8
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA1.41.51.51.51.61.41.91.71.81.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA1.72.01.31.71.41.61.71.31.71.7

[back to top]

MADRS Pessimistic Thoughts Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Pessimistic Thoughts scores rate thoughts of guilt, inferiority, self-reproach, sinfulness, remorse and ruin. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.91.00.70.90.80.91.01.01.21.01.2
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.50.50.60.50.80.70.70.70.90.9
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.60.80.60.91.00.81.10.91.01.1

[back to top]

MADRS Reduced Appetite Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Reduced Appetite scores rate the feeling of a loss of appetite compared with when-well. Rate by loss of desire for food or the need to force oneself to eat. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.80.60.70.80.50.50.50.71.00.90.9
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.20.40.30.40.60.30.50.40.40.3
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.30.40.50.80.70.40.70.51.11.1

[back to top]

MADRS Reduced Sleep Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Reduced Sleep scores rate the experience of reduced duration or depth of sleep compared to the participant's own normal pattern when well. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve2.51.92.01.81.81.81.71.62.31.91.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA1.51.81.71.91.51.51.81.91.21.4
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA1.71.21.51.41.21.71.50.91.22.0

[back to top]

MADRS Reported Sadness Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Reported Sadness scores rate depressed mood, regardless of whether it is reflected in appearance or not, and includes low spirits, despondency or the feeling of being beyond help and without hope. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.90.60.91.10.90.61.01.01.21.11.2
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.80.60.80.91.10.70.90.90.90.8
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.80.50.51.10.80.80.80.91.11.0

[back to top]

MADRS Suicidal Thoughts Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Suicidal Thoughts scores rate the feeling that life is not worth living, that a natural death would be welcome, suicidal thoughts, and preparations for suicide. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve0.40.50.50.50.30.30.50.10.40.50.4
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA0.20.00.10.00.30.30.20.10.10.2
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA0.30.40.20.20.20.20.40.20.10.4

[back to top]

Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) Total Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The MMSE is used to assess orientation, attention, immediate and short term recall, language, and ability to follow simple verbal and written commands. The test consists of five sections (orientation, registration, attention-calculation, recall, and language) and results in a total possible score of 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better function. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint visit (Month 36 or last visit if discontinued early)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve28.227.828.028.128.427.927.627.727.327.227.1
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA28.027.227.627.628.228.527.826.426.326.4
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA28.228.628.128.328.228.328.028.627.927.3

[back to top]

MMSE Attention and Calculation Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The MMSE is used to assess orientation, attention, immediate and short term recall, language, and ability to follow simple verbal and written commands. The Attention and Calculation subscale results in a total possible score of 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating better function. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve4.94.64.64.64.74.74.54.64.64.24.2
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA4.44.34.54.34.74.74.64.13.74.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA4.64.74.74.84.64.54.34.84.84.4

[back to top]

MMSE Language Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The MMSE is used to assess orientation, attention, immediate and short term recall, language, and ability to follow simple verbal and written commands. The Language subscale results in a total possible score of 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating better function. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve8.38.58.48.38.48.28.28.07.98.38.3
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA8.68.38.18.28.38.68.18.07.97.9
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA8.58.78.38.48.28.38.38.58.48.4

[back to top]

MMSE Recall Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The MMSE is used to assess orientation, attention, immediate and short term recall, language, and ability to follow simple verbal and written commands. The Recall subscale results in a total possible score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating better function. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve2.22.22.52.52.52.52.32.42.52.22.2
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA2.12.12.42.22.52.52.32.52.42.5
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA2.32.52.32.52.62.62.52.62.82.5

[back to top]

MMSE Registration Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The MMSE is used to assess orientation, attention, immediate and short term recall, language, and ability to follow simple verbal and written commands. The Registration subscale a total possible score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating better function. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA3.03.03.03.03.03.03.02.93.03.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.02.92.9

[back to top]

Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging: Best Stage From Baseline to Month 36

The best PD stage that the participant experienced during the last month was characterized according to Modified Hoehn and Yahr criteria, measured on the following 8-point scale for staging: 0=no signs of disease; 1=unilateral disease; 1.5=unilateral plus axial involvement; 2=bilateral disease; 2.5=mild bilateral disease; 3=mild to moderate bilateral disease; 4=severe disability; and 5=wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; 25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve2.22.02.02.02.22.22.22.32.52.52.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA2.52.52.52.52.62.52.62.62.62.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA2.52.62.62.72.92.92.93.03.03.1

[back to top]

Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging: Current Stage From Baseline to Month 36

The current stage of PD was characterized according to Modified Hoehn and Yahr criteria, measured on the following 8-point scale for staging: 0=no signs of disease; 1=unilateral disease; 1.5=unilateral plus axial involvement; 2=bilateral disease; 2.5=mild bilateral disease; 3=mild to moderate bilateral disease; 4=severe disability; and 5=wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; 23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve2.72.52.32.42.42.42.42.52.72.72.7
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA2.72.72.62.72.82.73.02.92.93.1
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA3.23.03.13.13.33.43.23.13.33.4

[back to top]

Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Scores From Baseline to Month 36

MADRS is a depression rating scale consisting of 10 items representing the core symptoms of depressive illness, each rated 0 (no symptom) to 6 (severe symptom). Total score ranges from 0 (no depression) to 60 (severely depressed). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 17Month 6; n=25, 21, 17Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve10.39.010.210.58.88.610.610.112.012.211.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA7.88.18.48.08.88.19.710.69.19.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA8.88.48.59.99.59.111.19.010.412.3

[back to top]

Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) Summary Index Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible, which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0-100 scale. Higher scores are associated with more severe symptoms. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 20, 17Month 3; n=22, 20, 18Month 6; n=24, 20, 17Month 9; n=23, 20, 16Month 12; n=23, 19, 17Month 18; n=22, 18, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 14Month 30; n=21, 16, 12Month 36; n=20, 15, 11Endpoint; n=25, 21, 17
Duodopa Naïve33.627.124.527.925.928.828.230.333.536.836.2
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA30.330.033.430.933.230.436.234.831.534.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA36.634.035.535.138.334.133.634.439.240.3

[back to top]

UPDRS Part IV Score, up to Month 36

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. For Part IV, questions are measured on a 5-point scale of 0 (normal or no disease effect) to 4 (maximum negative effect) or 2-point scale (0 or 1). Part IV score is the sum of answers to 'Complications of Therapy' questions, with a score range from 0-23. Higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint visit; n=26, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve6.56.36.56.16.56.36.26.46.5
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years7.17.87.17.37.06.86.66.47.5
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years7.26.77.77.57.66.66.55.56.7

[back to top]

UPDRS Total Score up to Month 36

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. For Parts I-III and Total Score, each question is measured on a 5-point scale of 0 (normal or no disease effect) to 4 (maximum negative effect). Part I score is the sum of answers to 'Mentation, Behavior and Mood' questions, with a score range from 0-16. Part II score is the sum of answers to 'Activities of Daily Living' questions, with a score range from 0-52. Part III score is the sum of answers to 'Motor Examination' questions, with a score range from 0-108. Total Score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale, with a score range from 0-176. Higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; 5, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint visit; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve43.142.443.340.845.244.547.146.247.9
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years46.245.543.545.144.240.247.447.150.8
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years47.846.847.448.148.552.750.254.055.0

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Activities of Daily Living Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 20, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve38.732.126.931.829.834.733.237.138.845.443.4
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA40.842.843.737.542.141.948.348.547.548.3
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA46.541.742.142.245.645.841.946.554.553.4

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Bodily Discomfort Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=24, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve42.641.738.538.936.339.338.542.942.842.942.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA40.239.842.142.134.637.135.339.231.736.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA43.144.039.441.246.642.738.934.737.139.7

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Cognition Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=24, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 16, 12Month 36; n=20, 15, 11Endpoint; n=25, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve30.622.524.225.521.526.828.624.731.534.131.5
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA33.036.637.835.633.131.341.945.742.139.2
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA33.732.330.631.633.830.127.530.730.734.9

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Communication Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=24, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve32.424.124.724.025.329.731.628.233.733.734.0
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA27.332.232.531.734.232.134.837.733.333.0
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA35.231.933.828.933.829.730.641.737.940.2

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Emotional Well Being Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=23, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 20, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 16, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve35.330.924.831.333.029.032.131.933.939.739.4
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA27.127.533.332.134.830.237.733.330.031.1
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA37.735.435.934.838.032.633.131.338.639.7

[back to top]

PDQ-39 Mobility Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=23, 20, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=24, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 18, 16Month 24; n=21, 17, 15Month 30; n=22, 17, 12Month 36; n=21, 15, 11Endpoint; n=26, 21, 17
Duodopa Naïve55.738.836.039.540.241.040.946.050.957.355.6
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA43.940.643.541.945.341.147.142.143.050.2
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA53.350.654.752.854.454.749.553.361.161.6

[back to top]

MMSE Orientation Subscale Scores From Baseline to Month 36

The MMSE is used to assess orientation, attention, immediate and short term recall, language, and ability to follow simple verbal and written commands. The orientation subscale has a total possible score of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating better function. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=26, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 21, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 19, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve9.89.69.49.79.89.69.79.79.49.69.5
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA9.99.59.69.99.89.79.88.99.38.9
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA9.89.69.79.69.79.99.99.89.19.2

[back to top]

UPDRS Part III Score, up to Month 36

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. For Parts I-III and Total Score, each question is measured on a 5-point scale of 0 (normal or no disease effect) to 4 (maximum negative effect). Part III score is the sum of answers to 'Motor Examination' questions, with a score range from 0-108. Higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 20, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 16Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint visit; n=27, 22, 17
Duodopa Naïve22.021.621.519.921.321.423.122.023.1
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years23.422.922.821.921.718.222.622.224.1
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years22.421.922.622.923.325.424.028.028.6

[back to top]

Direct Monthly Non-medical Costs Per Participant, SEK 2010

Direct non-medical costs include nursing home, home help, personal assistance, informal care (from family member or friend) and transportation to inpatient, outpatient visits and nursing home. The average rate for US Dollar (USD) to SEK on 31 December 2010 was 1 USD = 6.734 SEK. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (month -3) for Duodopa-naïve participants, then at Month 0, and monthly thereafter until study completion (up to 48 months) for all participants

InterventionSEK 2010 (Mean)
Duodopa Naïve19274
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years27439
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years25008
Total23398

[back to top]

Monthly Direct Medical Cost (Excluding Drug Costs) Per Participant, SEK 2010

Direct medical costs consist of inpatient care, outpatient care (visits to physician, nurse, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, dietitian, speech therapist, counselor, and phone consultations). The average rate for US Dollar (USD) to SEK on 31 December 2010 was 1 USD = 6.734 SEK. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (month -3) for Duodopa-naïve participants, then at Month 0, and monthly thereafter until study completion (up to 48 months) for all participants

InterventionSEK 2010 (Mean)
Duodopa Naïve3825
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years4552
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years3607
Total4002

[back to top]

Monthly Drug Costs Per Participant, SEK 2010

Drug costs include Duodopa cost and cost of concomitant anti-PD medication. Drug costs are a direct medical cost. The average rate for US Dollar (USD) to SEK on 31 December 2010 was 1 USD = 6.734 SEK. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (month -3) for Duodopa-naïve participants, then at Month 0, and monthly thereafter until study completion (up to 48 months) for all participants

InterventionSEK 2010 (Mean)
Duodopa Naïve39382
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years34417
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years37679
Total37339

[back to top]

Total Monthly Cost Per Participant, in Swedish Crowns (SEK) 2010

"Total monthly costs include~Direct medical costs (inpatient care, outpatient care, and drug costs [including Duodopa cost and cost of concomitant anti-PD medication]).~Direct non-medical costs (nursing home, home help, personal assistance, informal care [from family member or friend] and transportation to inpatient, outpatient visits and nursing home).~Indirect costs (sick-leave and early retirement due to PD [applied to individuals only up to the age of 65 since the main indirect cost item, early retirement due to disability, is only available for individuals 30-64 years old. Sixty-five is also a common retirement age in Sweden]).~The average rate for US Dollar (USD) to SEK on 31 December 2010 was 1 USD = 6.734 SEK." (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (month -3) for Duodopa-naïve participants, then at Month 0, and monthly thereafter until study completion (up to 48 months) for all participants

InterventionSEK 2010 (Mean)
Duodopa Naïve78418
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 Years75521
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 Years82177
Total78464

[back to top]

"Schwab and England Scale: Best On Period Stage From Baseline to Month 36"

"The Schwab and England scale was used to rate the subject's best on period during the past week by recording the percentage score, ranging between being completely independent (100%) and totally dependent (10%). On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug." (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage score on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Month -3); n=27, 0, 0Month 0; n=27, 22, 18Month 3; n=24, 22, 18Month 6; n=25, 22, 18Month 9; n=25, 20, 17Month 12; n=25, 20, 17Month 18; n=24, 20, 17Month 24; n=23, 18, 15Month 30; n=23, 17, 13Month 36; n=21, 16, 12Endpoint; n=27, 22, 18
Duodopa Naïve74.480.477.975.279.277.275.872.270.466.768.9
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNA75.575.977.376.572.574.073.371.873.171.4
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNA74.472.272.270.671.869.468.067.764.262.2

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Cramps) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Cramps' scores were 1 (worst) to 5 (best). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve4.44.54.74.74.84.74.84.84.84.74.84.54.74.74.64.54.94.94.54.74.64.5
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA4.64.74.64.74.54.54.44.54.54.74.44.64.84.84.74.84.74.84.54.6
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA4.64.64.54.54.34.34.44.34.24.14.14.34.04.04.13.94.14.24.44.5

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Drawing Impairment [Wavelet Method]) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. Drawing impairment was assessed as a spiral score, where the participant is asked to draw a spiral. 1 is worst score, 10 is best. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve4.04.04.14.23.63.83.84.14.34.34.14.44.64.64.34.54.14.54.45.04.54.8
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA4.54.34.34.24.54.64.14.14.14.14.44.33.93.94.44.44.84.65.04.9
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA5.05.14.74.84.54.54.64.55.04.75.44.95.25.14.94.85.35.35.35.3

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Dyskinetic Magnitude) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Dyskinetic time' is time with involuntary muscle movement. Magnitude scores were 1 (worst) to 5 (best). (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; 23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve4.13.64.14.04.44.24.14.24.13.84.14.13.93.94.44.14.54.54.34.04.34.0
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA4.14.04.24.04.13.84.24.04.23.73.83.94.23.93.93.94.03.74.03.7
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA4.03.74.03.73.93.73.73.83.73.83.93.84.13.84.24.14.14.04.13.6

[back to top]

Electronic Diary: Morning and Day Scores (Dyskinetic Time) From Baseline to Month 36

The Electronic Diary consisted of 15 items addressing motor performance, complication of therapy, self-assessment, and various types of tapping. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: 'walking', 'satisfied', 'dyskinesia', and 'off' and two objectively-measured: 'tapping' and 'spiral'. Each of the items was assessed in the morning and during the day. 'Dyskinetic time' is time with involuntary muscle movement, and is represented as a percentage of total time of the last __ hours. (NCT00141518)
Timeframe: Baseline (Month -3), Months 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, endpoint (last non-missing value assigned to treatment for the participant)

,,
Interventionpercentage of 'dyskinetic' time (Mean)
Morning, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Day, Baseline (Month -3); n=20, 0, 0Morning, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Day, Month 0; n=19, 20, 15Morning, Month 3; n=19, 18, 13Day, Month 3; n=19, 19, 13Morning, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Day, Month 6; n=16, 19, 11Morning, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Day, Month 9; n=16, 17, 9Morning, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Day, Month 12; n=16, 16, 9Morning, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Day, Month 18; n=15, 14, 10Morning, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Day, Month 24; n=13, 13, 7Morning, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Day, Month 30; n=9, 9, 5Morning, Month 36; n=6, 11, 5Day, Month 36; n=5, 11, 5Morning, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16Day, Endpoint; n=23, 20, 16
Duodopa Naïve18.624.318.217.412.014.416.715.915.620.813.616.217.020.69.615.811.814.510.416.216.516.2
Duodopa Non-naïve < 2 YearsNANA19.618.413.718.914.420.815.519.014.617.415.920.815.021.321.319.115.219.416.919.4
Duodopa Non-naïve ≥ 2 YearsNANA19.727.324.524.825.625.828.526.527.225.124.027.428.232.413.418.216.621.323.021.3

[back to top]

Mean Percentage of Cocaine-positive Urines Over Course of 12 Week Treatment in Subgroup NOT Achieving Abstinence at Baseline

Cocaine use was determined by assessing for the presence of benzoylecgonine in urine. (NCT00218023)
Timeframe: 3 times per week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) for 12 weeks

InterventionMean % of cocaine-positive urines (Mean)
Modafinil Plus MI, CM, and CBT88
Levodopa/Carbidopa Plus MI, CM, and CBT49
Naltrexone HCl Plus MI, CM, and CBT62
Placebo Plus MI, CM, and CBT91

[back to top]

Mean Percentage of Cocaine-positive Urines Over Course of 12 Week Treatment in Subgroup Achieving Abstinence at Baseline

Cocaine use was determined by assessing for the presence of benzoylecgonine in urine. (NCT00218023)
Timeframe: 3 times per week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) for 12 weeks

InterventionMean % of cocaine-positive urines (Mean)
Modafinil Plus MI, CM, and CBT31
Levodopa/Carbidopa Plus MI, CM, and CBT28
Naltrexone HCl Plus MI, CM, and CBT47
Placebo Plus MI, CM, and CBT35

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score From Baseline to Week 4

Motor function was assessed with the UPDRS part III. There are 14 items in the instrument, each measured on a 5 point scale (0-4): Speech, facial expression, tremor at rest, action tremor, rigidity, finger taps, hand movements, hand pronation and supination, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, postural stability, and body bradykinesia. The sum of scores can range from 0 to 56; a higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 4

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-3.7
Delayed Switch-1.8

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score From Baseline to End of Treatment

Motor function was assessed with the UPDRS part III. There are 14 items in the instrument, each measured on a 5 point scale (0-4): Speech, facial expression, tremor at rest, action tremor, rigidity, finger taps, hand movements, hand pronation and supination, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, postural stability, and body bradykinesia. The sum of scores can range from 0 to 56; a higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of treatment (Week 16 in the Immediate Switch group, Week 20 in the Delayed Switch group)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-3.6
Delayed Switch-3.3

[back to top]

Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to Week 8

The PDQ-39 is another instrument used to assess quality of life in individuals with Parkinson's disease. The questionnaire provides scores on eight scales: Mobility, activities of daily living, emotions, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The 1 to 5 range was recoded to 0 to 4 for the analysis. The total score can range from 0 to 156. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A negative change score indicates an improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-5.8
Delayed Switch-1.9

[back to top]

Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to Week 4

The PDQ-39 is another instrument used to assess quality of life in individuals with Parkinson's disease. The questionnaire provides scores on eight scales: Mobility, activities of daily living, emotions, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The 1 to 5 range was recoded to 0 to 4 for the analysis. The total score can range from 0 to 156. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A negative change score indicates an improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 4

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-1.7
Delayed Switch0.8

[back to top]

Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to End of Treatment

The PDQ-39 is another instrument used to assess quality of life in individuals with Parkinson's disease. The questionnaire provides scores on eight scales: Mobility, activities of daily living, emotions, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The 1 to 5 range was recoded to 0 to 4 for the analysis. The total score can range from 0 to 156. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A negative change score indicates an improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of treatment (Week 16 in the Immediate Switch group, Week 20 in the Delayed Switch group)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-2.8
Delayed Switch0.4

[back to top]

Change in Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Score From Baseline to Week 8

Quality of life was assessed with the Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Instrument (PDQUALIF), a 33-item self-reported questionnaire which includes seven domains: Social/role function, self-imaging/sexuality, sleep, outlook, physical function, independence, and urinary function. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The 1 to 5 range was recoded to 0 to 4 for the analysis. The total score can range from 0 to 132. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-2.5
Delayed Switch-1.1

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score From Baseline to Week 8

Motor function was assessed with the UPDRS part III. There are 14 items in the instrument, each measured on a 5-point scale (0-4): Speech, facial expression, tremor at rest, action tremor, rigidity, finger taps, hand movements, hand pronation and supination, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, postural stability, and body bradykinesia. The sum of scores can range from 0 to 56; a higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-3.6
Delayed Switch-3.7

[back to top]

Change in Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Score From Baseline to End of Treatment

Quality of life was assessed with the Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Instrument (PDQUALIF), a 33-item self-reported questionnaire which includes seven domains: Social/role function, self-imaging/sexuality, sleep, outlook, physical function, independence, and urinary function. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The 1 to 5 range was recoded to 0 to 4 for the analysis. The total score can range from 0 to 132. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of treatment (Week 16 in the Immediate Switch group, Week 20 in the Delayed Switch group)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-1.3
Delayed Switch0.2

[back to top]

Change in Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Score From Baseline to Week 4

Quality of life was assessed with the Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Instrument (PDQUALIF), a 33-item self-reported questionnaire which includes seven domains: Social/role function, self-imaging/sexuality, sleep, outlook, physical function, independence, and urinary function. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The 1 to 5 range was recoded to 0 to 4 for the analysis. The total score can range from 0 to 132. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00219284)
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 4

InterventionUnits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Immediate Switch-0.4
Delayed Switch1.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Communication includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)34.3-3.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Emotional Well-being (e.g., feelings of isolation) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)39.4-4.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Mobility (e.g., fear of falling when walking) includes 10 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)58.8-11.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Social Support includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)17.2-0.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Stigma (e.g., social embarrassment) consists of 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCHange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)32.5-9.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible (i.e. number of answers multiplied by 4) which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0-100 scale. Higher scores are associated with more severe symptoms. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)42.7-6.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Month 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions that comprise Part I, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part I score ranges from 0-16 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)2.20.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part II score ranges from 0-52 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)17.5-4.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers provided to the 14 Part III questions, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part III score ranges from 0-108 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)28.9-7.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part IV Score is the sum of the answers to the 11 questions that comprise Part IV, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4) or a 2-point scale (0 or 1). The Part IV score ranges from 0-23 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)9.2-3.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale. The total score will range from 0-176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 representing no disability. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)48.6-11.7

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Endpoint"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. On time without troublesome dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movement) is defined as on time without dyskinesia and on time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Positive change from Baseline for on time without troublesome dyskinesia indicates improvement." (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)4.833.86

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Endpoint

The CGI-S is a global assessment by the Investigator of current symptomatology and impact of illness on functioning. The ratings of the CGI-S are as follows: 1 = normal, 2 = borderline ill, 3 = mildly ill, 4 = moderately ill, 5 = markedly ill, 6 = severely ill, and 7 = among the most extremely ill. The CGI-I is a global assessment by the Investigator of the change in clinical status since the start of treatment. The CGI-I ratings are as follows: 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, 7 = very much worse. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
CGI-S BaselineCGI-I at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)4.852.10

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), Deaths and Discontinuations Due to AEs

AE=any untoward medical occurrence which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that: results in death; is life-threatening (an event in which the subject was at risk of death at the time of the event); requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or other important medical events. Treatment-emergent events (TEAE or TESAE)=those starting after the first dose of study drug. Severe=severity reported as 'severe' or missing. Possibly or Probably Treatment Related=drug-event relationship reported as 'possible', 'probable' or missing. Death=a fatal outcome of an SAE or AE. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Screening through Day 378 + 30 days

Interventionparticipants (Number)
DeathsTE Deaths>=1 SAE>=1TESAE>=1 TEAE Leading to Study Termination>=1 TEAE>=1 Severe TEAE>=1 Possibly or Probably Treatment Related TEAENo TEAE
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)871111082732310227231

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Device Complications During the Nasojejunal (NJ) Test Period

Complications of the infusion device were collected during the NJ Test period. Pump, intestinal tube, NJ tube, and other complications included (but were not limited to) device breakage, device leakage, device malfunction, device misuse, device occlusion, intentional and unintentional device removal by participant, complication of device insertion, device dislocation, device breakage, device dislocation, and post-procedural hemorrhage. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: NJ Test Period (from 2 to 14 days)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=1 ComplicationPump ComplicationIntestinal Tube ComplicationNJ Tube ComplicationOther Complications
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)90746825

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Device Complications During the Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy - With Jejunal Extension Tube (PEG-J) Surgery and Post-PEG Long Term Treatment Periods

Complications of the infusion device were collected during the PEG-J Surgery and Post-PEG Long-Term Treatment periods. Pump, PEG-J, stoma, and other complications included (but were not limited to) device breakage, device leakage, device malfunction, device misuse, device occlusion, intentional and unintentional device removal by participant, complication of device insertion, device dislocation, device breakage, device dislocation, and post-procedural hemorrhage. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: PEG-J Surgery Period (from 2 to 14 days) through the Long Term Treatment Period (Day 28 to Day 378)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=1 ComplicationPump ComplicationIntestinal Tube ComplicationPEG-J ComplicationStoma ComplicationOther Complication
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)282116165114116114

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include heart rate (HR) in beats per minute (bpm), PR interval (PRI), QT interval corrected for heart rate using Bazett's formula (QTcB), and QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (QTcF). Increase and decrease are signified by ↑ and ↓, respectively. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Screening through Day 378

Interventionparticipants (Number)
HR <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL; n=321HR >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL; n=321PR Interval <120 msec; n=321PR Interval >220 msec; n=321QTcB Interval >480 msec; n=319QTcB Interval >60 msec ↑ from BL; n=309QTcF Interval >480 msec; n=319QTcF Interval >60 msec ↑ from BL; n=309
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)1162615473

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Clinical Chemistry Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include aspartate aminotransferase (AST), upper limit of normal (ULN), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), female (f), and male (m). (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Screening through Day 378

Interventionparticipants (Number)
AST >3*ULN; n=315ALT >3*ULN; n=315GGT >3*ULN; n=315LDH >3*ULN; n=315Alkaline Phosphatase >400 U/L; n=315Total Protein <45 g/L; n=315Total Bilirubin >2*ULN; n=315Creatine Kinase >3*ULN; n=315Sodium <126 mmol/L; n=315Sodium >156 mmol/L; n=315Potassium <3.0 mmol/L; n=315Potassium >6.0 mmol/L; n=315Calcium <1.75 mmol/L; n=315Calcium >3.0 mmol/L; n=315BUN >10.8 mmol/L; n=77Creatinine >177 mcmol/L; n=315Uric Acid >500 mcmol/L (f), >590 mcmol/L (m);n=315Glucose (nonfasting) <2.78 mmol/L; n=315Glucose (nonfasting) >16.0 mmol/L; n=315Cholesterol >12.9 mmol/L; n=315Triglycerides >5.6 mmol/L; n=315
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)103000072211204301102

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Hematology Parameters

Potentially clinically significant values for red blood cells (RBCs), hemoglobin, and hematocrit are specified for females (f) and males (m) separately in the category rows. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Screening through Day 378

Interventionparticipants (Number)
RBCs <2.0*10^12/L (f), <2.5*10^12/L (m); n=316Hemoglobin <90 g/L (f), <100 g/L (m); n=316Hematocrit <30% (f), <34% (m); n=315White Blood Cells <2.8*10^9/L; n=316White Blood Cells >16.0*10^9/L; n=316Neutrophils <1.2*10^9/L; n=316Lymphocytes <0.75*10^9/L; n=316Lymphocytes >80%; n=316Platelet Count <95*10^9/L; n=315Platelet Count >700*10^9/L; n=315Mean Corpuscular Volume <60 fL; n=315Mean Corpuscular Volume >120 fL; n=315Eosinophils >10%; n=316Monocytes >30%; n=316
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)0427300210100070

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include supine systolic blood pressure (SuSBP), standing systolic blood pressure (StSBP), orthostatic systolic blood pressure (OSBP), supine diastolic blood pressure (SuDBP), standing diastolic blood pressure (StDBP), orthostatic diastolic blood pressure (ODBP), supine pulse (SuP) in beats per minute (bpm), standing pulse (StP), and body temperature (Temp). Increase and decrease are signified by ↑ and ↓, respectively. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: up to 56 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
SuSBP >=180 and >40 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=324SuSBP <=90 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=324StSBP >=180 and >40 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=324StSBP <=90 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=324OSBP: ↓ >=30 mm Hg (Supine to Standing); n=324SuDBP >=105 and >30 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=324SuDBP <=50 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=324StDBP >=105 and >30 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=324StDBP <=50 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=324ODBP: ↓ >=20 mm Hg (Supine to Standing); n=324SuP >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL; n=324SuP <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL; n=324StP >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL; n=324StP <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL; n=324Temp >=38.3 and >1.1°C ↑ from BL; n=322Weight >=7% ↑ from BL; n=272Weight <=7% ↓ from BL; n=272
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)4172358051181259010022579

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks at Baseline

To prospectively monitor for the possible development of sleep attacks, participants were asked if they had experienced any events in which they fell asleep suddenly or unexpectedly, including while engaged in some activity (e.g., eating/drinking, speaking, or driving) or at rest, with or without any previous warning of sleepiness. Those participants who reported 1 or more sleep attacks were asked to report the number of sleep attacks they experienced, whether they experienced sleepiness or drowsiness prior to the sleep attack, whether they experienced a 'bad' outcome or problem due to a sleep attack, and if so, how many 'bad' outcomes or problems they experienced. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Participants with >=1 Sleep AttacksNumber of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=1Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=2Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=3Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant>3Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=MissingSleepiness/Drowsiness Prior to Sleep AttackBad Outcome/Problem Due to Sleep AttackNumber of Bad Outcomes/Problems=1Number of Bad Outcomes/Problems=2Number of Bad Outcomes/Problems=3Number of Bad Outcomes/Problems>3
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)740021411000

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks During the Post-PEG Long-Term Treatment Period

To prospectively monitor for the possible development of sleep attacks, participants were asked if they had experienced any events in which they fell asleep suddenly or unexpectedly, including while engaged in some activity (e.g., eating/drinking, speaking, or driving) or at rest, with or without any previous warning of sleepiness. Those participants who reported 1 or more sleep attacks were asked to report the number of sleep attacks they experienced, whether they experienced sleepiness or drowsiness prior to the sleep attack, whether they experienced a 'bad' outcome or problem due to a sleep attack, and if so, how many 'bad' outcomes or problems they experienced. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: During the Post-PEG Long-Term Treatment Period (Day 28 through Day 378)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Participants with >=1 Sleep AttacksNumber of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=1Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=2Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant=3Number of Sleep Attacks Per Participant>3Sleepiness/Drowsiness Prior to Sleep AttackBad Outcome/Problem Due to Sleep AttackNumber of Bad Outcomes/Problems=1Number of Bad Outcomes/Problems=2Number of Bad Outcomes/Problems=3Number of Bad Outcomes/Problems>3
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)27112591122000

[back to top]

Summary of Minnesota Impulsive Disorder Interview (MIDI) Assessment of Intense Impulsive Behavior at Baseline (BL) and During the Post-PEG Long-term Treatment (PPLT) Period

The MIDI is a validated assessment of impulsive behavior consisting of a semistructured clinical interview assessing pathological gambling, trichotillomania (compulsive hair-pulling), kleptomania (compulsive stealing), pyromania (compulsive fire setting), intermittent explosive disorder, compulsive buying, and compulsive sexual behavior. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, during the Post-PEG Long-term Treatment Period (Day 28 through Day 378)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
BL Compulsive Buying; n=322BL Kleptomania; n=322BL Trichotillomania; n=322BL Intermittent Explosive Disorder; n=322BL Pyromania; n=322BL Pathological Gambling; n=322BL Compulsive Sexual Behavior; n=322PPLT Compulsive Buying; n=318PPLT Kleptomania; n=318PPLT Trichotillomania; n=318PPLT Intermittent Explosive Disorder; n=318PPLT Pyromania; n=318PPLT Pathological Gambling; n=318PPLT Compulsive Sexual Behavior; n=318
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)000002930000611

[back to top]

Number of Participants Taking at Least 1 Concomitant Medication During the Study

Concomitant medications include those started on or after the first open-label LCIG infusion as well as medications started prior to the first open-label infusion but continued during the study. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Screening up to Day 378

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)349

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Confirmed Cases of Melanoma

A comprehensive assessment for the presence of melanoma was performed during the screening period and at early termination or end of study by a dermatologist experienced with the diagnosis of the condition. If a suspicious lesion was present, a biopsy was obtained for proper diagnosis. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Screening up to Day 378

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)0

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Endpoint"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis." (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)1.60-0.36

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Off Time at Endpoint"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)6.77-4.44

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Total Score at Endpoint

"The AIMS is an investigator-completed rating scale that has a total of 12 items rating involuntary movements of various areas of the participant's body. Items 1 through 10 are rated on a 5-point scale of severity from 0 (none), 1 (minimal), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), to 4 (severe), and items 11 and 12 are yes/no questions regarding issues with teeth or dentures. The total AIMS score was calculated by summing items 1-10, with a possible range of 0-40; a negative change indicates improvement. The AIMS was to be performed at consistent times, when the subject was experiencing his/her worst On time (dyskinesia [involuntary muscle movement])." (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last Post-PEG Long-Term Period visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline; n=318Change from Baseline at Endpoint; n=317
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)9.6-1.7

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Endpoint

The ZBI is a 22-item questionnaire regarding the caregiver/subject relationship and evaluates the caregiver's health condition, psychological well-being, finances and social life. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale (0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=quite frequently, and 4=nearly always). The caregiver burden is evaluated by the total score (Range 0 to 88) obtained from the sum of the answers to the 22 questions. Higher scores are associated with a higher level of burden for the caregiver. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)27.10.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Endpoint

The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 to 1.00 with positive change indicating improvement. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)0.5880.064

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Endpoint

The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state'. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)50.214.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Activities of Daily Living (e.g., difficulty cutting food) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)50.7-8.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Bodily Discomfort includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)46.2-5.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Cognition includes 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00335153)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (last post-baseline visit up to Day 378)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline to Endpoint
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)27.2-4.5

[back to top]

Employment Impairment (EMP) II Status at Week 12

The EMP instruments are designed to collect information regarding employment and ability to run a household. EMP I questions include: Are you currently in paid employment? (If yes, at which percentage have you been working during the last 4 weeks?); Have you got someone to run your household for you? (If yes, how much time per week does he/she spend in your household?); Are you retired? (If yes, for which reason?) The retirement question (from EMP I) is excluded from the EMP II instrument. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Week 12 (or early termination)

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Paid Employment (PE)=YesPE=Yes, 100% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 75% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 50% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 25% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, Other % of Past 4 WeeksPE=NoSomeone Else Runs the Household (SRH)=YesSRH=Yes, 100% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 75% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 50% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 25% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, Other % of Time per WeekSRH=No
LCIG + Placebo Capsules1061102252213502213
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules51121026241244227

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. On time without troublesome dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movement) is defined as on time without dyskinesia and on time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Positive change from Baseline for on time without troublesome dyskinesia indicates improvement." (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules4.11
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules2.24

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis." (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-0.11
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.03

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Average Daily Normalized Off Time"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-4.04
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-2.14

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 12

The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules5.2
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-6.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQual Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Week 12

The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 to 1.00 with positive change indicating improvement. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules0.054
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.016

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Activities of Daily Living (e.g., difficulty cutting food) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-12.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-1.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Bodily Discomfort includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-13.5
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-10.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Cognition includes 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-7.3
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-3.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Communication includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-9.5
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules4.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Emotional Well-being (e.g., feelings of isolation) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-7.1
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-4.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Mobility (e.g., fear of falling when walking) includes 10 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-17.3
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-6.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Social Support includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-3.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Stigma (e.g., social embarrassment) consists of 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-8.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-4.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible (i.e. number of answers multiplied by 4) which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0-100 scale. Higher scores are associated with more severe symptoms. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-10.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-3.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions that comprise Part I, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part I score ranges from 0-16 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-0.2
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part II score ranges from 0-52 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-1.8
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules1.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Questions 32, 33, and 34 at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. Questions 32, 33, and 34 on UPDRS Part IV were totaled to evaluate dyskinesias. Each of these questions is measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part IV dyskinesia score will range from 0-12 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules0.4
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules0.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part IV Score is the sum of the answers to the 11 questions that comprise Part IV, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4) or a 2-point scale (0 or 1). The Part IV score ranges from 0-23 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-1.1
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules0.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale. The total score will range from 0-176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 no disability. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-3.6
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-2.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers provided to the 14 Part III questions, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part III score ranges from 0-108 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-1.5
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-2.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Week 12

The ZBI is a 22-item questionnaire regarding the caregiver/subject relationship and evaluates the caregiver's health condition, psychological well-being, finances and social life. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale (0=Never, 1=Rarely, 2=Sometimes, 3=Quite frequently, and 4= Nearly always). The caregiver burden is evaluated by the total score (Range 0 to 88) obtained from the sum of the answers to the 22 questions. Higher scores are associated with a higher level of burden for the caregiver. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-2.8
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules1.7

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 12

The CGI-S is a global assessment by the Investigator of current symptomatology and impact of illness on functioning. The ratings of the CGI-S are as follows: 1 = normal, 2 = borderline ill, 3 = mildly ill, 4 = moderately ill, 5 = markedly ill, 6 = severely ill, and 7 = among the most extremely ill. The CGI-I is a global assessment by the Investigator of the change in clinical status since the start of treatment. The CGI-I ratings are as follows: 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, 7 = very much worse. (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
CGI-S at BaselineCGI-I at Week 12
LCIG + Placebo Capsules4.22.3
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules4.63.2

[back to top]

Employment Impairment (EMP) I Status at Baseline

The EMP instruments are designed to collect information regarding employment and ability to run a household. EMP I questions include: Are you currently in paid employment? (If yes, at which percentage have you been working during the last 4 weeks?); Have you got someone to run your household for you? (If yes, how much time per week does he/she spend in your household?); Are you retired? (If yes, for which reason?). (NCT00357994)
Timeframe: Baseline

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Paid Employment (PE)=YesPE=Yes, 100% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 75% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 50% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 25% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, Other % of Past 4 WeeksPE=NoSomeone Else Runs the Household (SRH)=YesSRH=Yes, 100% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 75% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 50% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 25% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, Other % of Time per WeekSRH=NoAre You Retired (R)=YesR=Yes, Old Age PensionerR=Yes, Premature Due to PDR=Yes, Premature Due to Other ConditionR=Yes, Other ReasonR=No
LCIG + Placebo Capsules1062011252415332111248131211
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules8312112325134512623812128

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Social Support includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)14.2-0.2
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)11.91.8
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)17.1-2.7

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Stigma (e.g., social embarrassment) consists of 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)19.7-2.7
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)16.40.2
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)23.8-6.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible (i.e. number of answers multiplied by 4) which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0-100 scale. Higher scores are associated with more severe symptoms. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)26.9-0.7
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)22.21.5
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)32.8-3.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions that comprise Part I, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part I score ranges from 0-16 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)1.40.5
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)1.60.3
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)1.20.7

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part II score ranges from 0-52 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)10.1-0.2
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)8.60.5
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)12.1-1.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Cognition includes 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)19.32.4
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)15.01.3
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)24.83.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Communication includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)22.93.8
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)15.98.3
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)31.7-1.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Emotional Well-being (e.g., feelings of isolation) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)22.83.1
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)20.14.0
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)26.31.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers provided to the 14 Part III questions, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part III score ranges from 0-108 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)17.40.6
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)16.21.5
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)19.0-0.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part IV Score is the sum of the answers to the 11 questions that comprise Part IV, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4) or a 2-point scale (0 or 1). The Part IV score ranges from 0-23 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)6.3-1.5
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)5.8-1.6
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)7.0-1.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Endpoint

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale. The total score will range from 0-176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 representing no disability. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)29.00.9
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)26.42.3
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)32.4-1.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Endpoint

The ZBI is a 22-item questionnaire regarding the caregiver/subject relationship and evaluates the caregiver's health condition, psychological well-being, finances and social life. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale (0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=quite frequently, and 4=nearly always). The caregiver burden is evaluated by the total score (range 0 to 88) obtained from the sum of the answers to the 22 questions. Higher scores are associated with a higher level of burden for the caregiver. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 months or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)24.3-0.2
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)22.11.1
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)27.0-1.8

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Endpoint

The CGI-S is a global assessment by the Investigator of current symptomatology and impact of illness on functioning. The ratings of the CGI-S are as follows: 1 = normal, 2 = borderline ill, 3 = mildly ill, 4 = moderately ill, 5 = markedly ill, 6 = severely ill, and 7 = among the most extremely ill. The CGI-I is a global assessment by the Investigator of the change in clinical status since the start of treatment. The CGI-I ratings are as follows: 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, 7 = very much worse. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
CGI-S at Baseline; n=32, 28, 60CGI-I at Endpoint; n=33, 29, 62
LCIG (All Participants)3.32.2
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)3.02.1
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)3.72.3

[back to top]

Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Findings

The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) is a systematically administered instrument developed to track suicidal adverse events across a treatment study. The instrument is designed to assess suicidal behavior and ideation, track and assess all suicidal events, as well as the lethality of attempts. Suicidal ideation categories include the following: wish to be dead; nonspecific active suicidal thoughts; active suicidal ideation without intent to act; active suicidal ideation with some intent to act but no plan; active suicidal ideation with plan and intent. Suicidal behavior categories include the following: actual attempt; interrupted attempt; aborted attempt; preparatory acts or behavior; suicidal behavior; completed suicide. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: up to 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Participants with Suicidal IdeationsParticipants with Suicidal Ideations OnlyParticipants with Suicidal BehaviorsParticipants with Suicidal Behaviors or Ideations
LCIG (All Participants)0000
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)0000
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)0000

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Neurological Examination Findings

"The neurologic examination was to be done during On time. The neurological examination assessed: cranial nerves - assessment of cranial nerves II - XII, excluding fundoscopic examination; motor system - assessment of tone, strength, and abnormal movements; sensory system - including light touch, pinprick, joint position, and vibratory sense; reflexes - assessment of deep tendon reflexes and plantar responses (Babinski sign); coordination - assessment of upper and lower extremities; gait - assessment of base and tandem gait; station - assessment of posture and stability." (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: up to 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Cranial NerveMotor SystemSensory SystemReflexesCoordinationGaitStation
LCIG (All Participants)0532144
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)0321122
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)0211022

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Device Complications

Complications of the infusion device were collected. Pump, intestinal tube, PEG, stoma, and other complications included (but were not limited to) device breakage, device leakage, device malfunction, device misuse, device occlusion, intentional and unintentional device removal by participant, complication of device insertion, device dislocation, device breakage, device dislocation, and device site reaction. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=1 ComplicationPump ComplicationIntestinal Tube ComplicationPEG ComplicationStoma ComplicationOther
LCIG (All Participants)503431222710
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)26181511126
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)24161611154

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include heart rate (HR) in beats per minute (bpm), PR interval (PRI), QT interval corrected for heart rate using Bazett's formula (QTcB), and QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (QTcF). Increase and decrease are signified by ↑ and ↓, respectively. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
HR <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL; n=33, 28, 61HR >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL; n=33, 28, 61PR Interval <120 msec; n=33, 27, 60PR Interval >220 msec; n=33, 27, 60QTcB Interval >480 msec; n=33, 27, 60QTcB Interval >60 msec ↑ from BL; n=33, 27, 60QTcF Interval >480 msec; n=33, 27, 60QTcF Interval >60 msec ↑ from BL; n=33, 27, 60
LCIG (All Participants)00110000
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)00110000
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)00000000

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Clinical Chemistry Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include upper limit of normal (ULN), male (m), and female (f). (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Sodium <126 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Sodium >156 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Albumin <25 g/L; n=27, 20, 47Albumin >70 g/L; n=27, 20, 47Potassium <3.0 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Potassium >6.0 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Creatinine >177 µmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Calcium <1.75 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Calcium >3.0 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Total Protein <45 g/L; n=33, 28, 61Total Bilirubin >2xULN; n=33, 28, 61Aspartate Aminotransferase >3xULN; n=33, 28, 61Alanine Aminotransferase >3xULN; n=33, 28, 61Gamma-glutamyl Transpeptidase >3x ULN;n=33, 28, 61Lactate dehydrogenase >3x ULN; n=33, 28, 61Alkaline Phosphatase >400 U/L; n=33, 28, 61Creatine Phosphokinase >3x ULN; n=33, 28, 61Non-fasting Glucose <2.78 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Non-fasting Glucose >16.0 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Uric Acid>500µmol/L(f);>590µmol/L(m);n=33, 28, 61Blood Urea Nitrogen >10.8 mmol/L; n=28, 22, 50Cholesterol >12.9 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61Triglycerides >5.6 mmol/L; n=33, 28, 61
LCIG (All Participants)00000000000002000000300
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)00000000000001000000300
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)00000000000001000000000

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Mobility (e.g., fear of falling when walking) includes 10 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)34.7-2.5
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)27.62.3
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)43.8-8.5

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Off Time at Endpoint"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)3.92-1.30
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)2.87-0.42
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)5.18-2.34

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Hematology Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include females (f) and males (m). (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Red Blood Cells <2.0 10^12/L (f); <2.5 10^12/L (m)Haemoglobin <90 g/L (f); <100 g/L (m)Haematocrit <30% (f); <34% (m)White Blood Cells <2.8 10^9/LWhite Blood Cells >16.0 10^9/LNeutrophils, Absolute <1.2 10^9/LLymphocytes >80%Lymphocytes, Absolute <.75 10^9/LEosinophils >10%Monocytes >30%Platelet Count <95 10^9/LPlatelet Count >700 10^9/LMean Corpuscular Volume <60 fLMean Corpuscular Volume >120 fL
LCIG (All Participants)01200002000000
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)00100002000000
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)01100000000000

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include supine systolic blood pressure (SuSBP), standing systolic blood pressure (StSBP), orthostatic systolic blood pressure (OSBP), supine diastolic blood pressure (SuDBP), standing diastolic blood pressure (StDBP), orthostatic diastolic blood pressure (ODBP), supine pulse (SuP) in beats per minute (bpm), standing pulse (StP), and body temperature (Temp). Increase and decrease are signified by ↑ and ↓, respectively. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: 12 months

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
SuSBP <=90 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=33, 29, 62SuSBP >=180 and >40 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=33, 29, 62StSBP <=90 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=33, 29, 62StSBP >=180 and >40 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=33, 29, 62OSBP: ↓ >=30 mm Hg Supine to Standing; n=33,29,62SuDBP <=50 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=33, 29, 62SuDBP >=105 and >30 mm Hg ↑ from BL; n=33, 29, 62StDBP <=50 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BL; n=33, 29, 62StDBP >=105 and >30 mm Hg ↑ from BL; (n=33,29,62)ODBP: ↓ >=20 mm Hg Supine to Standing; n=33,29,62SuP <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL; n=33, 29, 62SuP >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL; n=33, 29, 62StP <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL; n=33, 29, 62StP >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL; n=33, 29, 62Temp >=38.3° and >=1.1°C ↑ from BL; n=33, 29, 62Weight <=7% ↓ from BL; n=33, 27, 60Weight >=7% ↑ from BL; n=33, 27, 60
LCIG (All Participants)3311019121314100101016
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)31408011271000058
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)027011110170001058

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks at Baseline and Endpoint

To prospectively monitor for the possible development of sleep attacks, participants were asked if they had experienced any events in which they fell asleep suddenly or unexpectedly, including while engaged in some activity (e.g., eating/drinking, speaking, or driving) or at rest, with or without any previous warning of sleepiness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Participants with >=1 Sleep Attacks at BaselineParticipants with >=1 Sleep Attacks at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)00
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)00
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)00

[back to top]

Summary of Minnesota Impulsive Disorder Interview (MIDI) Assessment of Intense Impulsive Behavior at Baseline (BL) and Post-baseline (PBL)

The MIDI is a validated assessment of impulsive behavior consisting of a semistructured clinical interview assessing pathological gambling, trichotillomania (compulsive hair-pulling), kleptomania (compulsive stealing), pyromania (compulsive fire-setting), intermittent explosive disorder, compulsive buying, and compulsive sexual behavior. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-baseline (up to Month 12)

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
BL Pathological Gambling; n=33, 29, 62BL Trichotillomania; n=33, 29, 62BL Kleptomania; n=33, 29, 62BL Pyromania; n=33, 29, 62BL Intermittent Explosive Disorder; n=33, 29, 62BL Compulsive Buying; n=33, 29, 62BL Compulsive Sexual Behavior; n=33, 29, 62PBL Pathological Gambling; n=33, 27, 60PBL Trichotillomania; n=33, 27, 60PBL Kleptomania; n=33, 27, 60PBL Pyromania; n=33, 27, 60PBL Intermittent Explosive Disorder; n=33, 27, 60PBL Compulsive Buying; n=33, 27, 60PBL Compulsive Sexual Behavior; n=33, 27, 60
LCIG (All Participants)00000110000012
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)00000000000012
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)00000110000000

[back to top]

Number of Participants Taking at Least 1 Concomitant Medication During the Study

Concomitant medications include medications started on or after the first open-label LCIG infusion as well as medications started prior to the first open-label infusion but continued during the study. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: 12 months

Interventionparticipants (Number)
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)33
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)29
LCIG (All Participants)62

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Confirmed Cases of Melanoma

A comprehensive assessment for the presence of melanoma was performed during the screening period and at early termination/end of study by a dermatologist experienced with the diagnosis of the condition. If a suspicious lesion was present, a biopsy was obtained for proper diagnosis. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: up to Month 12

Interventionparticipants (Number)
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)0
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)0
LCIG (All Participants)0

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Endpoint"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis." (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)0.97-0.24
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)1.09-0.58
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)0.820.15

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Month 12"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. On time without troublesome dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movement) is defined as on time without dyskinesia and on time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Positive change from Baseline for on time without troublesome dyskinesia indicates improvement." (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)11.111.54
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)12.041.00
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)10.002.19

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Total Score at Endpoint

"The AIMS is an investigator-completed rating scale that has a total of 12 items rating involuntary movements of various areas of the participant's body. Items 1 through 10 are rated on a 5-point scale of severity from 0 (none), 1 (minimal), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), to 4 (severe), and items 11 and 12 are yes/no questions concerning problems with teeth or dentures. The total AIMS score was calculated by summing items 1-10, with a possible range of 0-40; a negative change indicates improvement. The AIMS was to be performed at consistent times, when the subject was experiencing his/her worst On time (dyskinesia [involuntary muscle movement])." (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline; n=33, 29, 62Change from Baseline at Endpoint; n=33, 27, 60
LCIG (All Participants)5.75.6
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)6.16.1
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)5.35.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Endpoint

The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 to 1.00 with positive change indicating improvement. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)0.733-0.008
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)0.778-0.009
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)0.676-0.006

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Endpoint

The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)70.21.5
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)76.7-0.9
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)62.14.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Activities of Daily Living (e.g., difficulty cutting food) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)31.9-2.8
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)25.90.4
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)39.4-6.7

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Endpoint

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Bodily Discomfort includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: Baseline, Endpoint (Month 12 or last post-baseline visit)

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
EndpointChange from Baseline at Endpoint
LCIG (All Participants)33.3-1.1
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)32.1-2.8
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)34.91.0

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), Deaths and Discontinuations Due to AEs

AE=any untoward medical occurrence which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE=any untoward medical occurrence that: results in death; is life-threatening (an event in which the subject was at risk of death at the time of the event); requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or other important medical events. Treatment-emergent events (TEAE or TESAE)=those starting after the first dose of study drug. Severe=severity reported as 'severe' or missing. Possibly or Probably Treatment Related=drug-event relationship reported as 'possible', 'probable' or missing. Death=a fatal outcome of an SAE or AE. (NCT00360568)
Timeframe: From study enrollment to the end of study or early termination of treatment, including the removal of PEG-J, plus 30 days.

,,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
DeathsTE Deaths>=1 SAE>=1 TESAE>=1 TEAE Leading to Study Termination>=1 TEAE>=1 Severe TEAE>=1 Possibly or ProbablyTreatment-Related TEAENo TEAEs
LCIG (All Participants)00141435915483
LCIG (Previous: LCIG + Placebo Capsules)00551315282
LCIG (Previous: Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules)009922810201

[back to top]

Change in the UPDRS Part I (Mentation, Behavior, and Mood) Score From Baseline to Month 3

The UPDRS is a standardized assessment scale used to measure a patient's disease state. It is completed by a blinded rater. There are 6 parts to the UPDRS. Part I (items 1-4; total score 0-16, calculated as the sum of the individual items) measures the patient's mentation, mood and behavior. A lower total score indicates greater symptom control. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone-0.5
Levodopa/Carbidopa-0.2

[back to top]

Change in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living [ADL]) Score From Baseline to Month 3

The UPDRS is a standardized assessment scale used to measure a patient's disease state. It is completed by a blinded rater. There are 6 parts to the UPDRS. Part II (items 5-17; total score 0-52, calculated as the sum of the individual items) measures the patient's activities of daily living. A lower total score indicates greater symptom control. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone-2.5
Levodopa/Carbidopa-0.5

[back to top]

Change in the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Total Score From Baseline to Month 3

The PDQ-39 is an instrument used to assess quality of life in individuals with Parkinson's disease. The questionnaire provides scores on eight scales: Mobility, activities of daily living, emotions, stigma, social support, cognitions, communication, and bodily discomfort. Questions are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (sometimes) to 5 (always). The total score can range from 39 to 195. A lower score indicates better quality of life. A positive change score indicates an improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone6.3
Levodopa/Carbidopa0.8

[back to top]

Patient and Investigator Global Evaluation of the Patient

Both the patient and the investigator made an evaluation of the change in the patient's condition by rating the condition of the patient at the end of the study compared to patient's condition at baseline. The rating was made on a scale ranging from -3 to +3: (-3: Very much improved, -2: much improved, -1: mild improvement, 0: no change, +1: mild deterioration, +2: much deterioration, +3: very much deterioration). A negative score indicates improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

,
InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Patient global evaluationInvestigator global evaluation
Levodopa/Carbidopa-0.4-0.3
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone-0.9-0.9

[back to top]

Change in the UPDRS Part IV (Complications of Therapy) Score From Baseline to Month 3

Part IV of the UPDRS measures complications the patient may be experiencing with therapy and was only collected at and after the visit at which the first dyskinesia or episode of wearing-off was recorded. Part IV is composed of 3 sections and 11 items: A (32-35, dyskinesia), B (36-39, clinical fluctuations, C (40-42, other complications) (total score 0-23, calculated as the sum of the individual items). A lower total score indicates greater symptom control. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone-0.6
Levodopa/Carbidopa-0.1

[back to top]

Change in the UPDRS Part III (Motor Function) Score From Baseline to Month 3

The UPDRS is a standardized assessment scale used to measure a patient's disease state. It is completed by a blinded rater. There are 6 parts to the UPDRS. Part III (items 18-31; total score 0-56, calculated as the sum of the individual items) measures the patient's motor function. A lower total score indicates greater symptom control. A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone-4.0
Levodopa/Carbidopa-1.42

[back to top]

Change on the QUICK Questionnaire (QQ) Score From Baseline to Month 3

The QQ is a self-administered questionnaire that includes 19 wearing-off (WO) symptoms (motor and non-motor). A positive answer to each of the 19 symptoms is given by patients if they presented with a symptom and the symptom disappeared after the next drug dose. Two positive answers are diagnostic of wearing-off (WO). A negative change score indicates improvement. (NCT00391898)
Timeframe: Baseline to end of study (Month 3)

InterventionPositive answers (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa/Entacapone-0.6
Levodopa/Carbidopa-0.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Absolute Duration of Dyskinesias

Dyskinesias refers to maintenance therapy side effects of chorea, dystonia, or in combination (that occur in the ON time). Hours spent with dyskinesias (troublesome and not troublesome) were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means & pooled SD were obtained using ANCOVA with treatment effect & baseline covariate. A negative change from baseline signifies less time spent with dyskinesia. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,36,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)Endpoint (n=47,48,45,49,45
Placebo BID0.00.20.2-0.3-0.4-0.9-0.7
Preladenant 1 mg BID-0.5-0.4-0.5-0.3-0.5-0.2-0.6
Preladenant 10 mg BID0.70.60.70.90.80.90.6
Preladenant 2 mg BID0.30.20.61.00.80.60.5
Preladenant 5 mg BID0.20.30.20.20.10.40.2

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State (Without Troublesome Dyskinesias)"

"On time refers to periods of adequate control of Parkinson disease symptoms (better/absent). Troublesome dyskinesias refers to maint. therapy side effects of chorea, dystonia, or in combination that impair function. Hours spent in the on state without troubles. dyskinesias during awake time were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means & pooled SD were obtained using ANCOVA with treatment effect & baseline covariate. A (+) change from baseline signifies more time spent in the on state (without troubles. dyskinesias)." (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,36,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)Endpoint (n=47,48,45,49,45
Placebo BID-0.30.0-0.1-0.5-0.5-1.0-0.8
Preladenant 1 mg BID-0.3-0.2-0.2-0.1-0.2-0.2-0.4
Preladenant 10 mg BID0.50.40.50.80.70.50.2
Preladenant 2 mg BID0.50.20.50.80.70.40.4
Preladenant 5 mg BID0.20.30.50.30.20.20.2

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State (With Troublesome Dyskinesias)"

"On time refers to periods of adequate control of Parkinson disease symptoms (better/absent). Troublesome dyskinesias refers to maintenance therapy side effects of chorea, dystonia, or in combination that impair function. Hours spent in the on state with troublesome dyskinesias during awake time were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means & pooled SD were obtained using ANCOVA with treatment effect & baseline covariate. A (+) change from baseline signifies more time spent in the on state (troublesome dyskinesias)." (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,36,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)Endpoint (n=47,48,45,49,45)
Placebo BID0.30.20.30.10.10.10.1
Preladenant 1 mg BID-0.2-0.1-0.2-0.2-0.30.0-0.1
Preladenant 10 mg BID0.20.20.20.10.10.40.4
Preladenant 2 mg BID-0.20.00.10.20.10.20.1
Preladenant 5 mg BID0.00.0-0.30.0-0.10.20.1

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State (no Dyskinesias)"

"On time refers to periods of adequate control of Parkinson disease symptoms (better/absent). Dyskinesias refers to maintenance therapy (e.g., L-dopa) side effects of chorea, dystonia, or in combination. Hours spent in the on state with no dyskinesias during awake time were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means & pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment & baseline covariate. A (+) change from baseline signifies more time spent in the on state (no dyskinesias)." (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,36,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)Endpoint (n=47,48,45,49,45)
Placebo BID0.10.10.30.50.60.90.9
Preladenant 1 mg BID0.90.80.81.10.71.21.0
Preladenant 10 mg BID0.30.10.20.10.60.50.7
Preladenant 2 mg BID0.10.30.40.00.10.20.2
Preladenant 5 mg BID0.70.60.91.01.41.41.2

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the Off State at Each Visit"

"Off time refers to periods of inadequate control of Parkinson disease symptoms (worsening or presence of symptoms). Hours spent in the off state during awake time were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with treatment effect and baseline covariate. A negative change from baseline signifies less time spent in the off state." (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,36,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)
Placebo BID-0.2-0.5-0.8-0.5-0.4-0.4
Preladenant 1 mg BID-0.3-0.5-0.3-0.8-0.3-1.1
Preladenant 10 mg BID-1.2-0.9-1.0-1.7-1.9-1.9
Preladenant 2 mg BID-0.6-1.1-1.4-1.2-1.3-1.4
Preladenant 5 mg BID-1.0-1.1-1.3-1.1-1.7-1.6

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline to Endpoint of 12 Weeks in the 3-day Average of Awake Time Per Day Spent in the Off State"

"Off time refers to periods of inadequate control of Parkinson disease symptoms (worsening or presence of symptoms). For baseline and the 12 weeks treatment period, hours spent in the off state during awake time were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. Change from baseline in least squares (LS) means and pooled standard deviation (SD) were obtained from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. A negative change from baseline signifies less time spent in the off state." (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and up to 12 weeks

Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Preladenant 1 mg BID-0.4
Preladenant 2 mg BID-1.3
Preladenant 5 mg BID-1.6
Preladenant 10 mg BID-1.7
Placebo BID-0.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 6

Sleep attacks are uncontrollable episodes of sleep that occur during the daytime lasting a few seconds to several minutes. A questionnaire to determine sleep attacks over the prior 2 week period was administered at baseline and at 2-week intervals during the treatment period. Frequency of sleep attacks over the two-week treatment period intervals were tabulated in relation to the baseline assessment. Results are presented as participants showing the respective change in frequency of sleep attacks at baseline to the week of assessment (Week 6) (as reported by the participant). For example, someone who had >2 sleep attacks at BL who had a decrease of 1-2 by Week 6 would be reported as BL >2 to WK6 1-2. BL = baseline. WK = week. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Week 6

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Number)
BL 0 to WK6 <-2 (n=30,39,37,34,39)BL 0 to WK6 -1,-2 (n=30,39,37,34,39)BL 0 to WK6 0 (n=30,39,37,34,39)BL 0 to WK6 1,2 (n=30,39,37,34,39)BL 0 to WK6 >-2 (n=30,39,37,34,39)BL 1,2 to WK6 <-2 (n=4,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK6 -1,-2 (n=4,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK6 0 (n=4,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK6 1,2 (n=4,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK6 >-2 (n=4,2,2,1,1)BL >2 to WK6 <-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK6 -1,-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK6 0 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK6 1,2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK6 >-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)
Placebo BID0036211000010001
Preladenant 1 mg BID0028111101150010
Preladenant 10 mg BID0034000100000000
Preladenant 2 mg BID0038011010011000
Preladenant 5 mg BID0032142000030001

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 4

The UPDRS is a frequently used multi-item 4-part questionnaire designed to assess various aspects of Parkinson's disease severity. A total of 42 items are assessed divided across Parts 1 to 4. The Part 4 subscale assesses complications of therapy over the past week for a total of eleven question items. The first three questions and question 8 are rated from 0 (best) to 4 (worst), and the remaining seven questions are simple no (0) / yes (1) questions. The total subscale score ranges from 0 to 23. Assessments were obtained at baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. For endpoint, the last postbaseline visit while on study medication was used. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. Negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in severity. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
InterventionUnits on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=44,42,40,41,41)Week 4 (n=40,45,41,43,43)Week 6 (n=39,41,39,35,42)Week 8 (n=33,42,38,37,41)Week 10 (n=32,39,37,35,41)Week 12 (n=31,37,36,38,37)Endpoint (n=45,46,41,47,44)
Placebo BID-0.8-0.3-0.7-0.8-0.3-0.9-0.9
Preladenant 1 mg BID-0.3-0.4-0.8-0.7-0.8-1.1-0.8
Preladenant 10 mg BID-0.5-0.5-0.2-0.1-0.6-0.7-0.7
Preladenant 2 mg BID-0.5-0.8-0.4-0.8-0.40.0-0.4
Preladenant 5 mg BID-0.4-0.4-0.3-1.0-0.7-1.2-0.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 3 (2 Hours Post-dose)

The UPDRS is a frequently used multi-item 4-part questionnaire designed to assess various aspects of Parkinson's disease severity. A total of 42 items are assessed divided across Parts 1 to 4. The Part 3 subscale assesses motor function across 14 categories for 27 items. Scores for each item range from 0 (best) to 4 (worst) with a total range of 0-108. Assessments were obtained at baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. For endpoint, the last postbaseline visit while on study medication was used. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled standard deviation were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. Negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in severity. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
InterventionUnits on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=44,44,41,44,44)Week 4 (n=40,45,41,43,43)Week 6 (n=38,41,39,34,42)Week 8 (n=33,42,38,37,41)Week 10 (n=32,39,37,35,41)Week 12 (n=31,39,36,39,40)Endpoint (n=47,47,43,53,47)
Placebo BID-2.6-2.9-2.5-5.6-3.4-4.5-3.1
Preladenant 1 mg BID-2.7-3.2-2.5-1.9-3.5-2.7-3.0
Preladenant 10 mg BID-5.1-6.0-6.4-6.9-5.6-6.8-6.3
Preladenant 2 mg BID-2.9-1.5-2.4-1.7-4.3-3.1-2.8
Preladenant 5 mg BID-3.5-4.0-4.0-5.7-5.2-7.3-5.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 3 (1 Hour Post-dose)

The UPDRS is a frequently used multi-item 4-part questionnaire designed to assess various aspects of Parkinson's disease severity. A total of 42 items are assessed divided across Parts 1 to 4. The Part 3 subscale assesses motor function across 14 categories for 27 items. Scores for each item range from 0 (best) to 4 (worst) with a total range of 0-108. Assessments were obtained at baseline (predose Day 1) and 1 hour postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. For endpoint, the last postbaseline visit while on study medication was used. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. Negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in severity. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 1 hour postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
InterventionUnits on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=42,40,37,39,43)Week 4 (n=40,44,40,43,43)Week 6 (n=39,41,38,33,41)Week 8 (n=31,42,36,35,41)Week 10 (n=31,38,36,34,41)Week 12 (n=30,39,35,38,40)Endpoint (n=47,47,43,53,47)
Placebo BID-2.7-1.0-2.4-3.8-1.6-3.0-2.2
Preladenant 1 mg BID-1.1-3.3-1.2-2.1-2.9-2.2-1.9
Preladenant 10 mg BID-5.8-5.8-4.3-6.8-5.0-5.2-5.5
Preladenant 2 mg BID-1.4-2.4-3.3-2.7-5.3-3.3-2.3
Preladenant 5 mg BID-0.9-3.7-3.4-5.1-4.1-4.0-3.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part 2

The UPDRS is a frequently used multi-item 4-part questionnaire designed to assess various aspects of Parkinson's disease severity. A total of 42 items are assessed divided across Parts 1 to 4. Part 2 assesses daily living (13 items scored from 0 [best] to 4 [worst]; total range 0-52). Assessments were obtained at baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. For endpoint, the last postbaseline visit while on study medication was used. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. Negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in severity. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
InterventionUnits on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=44,42,40,41,41)Week 4 (n=40,45,41,43,43)Week 6 (n=39,41,39,35,42)Week 8 (n=33,42,38,37,41)Week 10 (n=32,39,37,35,41)Week 12 (n=31,37,36,38,37)Endpoint (n=45,46,41,47,44)
Placebo BID0.2-0.8-0.7-0.9-0.6-0.8-1.0
Preladenant 1 mg BID0.0-0.6-1.0-0.2-0.4-0.4-0.3
Preladenant 10 mg BID-1.2-1.7-0.3-1.8-0.8-0.8-0.9
Preladenant 2 mg BID-1.0-0.4-1.3-0.9-0.8-1.1-0.9
Preladenant 5 mg BID-1.0-1.8-1.8-2.2-2.0-2.7-2.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part 1

The UPDRS is a frequently used multi-item 4-part questionnaire designed to assess various aspects of Parkinson's disease severity. A total of 42 items are assessed divided across Parts 1 to 4. Part 1 assesses mentation (4 items scored from 0 [best] to 4 [worst]; total range 0-16). Assessments were obtained at baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. For endpoint, the last postbaseline visit while on study medication was used. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. Negative change from baseline indicates a decrease in severity. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
InterventionUnits on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=44,42,40,41,41)Week 4 (n=40,45,41,43,43)Week 6 (n=39,41,39,35,42)Week 8 (n=33,42,38,37,41)Week 10 (n=32,39,37,35,41)Week 12 (n=31,37,36,38,37)Endpoint (n=45,46,41,47,44)
Placebo BID0.20.20.30.1-0.10.20.3
Preladenant 1 mg BID0.1-0.1-0.10.20.20.00.1
Preladenant 10 mg BID-0.5-0.2-0.2-0.20.0-0.3-0.2
Preladenant 2 mg BID-0.20.0-0.1-0.10.1-0.10.1
Preladenant 5 mg BID-0.2-0.2-0.4-0.5-0.5-0.6-0.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time

Hours spent in the sleep state were recorded using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visit. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means & pooled SD were obtained using ANCOVA with treatment effect & baseline covariate. A positive change from baseline means more time asleep and a negative change means less time asleep. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,36,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)Endpoint (n=47,48,45,49,45)
Placebo BID0.00.10.20.20.20.20.1
Preladenant 1 mg BID0.00.10.10.10.20.20.2
Preladenant 10 mg BID0.10.20.10.20.50.30.2
Preladenant 2 mg BID0.20.50.40.20.30.50.5
Preladenant 5 mg BID0.10.1-0.10.10.30.00.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 8

Sleep attacks are uncontrollable episodes of sleep that occur during the daytime lasting a few seconds to several minutes. A questionnaire to determine sleep attacks over the prior 2 week period was administered at baseline and at 2-week intervals during the treatment period. Frequency of sleep attacks over the two-week treatment period intervals were tabulated in relation to the baseline assessment. Results are presented as participants showing the respective change in frequency of sleep attacks at baseline to the week of assessment (Week 8) (as reported by the participant). For example, someone who had >2 sleep attacks at BL who had a decrease of 1-2 by Week 8 would be reported as BL >2 to WK8 1-2. BL = baseline. WK = week. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Week 8

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Number)
BL 0 to WK8 <-2 (n=27,39,35,37,39)BL 0 to WK8 -1,-2 (n=27,39,35,37,39)BL 0 to WK8 0 (n=27,39,35,37,39)BL 0 to WK8 1,2 (n=27,39,35,37,39)BL 0 to WK8 >-2 (n=27,39,35,37,39)BL 1,2 to WK8 <-2 (n=2,2,2,1,0)BL 1,2 to WK8 -1,-2 (n=2,2,2,1,0)BL 1,2 to WK8 0 (n=2,2,2,1,0)BL 1,2 to WK8 1,2 (n=2,2,2,1,0)BL 1,2 to WK8 >-2 (n=2,2,2,1,0)BL >2 to WK8 <-2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK8 -1,-2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK8 0 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK8 1,2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK8 >-2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)
Placebo BID0036120000010001
Preladenant 1 mg BID0024210110030110
Preladenant 10 mg BID0036010001000000
Preladenant 2 mg BID0037201001020000
Preladenant 5 mg BID0033112000040000

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Awake Time Per Day Spent in the on State"

"On time refers to periods of adequate control of Parkinson disease symptoms (symptoms better or absent). Hours spent in the on state during awake time were recorded in half-hour time intervals using a daily diary at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. For baseline, the 24-hour average over 3 consecutive days was derived for Week -1. For endpoint, the 24-hour average was derived for the last available 3 consecutive days with postbaseline data available during the treatment period. For treatment period visits, the 24-hour average was derived for the final 3 consecutive days with data available for the particular visit. Change from baseline in LS means and pooled SD were obtained from an ANCOVA model with effect for treatment and baseline covariate. A positive (+) change from baseline signifies more time spent in the on state." (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week -1) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12

,,,,
Interventionhours/day (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2 (n=46,47,43,49,45)Week 4 (n=45,47,45,44,42)Week 6 (n=39,46,42,41,42)Week 8 (n=36,45,40,34,41)Week 10 (n=35,42,40,34,41)Week 12 (n=29,39,37,38,37)Endpoint (n=47,48,45,49,45)
Placebo BID0.10.30.60.20.10.10.2
Preladenant 1 mg BID0.40.50.30.80.21.00.4
Preladenant 10 mg BID1.00.71.01.11.41.41.3
Preladenant 2 mg BID0.40.61.01.00.90.80.7
Preladenant 5 mg BID0.90.81.01.11.51.81.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 4

Sleep attacks are uncontrollable episodes of sleep that occur during the daytime lasting a few seconds to several minutes. A questionnaire to determine sleep attacks over the prior 2 week period was administered at baseline and at 2-week intervals during the treatment period. Frequency of sleep attacks over the two-week treatment period intervals were tabulated in relation to the baseline assessment. Results are presented as participants showing the respective change in frequency of sleep attacks at baseline to the week of assessment (Week 4) (as reported by the participant). For example, someone who had >2 sleep attacks at BL who had a decrease of 1-2 by Week 4 would be reported as BL >2 to WK4 1-2. BL = baseline. WK = week. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Week 4

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Number)
BL 0 to WK4 <-2 (n=32,43,39,43,39)BL 0 to WK4 -1,-2 (n=32,43,39,43,39)BL 0 to WK4 0 (n=32,43,39,43,39)BL 0 to WK4 1,2 (n=32,43,39,43,39)BL 0 to WK4 >-2 (n=32,43,39,43,39)BL 1,2 to WK4 <-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK4 -1,-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK4 0 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK4 1,2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK4 >-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL >2 to WK4 <-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK4 -1,-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK4 0 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK4 1,2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK4 >-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)
Placebo BID0036121000010100
Preladenant 1 mg BID0030111101050010
Preladenant 10 mg BID0040210100000000
Preladenant 2 mg BID0040300011011000
Preladenant 5 mg BID0034321010020011

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 2

Sleep attacks are uncontrollable episodes of sleep that occur during the daytime lasting a few seconds to several minutes. A questionnaire to determine sleep attacks over the prior 2 week period was administered at baseline and at 2-week intervals during the treatment period. Frequency of sleep attacks over the two-week treatment period intervals were tabulated in relation to the baseline assessment. Results are presented as participants showing the respective change in frequency of sleep attacks at baseline to the week of assessment (Week 2) (as reported by the participant). For example, someone who had >2 sleep attacks at BL who had a decrease of 1-2 by Week 2 would be reported as BL >2 to WK2 1-2. BL = baseline. WK = week. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Week 2

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Number)
BL 0 to WK2 <-2 (n=36,42,39,43,41)BL 0 to WK2 -1,-2 (n=36,42,39,43,41)BL 0 to WK2 0 (n=36,42,39,43,41)BL 0 to WK2 1,2 (n=36,42,39,43,41)BL 0 to WK2 >-2 (n=36,42,39,43,41)BL 1,2 to WK2 <-2 (n=4,2,2,2,1)BL 1,2 to WK2 -1,-2 (n=4,2,2,2,1)BL 1,2 to WK2 0 (n=4,2,2,2,1)BL 1,2 to WK2 1,2 (n=4,2,2,2,1)BL 1,2 to WK2 >-2 (n=4,2,2,2,1)BL >2 to WK2 <-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK2 -1,-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK2 0 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK2 1,2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK2 >-2 (n=6,2,4,0,2)
Placebo BID0037130010010001
Preladenant 1 mg BID0031320210130300
Preladenant 10 mg BID0041110001100000
Preladenant 2 mg BID0039120110001010
Preladenant 5 mg BID0036121100020101

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 12

Sleep attacks are uncontrollable episodes of sleep that occur during the daytime lasting a few seconds to several minutes. A questionnaire to determine sleep attacks over the prior 2 week period was administered at baseline and at 2-week intervals during the treatment period. Frequency of sleep attacks over the two-week treatment period intervals were tabulated in relation to the baseline assessment. Results are presented as participants showing the respective change in frequency of sleep attacks at baseline to the week of assessment (Week 12) (as reported by the participant). For example, someone who had >2 sleep attacks at BL who had a decrease of 1-2 by Week 12 would be reported as BL >2 to WK12 1-2. BL = baseline. WK = week. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Week 12

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Number)
BL 0 to WK12 <-2 (n=24,36,33,39,37)BL 0 to WK12 -1,-2 (n=24,36,33,39,37)BL 0 to WK12 0 (n=24,36,33,39,37)BL 0 to WK12 1,2 (n=24,36,33,39,37)BL 0 to WK12 >-2 (n=24,36,33,39,37)BL 1,2 to WK12 <-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK12 -1,-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK12 0 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK12 1,2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK12 >-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL >2 to WK12 <-2 (n=4,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK12 -1,-2 (n=4,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK12 0 (n=4,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK12 1,2 (n=4,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK12 >-2 (n=4,2,4,0,2)
Placebo BID0034121000010010
Preladenant 1 mg BID0021210201020110
Preladenant 10 mg BID1035300001000000
Preladenant 2 mg BID0035100011011000
Preladenant 5 mg BID0031022000030010

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Frequency of Sleep Attacks at Week 10

Sleep attacks are uncontrollable episodes of sleep that occur during the daytime lasting a few seconds to several minutes. A questionnaire to determine sleep attacks over the prior 2 week period was administered at baseline and at 2-week intervals during the treatment period. Frequency of sleep attacks over the two-week treatment period intervals were tabulated in relation to the baseline assessment. Results are presented as participants showing the respective change in frequency of sleep attacks at baseline to the week of assessment (Week 10) (as reported by the participant). For example, someone who had >2 sleep attacks at BL who had a decrease of 1-2 by Week 10 would be reported as BL >2 to WK10 1-2. BL = baseline. WK = week. (NCT00406029)
Timeframe: Baseline (predose Day 1) and 2 hours postdose at Week 10

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Number)
BL 0 to WK10 <-2 (n=25,36,34,35,38)BL 0 to WK10 -1,-2 (n=25,36,34,35,38)BL 0 to WK10 0 (n=25,36,34,35,38)BL 0 to WK10 1,2 (n=25,36,34,35,38)BL 0 to WK10 >-2 (n=25,36,34,35,38)BL 1,2 to WK10 <-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK10 -1,-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK10 0 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK10 1,2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL 1,2 to WK10 >-2 (n=3,2,2,1,1)BL >2 to WK10 <-2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK10 -1,-2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK10 0 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK10 1,2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)BL >2 to WK10 >-2 (n=5,2,4,0,2)
Placebo BID0036020100010001
Preladenant 1 mg BID0021400111040100
Preladenant 10 mg BID0035000100000000
Preladenant 2 mg BID0035101100020000
Preladenant 5 mg BID0031302000030010

[back to top]

Gaitmat Stance Measurements (AUC)

Gaitmat stance measurements were measured every half hour throughout an 8 hour period. Area under the curve was computed using the trapezoidal method for root mean squared velocity in the anterior-posterior direction. Each subject's unique baseline was used by computing the mean of the test-retest period measured at 08:00 am. (NCT00467597)
Timeframe: Every 1/2 hour during an 8 hour period.

InterventionRoot Mean Square of Velocity*Minutes (Mean)
PD - No LID4.48
PD - Mild LID10.8
PD - Mod LID20.9
Controls - No PD2.8

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part IV Total Score at Week 52 and FAP

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part IV assesses complications of therapy on 11 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 or 0-1 points per item depending on the item. The maximum total score is 23 points. A higher score indicates more severe symptoms of complications. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Week 52, n=47, 46FAP, n=64, 58
ROP+L-Dopa0.10.3
Ropinirole Hydrochloride0.30.3

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline in the Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale Score by Clinician at Week 52 and FAP in ROP Group

The Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale Score is measured as percentage, from 100% (Completely independent. Able to do all chores without slowness, difficulty or impairment. Essentially normal. Unaware of any difficulty) to 0% (Vegetative functions such as swallowing, bladder and bowel functions are not functioning. Bedridden). (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

Interventionpercent change (Mean)
Week 52, n=46FAP, n=58
Ropinirole Hydrochloride2.11.5

[back to top]

Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part I Total Score at Week 52 and FAP

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part I assesses mentation, behavior, and mood on 4 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 16 points. A higher score indicates more severe mental symptoms. Percent change from baseline was calculated as (change from baseline score/baseline score) * 100; change from baseline was calculated as thescore at the observation day minus the baseline score. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionpercent change in score (Mean)
Week 52, n=19, 22FAP, n=27, 26
ROP+L-Dopa-68.86-38.09
Ropinirole Hydrochloride-22.73-21.92

[back to top]

Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part IV Total Score at Week 52 and FAP

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part IV assesses complications of therapy on 11 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 or 0-1 points per item depending on the item. The maximum total score is 23 points. A higher score indicates more severe symptoms of complications. Percent change from baseline was calculated as (change from baseline score/baseline score) * 100; change from baseline was calculated as thescore at the observation day minus the baseline score. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionpercent change in score (Mean)
Week 52, n=23, 17FAP, n=37, 20
ROP+L-Dopa-8.7013.30
Ropinirole Hydrochloride0.00-2.50

[back to top]

"Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part III Total Score (in On State for the ROP+L-Dopa Group) at Week 52 and FAP"

"The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part III assesses motor examination on 27 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 108 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as (change from baseline score/baseline score) * 100; change from baseline was calculated as thescore at the observation day minus the baseline score." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionpercent change in score (Mean)
Week 52, n=45, 46FAP, n=61, 58
ROP+L-Dopa-36.83-30.42
Ropinirole Hydrochloride-37.73-27.79

[back to top]

"Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"

"The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part II assesses activities of daily living on 13 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 52 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off state is where PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as (change from baseline score/baseline score) * 100; change from baseline was calculated as thescore at the observation day minus the baseline score." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionpercent change in score (Mean)
Week 52, n=47, 13FAP, n=62, 22
"ROP+L-Dopa, Off State (Only Participants With Off State)"-17.68-4.10
"ROP+L-Dopa, On State"-48.98-29.00

[back to top]

"Mean Change From Baseline in the Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale Score by Clinician at Week 52 and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"

The Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale Score is measured as percentage, from 100% (Completely independent. Able to do all chores without slowness, difficulty or impairment. Essentially normal. Unaware of any difficulty) to 0% (Vegetative functions such as swallowing, bladder and bowel functions are not functioning. Bedridden). (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionpercent change (Mean)
Week 52, n=47, 13FAP, n=63, 21
"ROP+L-Dopa, Off State (Only Participants With Off State)"5.82.6
"ROP+L-Dopa, On State"3.43.0

[back to top]

"Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Total Score (in On State for the ROP+L-Dopa Group) at Week 52 and Final Assessment Point (FAP)"

"The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of Parkinson's Disease (PD) patients objectively. Part III assesses motor examination on 27 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 108 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Participants with off state at baseline or without post-baseline data were not included in the ROP+L-dopa group at FAP. These participants as well as one with off state at Week 52 and those prematurely withdrawn were not included at Week 52." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Week 52, n=45, 46FAP, n=61, 58
ROP+L-Dopa-7.0-5.8
Ropinirole Hydrochloride-6.9-5.5

[back to top]

"Mean Change From Baseline in Awake Time Off (Hours) and Awake Time On (Hours) at Week 52 and FAP in the ROP+L-Dopa Group Excluding Participants With 0 Off (Hour) at Baseline"

"Off state is where PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. The off's duration (awake time spent off) and the on's duration (awake time spent on) on each day were calculated." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionhours (Mean)
Week 52, n=16FAP, n=22
"ROP+L-Dopa, Off Hours"-0.09-0.40
"ROP+L-Dopa, On Hours"1.001.00

[back to top]

"Japanese UPDRS Part III Mean Total Score (in On State for the ROP+L-Dopa Group) at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP"

"The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part III assesses motor examination on 27 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 108 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. LOCF was used for the FAP data to impute post-baseline missing values. One participant was not included in the ROP+L-dopa group at FAP as having no post-baseline data." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline, n=62,58Week 52, n=46, 46FAP, n=64, 58
ROP+L-Dopa20.512.714.3
Ropinirole Hydrochloride19.813.114.3

[back to top]

"Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"

"The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part II assesses activities of daily living on 13 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 52 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off state is where PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Week 52, n=47, 13FAP, n=64, 22
"ROP+L-Dopa, Off State (Only Participants With Off State)"-2.8-0.3
"ROP+L-Dopa, On State"-3.5-2.3

[back to top]

"Japanese UPDRS Part II Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"

"The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part II assesses activities of daily living on 13 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 52 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. On state is where PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off state is where PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. LOCF was used for the FAP data. Some participants were not included at FAP as having no post-baseline data in on state or having no data in off state at Week 52/withdrawal." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline, n=65, 27Week 52, n=47, 16FAP, n=64, 26
"ROP+L-Dopa, Off Sate (Only Participants With Off State)"14.311.415.2
"ROP+L-Dopa, On State"7.94.15.5

[back to top]

Number of Participants at Each Stage of the Modified Hoehn & Yahr Scale at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP in the ROP Group

The Modified Hoehn & Yahr criteria are measured on the following 8-point scale for staging: 0, No signs of disease; 1, Unilateral disease; 1.5, Unilateral plus axial involvement; 2, Bilateral disease; 2.5, Mild bilateral disease; 3, Mild to moderate bilateral disease; 4, Severe disability; and 5, Wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Number of Participants at Each Stage of the Modified Hoehn & Yahr Scale at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP in the ROP Group

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Baseline, n=58, Stage 0Baseline, n=58, Stage 1Baseline, n=58, Stage 1.5Baseline, n=58, Stage 2Baseline, n=58, Stage 2.5Baseline, n=58, Stage 3Baseline, n=58, Stage 4Baseline, n=58, Stage 5Week 52, n=46, Stage 0Week 52, n=46, Stage 1Week 52, n=46, Stage 1.5Week 52, n=46, Stage 2Week 52, n=46, Stage 2.5Week 52, n=46, Stage 3Week 52, n=46, Stage 4Week 52, n=46, Stage 5FAP, n=58, Stage 0FAP, n=58, Stage 1FAP, n=58, Stage 1.5FAP, n=58, Stage 2FAP, n=58, Stage 2.5FAP, n=58, Stage 3FAP, n=58, Stage 4FAP, n=58, Stage 5
Ropinirole Hydrochloride092211412001121141350011321718700

[back to top]

Number of Participants Scored as Responders on the Clinician's Global Impression (CGI) Scale at Week 52 and FAP

"CGI is measured on the following 7-point scale: 1, Very much improved; 2, Much Improved; 3, Minimally improved; 4, No change; 5, Minimally worse; 6, Much worse; and 7, Very much worse. Responders are defined as those participants scored as very much improved or much improved." (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Week 52 and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Week 52, n=47, 46FAP, n=64, 58
ROP+L-Dopa3334
Ropinirole Hydrochloride2831

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants Remaining in the Study on the Indicated Days in the ROP Group

The percentage of participants remaining in the study was presented by Kaplan-Meier method, where premature discontinuation (i.e., withdrawal before Week 52) was the event, and participants who had completed the study were censored. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Days 0-419

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Day 0Day 14Day 29Day 36Day 66Day 71Day 85Day 167Day 169Day 175Day 210Day 241Day 253Day 419
Ropinirole Hydrochloride10098979593919088868483817979

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants Remaining in the Study on the Indicated Days in the ROP+L-Dopa Group

The percentage of participants remaining in the study was presented by Kaplan-Meier method, where premature discontinuation (i.e., withdrawal before Week 52) was the event, and participants who had completed the study were censored. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Days 0-422

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Day 0Day 22Day 33Day 43Day 85Day 101Day 112Day 128Day 154Day 169Day 196Day 203Day 238Day 282Day 301Day 341Day 365Day 422
ROP+L-Dopa1009895949291898886838280787775747272

[back to top]

Japanese UPDRS Part IV Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part IV assesses complications of therapy on 11 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 or 0-1 points per item depending on the item. The maximum total score is 23 points. A higher score indicates more severe symptoms of complications. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline, n=65, 58Week 52, n=47, 46FAP, n=64, 58
ROP+L-Dopa2.11.52.4
Ropinirole Hydrochloride0.50.80.8

[back to top]

Mean Percent Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP in the ROP Group

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part II assesses activities of daily living on 13 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 52 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. Percent change from baseline was calculated as (change from baseline score/baseline score) * 100; change from baseline was calculated as thescore at the observation day minus the baseline score. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

Interventionpercent change in score (Mean)
Week 52, n=44FAP, n=56
Ropinirole Hydrochloride-24.35-16.74

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part II Total Score at Week 52 and FAP in the ROP Group

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part II assesses activities of daily living on 13 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 52 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Week 52, n=46FAP, n=58
Ropinirole Hydrochloride-2.2-1.8

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline in the Japanese UPDRS Part I Total Score at Week 52 and FAP

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part I assesses mentation, behavior, and mood on 4 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 16 points. A higher score indicates more severe mental symptoms. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Week 52, n=47, 46FAP, n=64, 58
ROP+L-Dopa-0.4-0.2
Ropinirole Hydrochloride-0.1-0.0

[back to top]

Japanese UPDRS Part II Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP in ROP Group

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part II assesses activities of daily living on 13 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 52 points. A higher score indicates more severe PD symptoms. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline, n=58Week 52, n=46FAP, n=58
Ropinirole Hydrochloride7.75.45.9

[back to top]

Japanese UPDRS Part I Mean Total Score at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP

The Japanese UPDRS assesses the status of PD patients objectively. Part I assesses mentation, behavior, and mood on 4 items. Participants receive a score of 0-4 points per item. The maximum total score is 16 points. A higher score indicates more severe mental symptoms. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline, n=65, 58Week 52, n=47, 46FAP, n=64, 58
ROP+L-Dopa0.80.40.7
Ropinirole Hydrochloride0.80.70.8

[back to top]

"Number of Participants at Each Stage of the Modified Hoehn & Yahr Scale at Baseline, Week 52, and FAP by On/Off State in the ROP+L-Dopa Group"

The Modified Hoehn & Yahr criteria are measured on the following 8-point scale for staging: 0, No signs of disease; 1, Unilateral disease; 1.5, Unilateral plus axial involvement; 2, Bilateral disease; 2.5, Mild bilateral disease; 3, Mild to moderate bilateral disease; 4, Severe disability; and 5, Wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided. LOCF was used for the FAP data to impute post-baseline missing values. Some participants in each state were not included at FAP as having no post-baseline data in the corresponding state or having no data in the corresponding state at Week 52/withdrawal. (NCT00485069)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 52, and FAP (up to Week 52)

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 0Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 1Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 1.5Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 2Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 2.5Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 3Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 4Baseline, n=65, 27, Stage 5Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 0Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 1Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 1.5Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 2Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 2.5Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 3Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 4Week 52, n=47, 16, Stage 5FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 0FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 1FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 1.5FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 2FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 2.5FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 3FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 4FAP, n=63, 25, Stage 5
"ROP+L-Dopa, Off State (Only Participants With Off State)"001297620111444101115773
"ROP+L-Dopa, On State"05322161630110615681011372171130

[back to top]

"Time Spent in Off State Per Day"

"Participant diaires recorded time spent in the off state at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. Off time is defined as when the participant's medication is not working as subjectively determined by the participant and his/her physician. Higher off time values relative to Baseline (BL) signify that the Parkinson's disease symptoms are worse (i.e., participant can only move slowly or not at all). BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175." (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

InterventionHours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL_LA (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID5.64.34.24.03.73.74.14.2

[back to top]

"Time Spent in the on State Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"

"Participant diaries recorded time spent in the on state without troublesome dyskinesias at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. On time is defined as when the participant's medication is working as subjectively determined by the participant and his/her physician. Dyskinesias are a side effect of long-term therapy with L-dopa consisting of unintentional twisting and/or turning movements that occur in the on time; troublesome dyskinesias interfere with function or cause discomfort. Higher values relative to BL signify that the Parkinson's disease symptoms are better or absent (i.e., participant can move well) concomitant with absence of troublesome dyskinesias. BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175." (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

Interventionhours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL_LA (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID3.33.43.73.83.83.83.63.8

[back to top]

"Time Spent in the on State With no Dyskinesias"

"Participant diaries recorded time spent in the on state with no dyskinesias at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. On time is defined as when the participant's medication is working as subjectively determined by the participant and his/her physician. Dyskinesias are a side effect of long-term therapy with L-dopa consisting of unintentional twisting and/or turning movements that occur in the on time. Higher values relative to BL signify an improvement in the Parkinson's disease symptoms (i.e., participant can move well) concomitant with no dyskinesias. BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175." (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

Interventionhours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL_LA (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID6.37.16.86.97.06.96.96.6

[back to top]

"Time Spent in the on State With Troublesome Dyskinesias"

"Participant diaries recorded time spent in the on state with troublesome dyskinesias at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. On time is defined as when the participant's medication is working as subjectively determined by the participant and his/her physician. Dyskinesias are a side effect of long-term therapy with L-dopa consisting of unintentional twisting and/or turning movements that occur in the on time; troublesome dyskinesias interfere with function or cause discomfort. Higher values relative to BL signify that the Parkinson's disease symptoms are better or absent (i.e., participant can move well) concomitant with troublesome dyskinesias. BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175." (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

Interventionhours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL_LA (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID1.01.21.41.31.31.41.41.5

[back to top]

Total Sleep Time

Participant diaries recorded time spent in the sleep state at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175. (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

Interventionhours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL_LA (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID7.67.87.77.87.87.77.97.8

[back to top]

Number of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event

An adverse event is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure. A serious adverse event is an adverse event that that results in death, life threatening adverse event, permanent or significant disability / unfitness for work, hospital treatment (i.e., admission to hospital) or prolongation of a patient's length of stay, or congenital deformity or birth defect. (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Up to 42 weeks

InterventionParticipants (Number)
Preladenant 5 mg BID123

[back to top]

Absolute Duration of Dyskinesias

"Participant diaries recorded time spent in the on state with dyskinesias at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. On time is defined as when the participant's medication is working as subjectively determined by the participant and his/her physician. Dyskinesias are a side effect of long-term therapy with L-dopa consisting of unintentional twisting and/or turning movements that occur in the on time. Higher values relative to BL signify worsening of dyskinesia (i.e., more time spent with dyskinesia). BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175." (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

Interventionhours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL_LA (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID4.34.65.15.15.25.25.05.3

[back to top]

"Awake Time Per Day in the on State"

"Participant diaries recorded time spent in the on state at half-hourly intervals for at least 3 full days before scheduled visits. On time is defined as when the participant's medication is working as subjectively determined by the participant and his/her physician. Higher on time values relative to BL mean that the Parkinson's disease symptoms are better or absent (i.e., participant can move well). BL was determined using two methods: 1) P04501 BL refers to the starting BL of the double-blind base study P04501 and 2) P04501 BL_LA refers to BL as defined by the last assessment taken in P04501. Endpoint refers to the last observed result for participants within P05175." (NCT00537017)
Timeframe: Baseline (P04501 BL; P04501 BL_LA), Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 24, Week 36

Interventionhours/day (Mean)
P04501 BL (n=133)P04501 BL (Last Assessment) (n=133)Week 4 (n=132)Week 8 (n=119)Week 12 (n=119)Week 24 (n=110)Week 36 (n=99)Endpoint (n=133)
Preladenant 5 mg BID10.611.711.912.012.112.211.911.8

[back to top]

"Measurement of Time in Minutes From When a Patient Was in a Clinical Off State, Took Their Medication and Went Into a Clinical on State"

"Time to on state (benefit with regard to mobility, stiffness and slowness) with parcopa versus carbidopa/levodopa immediate release compound. This measurement is compared between Parcopa and carbidopa/levodopa wit the first morning dose of each intervention. Study duration was 2 days." (NCT00590122)
Timeframe: first dose of day for each arm

Interventionminutes (Mean)
B-Parcopa Arm23.9
A-Carbidopa/Levodopa Arm28.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline on the Non-motor Score of the Quantitative Wearing-Off Questionnaire 9 Item (QWOQ-9)

"The QWOQ-9 is a self-rated questionnaire used to assess motor and non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease. The 4 non-motor symptoms are each measured on a five item (0-4) Likert scale, reflecting the severity of the item from not present to very severe. The range of possible score values of the non-motor subscale of the QWOQ-9 is 0 to 16. A higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change score indicates improvement." (NCT00642356)
Timeframe: Baseline to 15 minutes prior to 2nd dose at Week 8

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone-0.9
Immediate Release Carbidopa/Levodopa-0.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline on the Motor Score of the Quantitative Wearing-Off Questionnaire 9 Item (QWOQ-9)

"The QWOQ-9 is a self-rated questionnaire used to assess motor and non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease. The 5 motor symptoms are each measured on a five item (0-4) Likert scale, reflecting the severity of the item from not present to very severe. The range of possible score values of the motor subscale of the QWOQ-9 is 0 to 20. A higher score indicates greater disability. A negative change score indicates improvement." (NCT00642356)
Timeframe: Baseline to 15 minutes prior to 2nd dose at Week 8

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
Carbidopa/Levodopa/Entacapone-1.2
Immediate Release Carbidopa/Levodopa0.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Emotional Well-Being Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Emotional Well-being (e.g., feelings of isolation) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-7.1
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-4.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Communication Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Communication includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-9.5
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules4.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Cognition Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Cognition includes 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-7.3
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-3.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Bodily Discomfort Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Bodily Discomfort includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-13.5
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-10.2

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. On time without troublesome dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movement) is defined as On time without dyskinesia and On time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Positive change from Baseline for on time without troublesome dyskinesia indicates improvement." (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules4.11
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules2.24

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQual Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Summary Index at Week 12

The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 to 1.00 with positive change indicating improvement. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules0.054
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.016

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia at Week 12"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis." (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-0.11
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.03

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Average Daily Normalized Off Time"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-4.04
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-2.14

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life Scale (EQ-5D) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 12

The EQ VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules5.2
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-6.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) Total Score at Week 12

The ZBI is a 22-item questionnaire regarding the caregiver/subject relationship and evaluates the caregiver's health condition, psychological well-being, finances and social life. Each question is answered on a 5-point scale (0=Never, 1=Rarely, 2=Sometimes, 3=Quite frequently, and 4= Nearly always). The caregiver burden is evaluated by the total score (Range 0 to 88) obtained from the sum of the answers to the 22 questions. Higher scores are associated with a higher level of burden for the caregiver. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-2.8
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules1.7

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Questions 32, 33, and 34 at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. Questions 32, 33, and 34 on UPDRS Part IV was totaled to evaluate dyskinesias. Each of these questions is measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part IV dyskinesia score will range from 0-12 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules0.4
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules0.8

[back to top]

Employment Impairment (EMP) II Status at Week 12

The EMP instruments are designed to collect information regarding employment and ability to run a household. EMP I questions include: Are you currently in paid employment? (If yes, at which percentage have you been working during the last 4 weeks?); Have you got someone to run your household for you? (If yes, how much time per week does he/she spend in your household?); Are you retired? (If yes, for which reason?) The retirement question (from EMP I) is excluded from the EMP II instrument. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Week 12 (or early termination)

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Paid Employment (PE)=YesPE=Yes, 100% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 75% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 50% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 25% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, Other % of Past 4 WeeksPE=NoSomeone Else Runs the Household (SRH)=YesSRH=Yes, 100% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 75% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 50% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 25% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, Other % of Time per WeekSRH=No
LCIG + Placebo Capsules1061102252213502213
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules51121026241244227

[back to top]

Employment Impairment (EMP) I Status at Baseline

The EMP instruments are designed to collect information regarding employment and ability to run a household. EMP I questions include: Are you currently in paid employment? (If yes, at which percentage have you been working during the last 4 weeks?); Have you got someone to run your household for you? (If yes, how much time per week does he/she spend in your household?); Are you retired? (If yes, for which reason?). (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Paid Employment (PE)=YesPE=Yes, 100% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 75% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 50% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, 25% of Past 4 WeeksPE=Yes, Other % of Past 4 WeeksPE=NoSomeone Else Runs the Household (SRH)=YesSRH=Yes, 100% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 75% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 50% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, 25% of Time per WeekSRH=Yes, Other % of Time per WeekSRH=NoAre You Retired (R)=YesR=Yes, Old Age PensionerR=Yes, Premature Due to PDR=Yes, Premature Due to Other ConditionR=Yes, Other ReasonR=No
LCIG + Placebo Capsules1062011252415332111248131211
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules8312112325134512623812128

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression - Status (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 12

The CGI-S is a global assessment by the Investigator of current symptomatology and impact of illness on functioning. The ratings of the CGI-S are as follows: 1 = normal, 2 = borderline ill, 3 = mildly ill, 4 = moderately ill, 5 = markedly ill, 6 = severely ill, and 7 = among the most extremely ill. The CGI-I is a global assessment by the Investigator of the change in clinical status since the start of treatment. The CGI-I ratings are as follows: 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, 7 = very much worse. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
CGI-S at BaselineCGI-I at Week 12
LCIG + Placebo Capsules4.22.3
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules4.63.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers provided to the 14 Part III questions, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part III score ranges from 0-108 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-1.5
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-2.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale. The total score will range from 0-176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 no disability. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-3.6
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-2.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part IV Score is the sum of the answers to the 11 questions that comprise Part IV, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4) or a 2-point scale (0 or 1). The Part IV score ranges from 0-23 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-1.1
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules0.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part II score ranges from 0-52 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-1.8
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules1.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at Week 12

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions that comprise Part I, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part I score ranges from 0-16 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-0.2
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible (i.e. number of answers multiplied by 4) which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0-100 scale. Higher scores are associated with more severe symptoms. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-10.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-3.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Stigma Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Stigma (e.g., social embarrassment) consists of 4 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-8.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-4.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Social Support Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Social Support includes 3 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-3.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-0.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Activities of Daily Living Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Activities of Daily Living (e.g., difficulty cutting food) includes 6 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-12.9
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-1.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility Domain Score at Week 12

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. The PDQ-39 Domain: Mobility (e.g., fear of falling when walking) includes 10 questions, each answered on a 5-point scale. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT00660387)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LCIG + Placebo Capsules-17.3
Placebo Gel + Levodopa-Carbidopa Capsules-6.8

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Intense Impulsive Behavior

To monitor for the development of intense impulsive behavior the Minnesota Impulsive Disorder Interview (MIDI) was administered. The MIDI is a semi-structured clinical interview assessing pathological gambling, trichotillomania, kleptomania, pyromania, intermittent explosive disorder, compulsive buying, and compulsive sexual behavior. (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study) and every 6 months until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline: Pathological GamblingBaseline: TrichotillomaniaBaseline: KleptomaniaBaseline: PyromaniaBaseline: Intermittent Explosive DisorderBaseline: Compulsive BuyingBaseline: Compulsive Sexual BehaviorPost-baseline: Pathological GamblingPost-baseline: TrichotillomaniaPost-baseline: KleptomaniaPost-baseline: PyromaniaPost-baseline: Intermittent Explosive DisorderPost-baseline: Compulsive BuyingPost-baseline: Compulsive Sexual Behavior
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel100001110000214

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Chemistry Laboratory Values

"A laboratory value was considered potentially clinically significant if it satisfied the pre-specified criteria presented in the table and was also more extreme than the participant's corresponding baseline value.~ULN = upper limit of normal" (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Baseline and every 6 months until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Creatinine > 177 µmol/LCalcium < 1.75 mmol/LCalcium > 3.0 mmol/LTotal bilirubin > 2 x ULNAspartate aminotransferase (AST) > 3 x ULNAlanine aminotransferase (ALT) > 3 x ULNGamma glutamyl-transferase (GGT) > 3 x ULNLactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 3 x ULNAlkaline phosphatase (ALP) > 400 U/LCreatine phosphokinase (CPK) > 3 x ULNNon-fasting glucose < 2.78 mmol/LNon-fasting glucose > 16.0 mmol/LUric acid > 500 µmol/L (Female); > 590 µmol/L (Male)Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) > 10.8 mmol/LCholesterol > 12.9 mmol/L
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel0100005006410110

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Hematology Laboratory Values

A laboratory value was considered potentially clinically significant if it satisfied the pre-specified criteria presented in the table and was also more extreme than the participant's corresponding Baseline value. (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Baseline and every 6 months until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Red blood cells (RBC) < 2.0 × 10^12 cells/L (Female); < 2.5 × 10^12 cells/L (Male)Haemoglobin < 90 g/L (Female); < 100 g/L (Male)Haematocrit < 30% (Female); < 34% (Male)White blood cells (WBC) < 2.8 × 10^9 cells/LWBC > 16.0 × 10^9 cells/LAbsolute neutrophil count < 1.2 × 10^9 cells/LLymphocytes > 80%Absolute lymphocyte count < 0.75 × 10^9 cells/LEosinophils > 10%Monocytes > 30%Platelet count < 95 × 10^9 cells/LPlatelet count > 700 × 10^9 cells/LMean corpuscular volume (MCV) < 60 fLMCV > 120 fL
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel0916322014412000

[back to top]

Number of Participants Who Developed Melanoma

A comprehensive assessment for the presence of melanoma was performed at least once a year by a dermatologist. (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Once per year during the study; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel2

[back to top]

"Change in Average Daily Off Time Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary at End of Treatment"

"The PD symptom diary asks participants (or their caregivers) to indicate their status upon waking and every 30 minutes during their normal waking time according to the following categories: asleep, off, on without dyskinesia, on with non-troublesome dyskinesia, or on with troublesome dyskinesia.~Off time was defined as time when medication had worn off and was no longer providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness.~PD diary times were normalized to a 16-hour waking day and averaged for the 3 days prior to each study visit.~A negative change for off time indicates improvement. The PD diary assessment was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at United States (US) sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionhours (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-3.97-0.19

[back to top]

Number of Participants Receiving Concomitant Anti-Parkinson's Disease Medications by Treatment Year

"Participants could use oral levodopa-carbidopa for scheduled or supplemental bedtime/overnight doses after the pump was disconnected for the night, or as rescue medication in case of acute deterioration caused by failure of the LCIG system such as tubes and/or the pump or the onset of an acute illness.~The initiation of additional concomitant PD medication was allowed at the discretion of the Investigator if medically indicated." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Year 1, Year 2, Year 3, Year 4, Year 5, Year 6, Year 7, Year 8, Year 9, Year 10, > Year 10 (maximum time on treatment was approximately 11.5 years).

,,,,,,,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
No concomitant PD medications (LCIG only)Concomitant oral levodopa/carbidopaOther concomitant PD medications
> Year 10810
Year 112610036
Year 101741
Year 21079132
Year 3967426
Year 4745517
Year 552377
Year 638165
Year 73392
Year 82882
Year 92151

[back to top]

"Change in Average Daily On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary at End of Treatment"

"The PD diary asks participants (or their caregivers) to indicate their status upon waking and every 30 minutes during their normal waking time according to the following categories: asleep, off, on without dyskinesia, on with non-troublesome dyskinesia, or on with troublesome dyskinesia.~On time is when medication is providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness and stiffness. Dyskinesia is involuntary twisting, turning movements which are an effect of medication and occur during on time. Troublesome dyskinesia interferes with function or causes meaningful discomfort.~PD diary times were normalized to a 16-hour waking day and averaged for the 3 days prior to each study visit. A positive change indicates improvement.~The PD diary was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionhours (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel0.120.70

[back to top]

"Change in Average Daily On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary at End of Treatment"

"The PD diary asks participants (or their caregivers) to indicate their status upon waking and every 30 minutes during their normal waking time according to the following categories: asleep, off, on without dyskinesia, on with non-troublesome dyskinesia, or on with troublesome dyskinesia.~On time is when medication is providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness and stiffness. Dyskinesia is involuntary twisting, turning movements which are an effect of medication and occur during on time. Non-troublesome dyskinesia does not interfere with function or cause meaningful discomfort.~On time without troublesome dyskinesia is the sum of on time without dyskinesia and on time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. PD diary times were normalized to a 16-hour waking day and averaged for the 3 days prior to each study visit. A positive change indicates improvement.~The PD diary was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionhours (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel3.86-0.51

[back to top]

Change in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Scores at End of Treatment

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire that comprises 39 items addressing the following eight domains of health that patients consider to be adversely affected by the disease:~Mobility (e.g., fear of falling when walking) - 10 questions~Activities of daily living (e.g., difficulty cutting food) - 6 questions~Emotional well-being (e.g., feelings of isolation) - 6 questions~Stigma (e.g., social embarrassment) - 4 questions~Social support - 3 questions~Cognition - 4 questions~Communication - 3 questions~Bodily discomfort - 3 questions~Each question is answered on a 5-point scale from 0 (Never) to 4 (Always / Cannot Do At All). Scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain and converting to a scale from 0 to 100. Higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. The PDQ-39 summary index (range 0-100) includes responses to all 39 items. A negative change indicates improvement." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Summary Index: Change from initial LCIG infusionSummary Index: Change from BaselineMobility Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionMobility Domain: Change from BaselineActivities of Daily Living Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionActivities of Daily Living Domain: Change from BaselineEmotional Well-Being Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionEmotional Well-Being Domain: Change from BaselineStigma Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionStigma Domain: Change from BaselineSocial Support Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionSocial Support Domain: Change from BaselineCognition Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionCognition Domain: Change from BaselineCommunication Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionCommunication Domain: Change from BaselineBodily Discomfort Domain: Change from initial LCIG infusionBodily Discomfort Domain: Change from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-1.466.83-2.0812.01-1.559.35-0.582.53-9.50-0.183.592.251.786.563.198.17-4.745.64

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score at End of Treatment

"The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. It is made up of the following sections:~I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood;~II) Activities of Daily Living;~III) Motor Examinations;~IV) Complications of Therapy sections (including dyskinesias).~The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions that comprise Part I, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part I score ranges from 0-16 and higher scores are associated with more disability. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.~The UPDRS was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel1.511.46

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score at End of Treatment

"The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. It is made up of the following sections:~I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood;~II) Activities of Daily Living;~III) Motor Examinations;~IV) Complications of Therapy sections (including dyskinesias).~The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part II score ranges from 0-52 and higher scores are associated with more disability. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.~The UPDRS was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel3.046.11

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at End of Treatment

"The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. It is made up of the following sections:~I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood;~II) Activities of Daily Living;~III) Motor Examinations;~IV) Complications of Therapy sections (including dyskinesias).~UPDRS Part III consists of 14 questions. Questions 20 - 26 are multi-part questions in that they are evaluated separately for multiple body parts. Counting each of these assessments leads to a total of 27 answers for Part III. The UPDRS Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers provided to the 14 Part III questions, each of which are measured on a 5-Point scale (0-4). The Part III score ranges from 0-108 and higher scores are associated with more disability. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.~The UPDRS was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel4.519.18

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score at End of Treatment

"The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. It is made up of the following sections:~I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood;~II) Activities of Daily Living;~III) Motor Examinations;~IV) Complications of Therapy sections (including dyskinesias).~The UPDRS total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I - III of the scale. The total score ranges from 0 - 176 with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 no disability. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.~The UPDRS was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel9.1216.82

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Dyskinesia Score at End of Treatment

"The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. It is made up of the following sections:~I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood; II) Activities of Daily Living; III) Motor Examinations; IV) Complications of Therapy sections (including Dyskinesias); and~The UPDRS Part IV dyskinesia Score is the sum of Questions 32 (What proportion of the waking day are dyskinesias present?), 33 (How disabling are the dyskinesias? ), and 34 (How painful are the dyskinesias?) on UPDRS Part IV, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part IV dyskinesia score ranges from 0 - 12 and higher scores are associated with more disability. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.~The UPDRS was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.190.55

[back to top]

Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score at End of Treatment

"The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. It is made up of the following sections:~I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood;~II) Activities of Daily Living;~III) Motor Examinations;~IV) Complications of Therapy sections (including Dyskinesias).~The UPDRS Part IV Score is the sum of all answers to the 11 questions that comprise Part IV, 4 of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0 - 4) and 7 which are measured on a 2-point scale (0 - 1). The Part IV score ranges from 0 - 23 with higher scores associated with more disability. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.~The UPDRS was implemented with Protocol amendment 4 (December 2013) for participants at US sites only." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Prior to initial LCIG infusion (in the previous study, before the first LCIG infusion), Baseline (final assessment of the previous open-label LCIG study), and end of treatment; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Change from initial LCIG infusionChange from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-2.270.77

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Values

A vital sign value was considered potentially clinically significant if it satisfied the pre-specified criteria presented in the table and was also more extreme than the participant's corresponding Baseline value. (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Baseline and every 6 months until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Supine Systolic Blood Pressure ≥180 mmHg and > 40 mmHg increase from BaselineSupine Systolic Blood Pressure ≤ 90 mmHg and > 30 mmHg decrease from BaselineStanding Systolic Blood Pressure ≥ 180 mmHg and > 40 mmHg increase from BaselineStanding Systolic Blood Pressure ≤ 90 mmHg and > 30 mmHg decrease from BaselineOrthostatic Change in Systolic Blood Pressure Decrease of ≥ 30 mmHgSupine Diastolic Blood Pressure ≥ 105 mmHg and > 30 mmHg increase from BaselineSupine Diastolic Blood Pressure ≤ 50 mmHg and > 30 mmHg decrease from BaselineStanding Diastolic Blood Pressure ≥ 105 mmHg and > 30 mmHg increase from BaselineStanding Diastolic Blood Pressure ≤ 50 mmHg and > 30 mmHg decrease from BaselineOrthostatic Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure Decrease of ≥ 20 mmHgSupine Pulse ≥ 120 bpm and > 30 bpm increase from BaselineSupine pulse ≤ 50 bpm and > 30 bpm decrease from BaselineStanding pulse ≥ 120 bpm and > 30 bpm increase from BaselineStanding pulse ≤ 50 bpm and > 30 bpm decrease from BaselineTemperature ≥ 38.3℃ and ≥ 1.1℃ increase from BaselineWeight ≥ 7% increase from BaselineWeight ≥ 7% decrease from Baseline
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel6131267326714450354036140

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Sleep Attacks

"Participants were asked whether they experienced any events in which they fell asleep suddenly or unexpectedly, including while engaged in some activity (e.g., eating/drinking, speaking, or driving) or at rest, with or without any previous warning of sleepiness. If yes, participants were asked if they suffered any bad outcome or problem from the falling asleep event." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Baseline (final assessment period of the previous open-label LCIG study) and every 6 months until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline: One or more sleep attacksBaseline: One or more sleep attacks with a bad outcomePost-baseline: One or more sleep attacksPost-baseline: One or more sleep attacks with a bad outcome
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel60273

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events

"Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are defined as adverse events (AEs) which started on or after the date of the first LCIG Infusion in this study and within 30 days of the date of the last PEG-J exposure.~At least possibly drug-related is defined as TEAEs assessed as having a Possible or Probable or missing relationship to study drug.~Serious AEs included any untoward medical occurrence that:~Resulted in death~Was life-threatening~Required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of an existing hospitalization~Resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity~was a congenital anomaly/birth defect~The severity of all AEs was characterized as mild, moderate or severe according to the following definitions:~Mild: usually transient and do not interfere with daily activities.~Moderate: low level of inconvenience or concern to the subject, may interfere with daily activities.~Severe: events interrupt the subject's usual daily activity." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: From first dose of LCIG in this study up to 30 days after the date of last PEG-J exposure; median duration of treatment was 1178 days, with a maximum of 4217 days (11.5 years).

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Any treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE)TEAE at least possibly related to study drugSerious TEAESevere TEAETEAE leading to premature study discontinuatonTEAE leading to death
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel2532191591528258

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (TE AESI)

"Adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were identified using standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) queries (SMQ) or company MedDRA queries (CMQs). The AESI in the following categories were identified on the basis of review of the clinical program and postmarketing observations where the treatment system is commercially available.~Procedure and device associated events~Polyneuropathy, included preferred terms in either the peripheral neuropathy or GuillainBarre syndrome standardized MedDRA query (narrow search), such as polyneuropathy, decreased vibratory sense, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral sensory neuropathy, neuralgia, demyelinating polyneuropathy, and sensory disturbance~Weight loss~Cardiovascular fatalities~Respiratory tract aspiration including aspiration pneumonia/pneumonitis." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: From first dose of LCIG in this study up to 30 days after the date of last PEG-J exposure; median duration of treatment was 1178 days, with a maximum of 4217 days (11.5 years).

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
TE AESI related to procedure and deviceTE AESI related to polyneuropathyTE AESI related to weight lossTE AESI related to cardiovascular fatalitiesTE AESI related to aspiration
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel1622453771

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Vitamin Levels Outside of the Normal Range

Special tests for vitamin deficiencies (folic acid, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, methylmalonic acid [MMA], and homocysteine) were implemented with Protocol Amendment 2 (27 July 2011). The number of participants with vitamin levels outside of the normal range at any time post-baseline is reported for each vitamin tested. (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Every 6 months (beginning with implementation of Protocol Amendment 2) until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Vitamin B12 < 148 pmol/LVitamin B12 > 775 pmol/LMethylmalonic acid > 0.4 µmol/LHomocysteine < 3.7 µmol/LHomocysteine > 13.9 µmol/LVitamin B6 < 20 nmol/LVitamin B6 > 125 nmol/LFolic acid < 4.5 nmol/L
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel22466511981551086

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Any Suicidal Ideation or Behavior

"The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was implemented with Protocol Amendment 3 (20 March 2012) in order to assess suicidal behavior and ideation.~Suicidal ideation includes the wish to be dead, nonspecific active suicidal thoughts, active ideation without intent to act, active ideation with some intent to act, and active ideation with specific plan or intent. Suicidal behavior includes actual attempts, interrupted attempts, aborted attempts, completed suicide, and preparatory acts or behaviors.~The number of participants with affirmative responses on the C-SSRS at any time during the treatment period is reported." (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: Every 6 months (beginning with implementation of Protocol Amendment 3) until final visit; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Any suicidal ideation or behaviorAny suicidal ideationAny suicidal behaviorNon-suicidal self-injurious behavior
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel323061

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Device Complications

Device complications include complications with the pump, intestinal tube, PEG-J or stoma. (NCT00660673)
Timeframe: From first dose of LCIG in this study up to 30 days after the date of last PEG-J exposure; median duration of treatment was 1178 days.

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Any device complicationDevice complication leading to tube replacementDevice complication with associated adverse eventDevice complication with associated adverse event leading to tube replacement
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel24418317743

[back to top]

Confirmed Abstinence From Cocaine as Assessed by Treatment Effectiveness Score (TES)

The Treatment Effectiveness Score (TES) is the number of cocaine-negative urines collected out of the total scheduled urine tests for the 12-week trial (36 total scheduled urine tests per participant). The mean number of cocaine-negative urines over all time points is reported in this outcome measure. (NCT00713583)
Timeframe: 12 weeks of treatment

Interventioncocaine-negative urines (Mean)
Levodopa Pharmacotherapy7
Placebo9

[back to top]

Aim 2: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements With Respect to Pulse

Mean peak acceleration of wrist movements for repeated TMS (rTMS) conditions with respect of the TMS pulse (-100, +300, placebo, zero) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface. (NCT00715520)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)

Interventiong (Mean)
Baseline - Pulse (zero)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (zero)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (zero)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (zero)Baseline - Pulse (placebo)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (placebo)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (placebo)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (placebo)Baseline - Pulse (-100)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (-100)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (-100)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (-100)Baseline - Pulse (+300)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (+300)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (+300)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (+300)
Aim 21.331.431.511.531.441.361.351.331.511.51.461.471.401.321.381.40

[back to top]

Aim 2: Mean Peak Acceleration for rTMS Treatment With Respect to Frequency

Mean peak acceleration for the different frequencies of rTMS treatment (placebo, 0.1 Hz, 0.25 Hz, 0.5 Hz) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface. (NCT00715520)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)

Interventiong (Mean)
Baseline - PlaceboPost-Training 1 - PlaceboPost-Training 2 - PlaceboPost-Training 3 - PlaceboBaseline - .1 HzPost-Training 1 - .1 HzPost-Training 2 - .1 HzPost-Training 3 - .1 HzBaseline - .25 HzPost-Training 1 - .25 HzPost-Training 2 - .25 HzPost-Training 3 - .25 HzBaseline - .5 HzPost-Training 1 - .5 HzPost-Training 2 - .5 HzPost-Training 3 - .5 Hz
Aim 21.441.361.351.331.331.431.501.531.381.351.401.341.321.291.251.29

[back to top]

Aim 1: Mean Peak Acceleration of Wrist Extension Movements

Mean peak acceleration was measured across study drug conditions prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. Acceleration was measured in g; a symbol for the average acceleration produced by gravity at the Earth's surface. (NCT00715520)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-Training 1 (Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)

Interventiong (Mean)
Baseline - PlaceboPost-Training 1 - PlaceboPost-Training 2 - PlaceboBaseline - Amphetamine SulfatePost-Training 1 - Amphetamine SulfatePost-Training 2 - Amphetamine SulfateBaseline - MethylphenidatePost-Training 1 - MethylphenidatePost-Training 2 - MethylphenidateBaseline - Carbidopa-LevodopaPost-Training 1 - Carbidopa-LevodopaPost-Training 2 - Carbidopa-Levodopa
Aim 11.321.331.241.241.281.291.351.271.221.221.231.37

[back to top]

Aim 1: Mean Parameter Estimate for Maximal Motor Evoked Potential (MEPmax) Derived From Stimulus Response Curves (SRC)

Motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2), and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3).The MEP is elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at increased intensity. Its amplitude is measured from peak to peak and expressed in millivolts (mV). Measured MEP amplitudes were plotted against the intensity to create a stimulus response curve (SRC). SRCs were modeled by a 3- parameter sigmoid function and MEPmax was extracted. Long-lasting increases in MEP amplitude indicate increases in motor cortex excitability and are associated with motor learning. (NCT00715520)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-Training 1 (Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)

InterventionmV (Mean)
Baseline Placebo - MEPmaxPost-Training 1 Placebo - MEPmaxPost-Training 2 Placebo - MEPmaxBaseline - Amphetamine Sulfate - MEPmaxPost-Training 1 Ampletamine Sulfate - MEPmaxPost-Training 2 Amphetamine Sulfate - MEPmaxBaseline Methylphenidate - MEPmaxPost-Training 1 Methylphenidate - MEPmaxPost-Training 2 Methylphenidate - MEPmaxBaseline Carbidopa-Levodopa - MEPmaxPost-Training 1 Carbidopa-Levodopa - MEPmaxPost-Training 2 Carbidopa-Levodopa - MEPmax
Aim 11.011.631.29.731.221.081.041.101.221.811.411.53

[back to top]

Aim 2: Mean Sum of Normalized Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) With Respect to Pulse

Mean sum of normalized MEP for repeated TMS (rTMS) conditions with respect to the pulse (-100, +300, placebo, zero) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Its amplitude is measured from peak to peak and expressed in mV. Long- lasting increases in MEP amplitude indicate increases in motor cortex excitability and are associated with motor learning. (NCT00715520)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)

Interventionmillivolts (Mean)
Baseline - Pulse (zero)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (zero)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (zero)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (zero)Baseline - Pulse (placebo)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (placebo)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (placebo)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (placebo)Baseline - Pulse (-100)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (-100)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (-100)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (-100)Baseline - Pulse (+300)Post-Training 1 - Pulse (+300)Post-Training 2 - Pulse (+300)Post-Training 3 - Pulse (+300)
Aim 2.39.66.63.69.40.54.51.52.39.56.60.61.38.54.48.51

[back to top]

Aim 2: Mean Sum of Normalized Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) for rTMS Treatment With Respect to Frequency

Mean sum of normalized MEP for the different frequencies of rTMS treatment (placebo at 0.1 Hz, 0.1 Hz, 0.25 Hz, 0.5 Hz) prior to treatment (baseline), immediately after the treatment (post-training 1), 30 minutes after the treatment (post-training 2) and 60 minutes after the treatment (post-training 3). Increases in the mean peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements indicate motor learning. (NCT00715520)
Timeframe: Baseline, Post-Training 1(Immediately), Post-Training 2 (30 Minutes), Post-Training 3 (60 Minutes)

Interventionmillivolts (Mean)
Baseline - PlaceboPost-Training 1 - PlaceboPost-Training 2 - PlaceboPost-Training 3 - PlaceboBaseline - .1 HzPost-Training 1 - .1 HzPost-Training 2 - .1 HzPost-Training 3 - .1 HzBaseline - .25 HzPost-Training 1 - .25 HzPost-Training 2 - .25 HzPost-Training 3 - .25 HzBaseline - .5 HzPost-Training 1 - .5 HzPost-Training 2 - .5 HzPost-Training 3 - .5 Hz
Aim 2.67.93.941.02.711.061.061.14.67.90.90.98.64.92.90.84

[back to top]

Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 being the best. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 9 weeks after starting levodopa

Interventionletters (Mean)
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa59.9
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa56.5

[back to top]

Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 4 Weeks Post Enrollment

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa59.1
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa54.3

[back to top]

Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after stopping levodopa

Interventionletters (Mean)
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa60.6
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa53.9

[back to top]

Distribution of Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters. A difference was calculated as the difference in letters between baseline and outcome with positive difference indicating improvement in acuity. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: baseline to 10 weeks after stopping levodopa

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=15 letters worse10 to 14 letters worse5 to 9 letters worseWithin plus or minus 4 letters5 to 9 letters better10 to 14 letters better>=15 letters better
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa0018710
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa0007620

[back to top]

Tolerability of Study Medication-Adverse Event Reporting

Number of adverse events reported throughout entire study. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 24 weeks

,
Interventionevents (Number)
HeadacheCold/Upper Respiratory Infection/CoughRashFluNausea/VomitingFatigue/SleepinessDizziness/light-headednessConjunctivitisMuscle painStomach acheEar acheFeverLoss of appetiteNightmareKnee injurySinus infectionWeight lossConstipationFinger injuryPulled muscle
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa66311102220000000011
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa63122330001121111100

[back to top]

Distribution of Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. A difference was calculated as the difference in letters between baseline and outcome with positive difference indicating improvement in acuity. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: baseline to 9 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=15 letters worse10 to 14 letters worse5 to 9 letters worseWithin plus or minus 4 letters5 to 9 letters better10 to 14 letters better>=15 letters better
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa0015641
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa0009520

[back to top]

Distribution of Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Scores at 4 Weeks Post Enrollment

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. A difference was calculated as the difference in letters between baseline and outcome with positive difference indicating improvement in acuity. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: enrollment to 4 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=15 letters worse10 to 14 letters worse5 to 9 letters worseWithin plus or minus 4 letters5 to 9 letters better10 to 14 letters better>=15 letters better
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa0009710
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa00011500

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 being the best. Letter scores are presented as Snellen Equivalents for presentation (i.e. 20/20 includes those with letter scores between 83 and 87 letters, 20/25 includes those with letter scores between 78 to 82 letters, etc.). (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 9 weeks after starting levodopa

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
<20/100 (<47 letters)20/100 (47 to 52 letters)20/80 (53 to 57)20/63 (58 to 62)20/50 (63 to 67)20/40 (68-72 letters)20/32 (73 to 77 letters)
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa5015321
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa2213431

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 4 Weeks After Enrollment

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. Letter scores are presented as Snellen Equivalents for presentation (i.e. 20/20 includes those with letter scores between 83 and 87 letters, 20/25 includes those with letter scores between 78 to 82 letters, etc.). (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
<20/100 (<47 letters)20/100 (47 to 52 letters)20/80 (53 to 57)20/63 (58 to 62)20/50 (63 to 67)20/40 (68-72 letters)20/32 (73 to 77 letters)
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa4135310
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa2214430

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. Letter scores are presented as Snellen Equivalents for presentation (i.e. 20/20 includes those with letter scores between 83 and 87 letters, 20/25 includes those with letter scores between 78 to 82 letters, etc.). (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after stopping levodopa

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
<20/100 (<47 letters)20/100 (47 to 52 letters)20/80 (53 to 57)20/63 (58 to 62)20/50 (63 to 67)20/40 (68-72 letters)20/32 (73 to 77 letters)
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa5123600
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa2034213

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 9 Weeks After Starting Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. A difference was calculated as the difference in letters between baseline and outcome with positive difference indicating improvement in acuity. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: baseline to 9 weeks

Interventionletters (Mean)
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa3.8
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa6.1

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 4 Weeks Post Enrollment

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. A difference was calculated as the difference in letters between baseline and outcome with positive difference indicating improvement in acuity. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: enrollment to 4 weeks

Interventionletters (Mean)
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa2.9
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa3.8

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Letter Scores at 10 Weeks After Stopping Levodopa

Visual acuity was measured with the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (E-ETDRS) method and resulted in a letter score that could range from 0 to 97 letters, with 0 being the worst and 97 the best. A difference was calculated as the difference in letters between baseline and outcome with positive difference indicating improvement in acuity. (NCT00789672)
Timeframe: baseline to 10 weeks after stopping levodopa

Interventionletters (Mean)
Lower Dose 0.51 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa4.9
Higher Dose 0.76 mg Levodopa/Carbidopa3.5

[back to top]

Maximum Dose of Levodopa/Carbidopa That Can be Tolerated (Without Any Dose Limiting Toxicity) by at Least 3 Subjects.

(NCT00829439)
Timeframe: 1 week

Interventionmg/kg/day (Number)
Levodopa/Carbidopa15

[back to top]

Mean Peak Dyskinesia Score

Dyskinesia was scored on a scale of 0 (absent), 1 (mild) , 2 (moderate), 3 (severe) and 4 (incapacitating) for seven body parts (face, neck, trunk, each arm and each leg) based on the worse dyskinesia noted during the entire measurement time. Scores were assessed at Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0. The dyskinesia score was the sum of the scores for the seven body parts. The peak dyskinesia score was recorded for each participant regardless of what timepoint the score was achieved. The total possible score for an individual at each timepoint could range from 0 to 28 with higher scores indicating greater effects of the dyskinesia. The mean peak dyskinesia score was calculated using the individual peak values. (NCT00845000)
Timeframe: Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0 of each treatment period

InterventionScore on a scale (Mean)
SCH 420814 10 mg11.00
SCH 420814 100 mg11.42
Placebo8.50

[back to top]

Mean Peak Finger Tapping Score

Tapping was measured with two manual counters with keys that were depressed to register a count. The participant alternately tapped each counter using the index finger of the more affected hand for 60 seconds and was not allowed to use more than one finger to tap. The participant was instructed to tap as rapidly as possible while being timed for 60 seconds. The counts were recorded for the two counters at Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0. The peak tapping score was recorded for each participant regardless of what timepoint the score was achieved. The mean peak finger tapping score was calculated using the individual peak values. (NCT00845000)
Timeframe: Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0 of each treatment period

Interventiontaps per 60 seconds (Mean)
SCH 420814 10 mg44.33
SCH 420814 100 mg41.58
Placebo45.75

[back to top]

Mean Peak Tremor Score

Tremor was scored on a scale of 0 (absent), 1 (mild, 2 (moderate), 3 (severe) and 4 (incapacitating) for seven body parts (face, neck, trunk, each arm and each leg) based on the worse tremor observed during the time spent with participant while taking other study measurements(vital signs, drawing samples, performing the tapping and walking tasks). Scores were assessed at Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0. The tremor score was the sum of scores for seven body parts. The peak tremor score was recorded for each participant regardless of what timepoint the score was achieved. The total possible score for an individual at each timepoint could range from 0 to 28 with higher scores indicating more effects of the tremors. The mean peak tremor score was calculated using the individual peak values. (NCT00845000)
Timeframe: Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0 of each treatment period

InterventionScore on a scale (Mean)
SCH 420814 10 mg3.5
SCH 420814 100 mg3.33
Placebo4.42

[back to top]

Mean Peak Walking Speed

Walking speed assessment began with the participant being seated in an armless chair. Then while being timed, the participant stood up with their arms crossed on their chest and walked 6 meters, turned around, returned to the chair and sat. Timing was stopped when the participant's buttocks hit the chair and the total time was recorded. If the participant could not arise in 60 seconds, 60 seconds was entered in this line of the report form and the participant was tested again but allowed to push off to get out of the chair. Sixty seconds was the maximum time allowed to complete the walking assessment, thus 60 seconds was recorded as the time if they could not complete the task within this time limit. Walking speed was assessed at Hours 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 7.0 and 8. The peak walking speed was recorded for each participant regardless of what timepoint the score was achieved. The mean peak walking speed was calculated using the individual peak values. (NCT00845000)
Timeframe: Hours 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 7.0 and 8.0 of each treatment period

InterventionSeconds (Mean)
SCH 420814 10 mg16.64
SCH 420814 100 mg14.45
Placebo20.00

[back to top]

"Off Time Hours Reported by Subjects Using Parkinson's Patient Diary"

"Subjects recorded state of OFF time using the Parkinson's Patient Diary" (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Last 3 days of each treatment period, every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day beginning at 6:00 AM

Interventionhours (Mean)
IPX0663.83
IR CD-LD5.83

[back to top]

8-Hour Efficacy Using Day 1 Tapping

"Improvement in Tapping: has been used as a surrogate endpoint for assessing subject being On. Finger Tapping: the number of times the subject could tap two counter keys 20 cm apart alternately in 1 minute with the most affected arm assessed every 30 minutes on Day 1. Subjects performed the 60-second tapping measurement three times prior to dosing in the clinic, and at half-hour intervals through the 8-hour measurement period on Day 1 of each treatment period. More hours On during treatment represented better outcome. For the Tapping measurement, the protocol defined a 20% change from the average of the predose measurements as the time to On. Each half-hour interval counted as 0.5 hour. Any measurement below a 20% improvement was considered time Not On. If patient required redosing then primary analyses adjusted for redosing in calculating the results." (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Day 1 of each treatment period - three times prior to dosing in the clinic, and at half-hour intervals through the 8-hour measurement period

InterventionHours (Mean)
IPX0664.74
IR CD-LD2.98

[back to top]

8-Hour Efficacy Using Day 1 Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III Score

To determine efficacy on Day 1 the UPDRS (unified Parkinson's disease rating) Part III score, a clinician-scored measure of motor function, was collected immediately predose and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 h post dose. The UPDRS Part III motor exam analyzes multiple motor functions like speech, facial expression, tremor, rigidity, movement, posture, gait etc. Each parameter is assigned values from 0 to 4, with 0 being normal and 4 being the most affected. The total range is 0 - 108, with lower scores indicating a better outcome.The average of post dose was calculated for day 1. (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Pre dosing and at hourly intervals through the 8-hour measurement period on day 1

InterventionUPDRS Part III Motor Score (Mean)
IPX06621.6
IR CD-LD25.5

[back to top]

Pharmacokinetics Measurements to Determine Area Under the Concentration-time Curve for the Dosing Interval for LD and CD Concentrations From Blood Collected Pre-dose and at Different Time Points on Day 1 and Day 8 of Periods 1 and 2 of Treatment Arms.

For both treatment arms: Sequence 1 (IPX066, Washout, then IR CD-LD) and Sequence 2 (IR CD-LD, Washout, IPX066), blood samples for measurement of LD and CD plasma concentrations were collected pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 7, and 8 hours after dosing on Day 1 (referred to as Single-Dose data); and at pre-dose, 0.5, 1,1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 hours after dosing on Day 8 (referred to as Multiple-Dose data). Area under the concentration-time curve for the dosing interval (AUC Tau) in hour*nanogram/milliliter was estimated using Single-Dose data and Multiple-Dose data. (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Day 1 and on Day 8 after a week of intervention in each treatment arm: Arm 1 (IPX066 first, washout, then CD-LD IR) and Arm2 (CD-LD IR first, washout, then IPX066

,
Interventionhour*nanogram/milliliter (Mean)
CD AUC Tau, Single-DoseCD AUC Tau, Multiple-DoseLD AUC Tau, Single-DoseLD AUC Tau, Multiple-Dose
IPX066917.0671344.43610902.19413903.380
IR CD-LD401.694449.5843881.2984167.151

[back to top]

Pharmacokinetics Measurements to Determine Cmax for Carbidopa (CD) and Levodopa (LD) Plasma Concentrations From Samples Collected Pre-dose and at Different Time Points on Day 1 and Day 8 of Periods 1 and 2 of Both Treatment Arms.

For both treatment arms: Sequence 1 (IPX066, Washout, then IR CD-LD) and Sequence 2 (IR CD-LD, Washout, IPX066), blood samples for measurement of LD and CD plasma concentrations were collected pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 7, and 8 hours after dosing on Day 1 (referred to as Single-Dose data); and at pre-dose, 0.5, 1,1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 hours after dosing on Day 8 (referred to as Multiple-Dose data). Maximum (peak) drug concentration (Cmax in nanograms/milliliter) was estimated using Single-Dose data and Multiple-Dose data. (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Day 1 and on Day 8 after a week of intervention in each treatment arm: Arm 1 (IPX066 first, washout, then CD-LD IR) and Arm 2 (CD-LD IR first, washout, then IPX066)

,
Interventionnanogram/milliliter (Mean)
CD Cmax, Single-DoseCD Cmax, Multiple-DoseLD Cmax, Single-DoseLD Cmax, Multiple-Dose
IPX066238.852313.2223000.0003807.037
IR CD-LD146.848167.5152356.4442761.852

[back to top]

Pharmacokinetics Measurements to Determine Tmax for Levodopa and Carbidopa Plasma Concentrations From Samples Collected Pre-dose and at Different Time Points on Day 1 and Day 8 of Periods 1 and 2 of Both Treatment Arms.

For both treatment arms: Sequence 1 (IPX066, Washout, then IR CD-LD) and Sequence 2 (IR CD-LD, Washout, IPX066), blood samples for measurement of LD and CD plasma concentrations were collected pre-dose and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 7, and 8 hours after dosing on Day 1 (referred to as Single-Dose data); and at pre-dose, 0.5, 1,1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 hours after dosing on Day 8 (referred to as Multiple-Dose data). Time of maximum drug concentration (Tmax in hours) was estimated using Single-Dose data and Multiple-Dose data. (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Day 1 and on Day 8 after a week of intervention in each treatment arm: Arm 1 (IPX066 first, washout, then CD-LD IR) and Arm2 (CD-LD IR first, washout, then IPX066

,
InterventionHours (Mean)
CD Tmax Single-DoseCD Tmax Multiple-DoseLD Tmax Single-DoseLD Tmax Multiple-Dose
IPX0662.9443.8152.0374.407
IR CD-LD2.2965.6850.8703.611

[back to top]

Result Summary of Day 1 Dyskinesia Evaluated by Investigator Assessment for Each Treatment Period

"To determine 8h efficacy on Day 1 the on site investigator assessments of ON, OFF and state of dyskinesia for each subject was collected predose (-1, -0.5, and 0 hours) every 30 min for up to 8 hours after dosing . For all subjects duration of (1) OFF time (2) ON time without dyskinesia, (3) ON time with non-troublesome dyskinesia and (4) ON time with troublesome dyskinesia was calculated for both treatments. Definition of ON was based on a 20% change from predose measure, and the results were analyzed in the standard manner of a two way crossover design. The trial inclusion criteria included ability of subject to differentiate ON state from OFF state per investigator's assessment." (NCT00869791)
Timeframe: Predose and then every 30 min upto 8 h after dosing on Day of 1 of each treatment period

,
InterventionHours (Mean)
OFF timeON time without dyskinesiaON time with non-troublesome dyskinesiaON time with troublesome dyskinesia
IPX0661.902.942.620.54
IR CD-LD4.442.360.900.28

[back to top]

Summary of Change From Baseline to End of Study in Mean Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) Score

"Change from Baseline in Parkinson's disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ-39) at Weeks 4, 9, 16, 23 and 30 or early discontinuation was collected. The PDQ-39 is a self-reported questionnaire consisting of 39 questions regarding the subjects mobility and the responses consist of Never (better in outcome), (value 0), Occasionally (value 1), Sometimes (value 2), , Often (value 3), and Always (value 4), (worse in outcome). The minimum possible score is 0 and the maximum is 156. The outcome measure calculated was the change from baseline to end of study in mean PDQ-39 score. Negative values indicate a better result." (NCT00880620)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 30 (or End of Study)

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
IPX066 145 mg LD-4.4
IPX066 245 mg LD-3.8
IPX066 390 mg LD-6.0
Placebo0.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in the Sum of UPDRS Part II + UPDRS Part III at Week 30

"Analysis of the Change from Baseline in the sum of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living) + UPDRS Part III (Motor Examination) at Week 30 (End of Study).~Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) - Four Parts Higher score values represent a worse outcome.~Subscales II and III were summed:~Part I: Mentation, Behavior and Mood - 4 questions 1-4 Score range: 1-16 Part II: Activities of Daily Living - 13 questions 5-17 Score range: 0-52 Part III: Motor Examination - 19 questions 18-31 and 25 total assessments Score range: 0-100 Part IV: Complications of Therapy (In the past week) - 11 questions Score range: 0-25" (NCT00880620)
Timeframe: Week 30

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Placebo-0.6
IPX066 145mg LD-11.7
IPX066 245 mg LD-12.9
IPX066 390 mg LD-14.9

[back to top]

"Off Time"

"Off time hours is measured by using the Parkinson's disease diary. Off time describes a period when the participant experiences increased Parkinsonian symptoms (e.g. immobility or inability to move with ease)." (NCT00974974)
Timeframe: 22 weeks

Interventionhours (Mean)
IPX0663.87
IR CD-LD (Active Comparator)4.88

[back to top]

"On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"

"On time without troublesome dyskinesiais measured by using the Parkinson's disease diary. On time without troublesome dyskinesia describes a period when the participant experiences decreased Parkinsonian symptoms (e.g. immobility or inability to move with ease) without dyskinesia (i.e. difficulty in performing voluntary movements) that affect daily living." (NCT00974974)
Timeframe: 22 weeks

Interventionhours (Mean)
IPX06611.84
IR CD-LD (Active Comparator)10.91

[back to top]

"Percentage of Off Time During Waking Hours at End of Study"

"Percentage of off time during waking hours at end of study is measured by using the Parkinson's disease diary. Off time describes a period when the participant experiences increased Parkinsonian symptoms (e.g. immobility or inability to move with ease)." (NCT00974974)
Timeframe: 22 weeks

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
IPX06623.82
IR CD-LD (Active Comparator)29.79

[back to top]

Total UPDRS Parts I-IV

"Analysis of the Change from Baseline in the sum of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I (Mentation, Behavior and Mood), Part II (Activities of Daily Living), UPDRS Part III (Motor Examination), and Part IV (Complications of Therapy [In the past week]) at End of Study. Includes both scoring by a clinician and a historical report of mental functioning, activities of daily living and complications of therapy in the past week obtained by questioning the patient.~Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) - Four Parts Higher score values represent a worse outcome.~Subscales II and III were summed:~Part I: Mentation, Behavior and Mood - 4 questions 1-4 Score range: 1-16 Part II: Activities of Daily Living - 13 questions 5-17 Score range: 0-52 Part III: Motor Examination - 19 questions 18-31 and 25 total assessments Score range: 0-100 Part IV: Complications of Therapy (In the past week) - 11 questions Score range: 0-25" (NCT01096186)
Timeframe: 9 months

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
IPX06630.5

[back to top]

Patient Global Impression (PGI)

"Satisfaction of IPX066 using Patient Global Impression (PGI) 7-point scale.~Patient Global Impression 0-7 - higher value indicates increased improvement from study start" (NCT01096186)
Timeframe: 9 months

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
IPX0665.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in the Sum of UPDRS Part II + UPDRS Part III

"Analysis of the Change from Baseline in the sum of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living) + UPDRS Part III (Motor Examination) at End of Study.~Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) - Four Parts Higher score values represent a worse outcome.~Subscales II and III were summed:~Part I: Mentation, Behavior and Mood - 4 questions 1-4 Score range: 1-16 Part II: Activities of Daily Living - 13 questions 5-17 Score range: 0-52 Part III: Motor Examination - 19 questions 18-31 and 25 total assessments Score range: 0-100 Part IV: Complications of Therapy (In the past week) - 11 questions Score range: 0-25" (NCT01096186)
Timeframe: 9 months

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
IPX06626.4

[back to top]

"Percentage of OFF Time During Waking Hours"

"Using a Parkinson's disease diary, subjects recorded a state of asleep, OFF, ON without dyskinesia, ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia, or ON with troublesome dyskinesia every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day for the last 3 days of each double-blind crossover treatment period.~Mean percentage of OFF Time During Waking Hours was calculated. Off Time is Time when medication has worn off and is no longer providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness." (NCT01130493)
Timeframe: 3 days of data immediately prior to the end of each 2 week treatment period

InterventionPercent (Mean)
IPX06623.98
CLE (Active Comparator)32.48

[back to top]

"Total OFF Time During Waking Hours"

"Using a Parkinson's disease diary, subjects recorded a state of asleep, OFF, ON without dyskinesia, ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia, or ON with troublesome dyskinesia every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day for the last 3 days of each double-blind crossover treatment period.~Mean Total Off Time During Waking Hours was calculated. Off Time is Time when medication has worn off and is no longer providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness." (NCT01130493)
Timeframe: 3 days of data immediately prior to the end of each 2 week treatment period

Interventionhours (Mean)
IPX0663.82
CLE (Active Comparator)5.22

[back to top]

"Total On With No Troublesome Dyskinesia"

"Using a Parkinson's disease diary, subjects recorded a state of asleep, OFF, ON without dyskinesia, ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia, or ON with troublesome dyskinesia every 30 minutes over a 24-hour day for the last 3 days of each double-blind crossover treatment period.~Mean Total On with No Troublesome Dyskinesia was calculated. On Time is when medication is providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness." (NCT01130493)
Timeframe: 3 days of data immediately prior to the end of each 2 week treatment period

Interventionhours (Mean)
IPX06611.36
CLE (Active Comparator)9.98

[back to top]

Subject Preference

Subjects who completed both treatments were asked to indicate a preference for Treatment Period 1 or Treatment Period 2 or no preference. Preferences for a particular treatment period were mapped to the associated treatment and reported. (NCT01130493)
Timeframe: End of Study (week 11)

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Number of Participants Who Preferred IPX06644
Number of Participants Who Preferred CLE23
Number of Participants Who Had no Preference17

[back to top]

UPDRS Part II Plus Part III

"Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II (Activities of Daily Living) and Part III (Motor Examination). Part II consists of 14 questions, each ranges from 0 (Normal/None) - 4 (Worst) with a total score of 0 - 72. Part III consists of 27 questions, each ranges from 0 (Normal/None) - 4 (Worst) with a total score of 0 - 108.~The UPDRS Part II Plus Part III scores ranged from 0 (no problems with daily living or mobility) to 180 (severe problems with daily living and mobility." (NCT01130493)
Timeframe: End of each double-blind treatment period.

InterventionScores on a scale (Mean)
IPX06629.3
CLE (Active Comparator)31.7

[back to top]

Improved Vision

Binocular best-corrected visual acuity-The visual acuity test is used to determine the smallest letters you can read on a standardized chart (Snellen chart) or a card held 20 feet (6 meters) away. Special charts are used when testing at distances shorter than 20 feet (6 meters). Ranges are 20/10 vision to 20/200 vision. 20/10 being the best and 20/200 being the worse. (NCT01176435)
Timeframe: 20 weeks

InterventionlogMAR (Mean)
0.76 mg/kg L-DOPA0.67
0.51 mg/kg L-DOPA0.55
Placebo0.53

[back to top]

Mean Systemic Adverse Events

(NCT01190813)
Timeframe: Enrollment through 26 weeks

Interventionevents (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.28
Placebo1.55

[back to top]

Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at Enrollment

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at enrollment. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: At enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.42
Placebo1.44

[back to top]

Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 4 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 4 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.29
Placebo1.26

[back to top]

Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 26 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 26 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.19
Placebo1.22

[back to top]

Amblyopia Resolution at 18 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/25 or better20/32 or worse
Levodopa/Carbidopa086
Placebo045

[back to top]

Amblyopia Resolution at 26 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/25 or better20/32 or worse
Levodopa/Carbidopa086
Placebo045

[back to top]

Amblyopia Resolutionat 4 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/25 or better20/32 or worse
Levodopa/Carbidopa088
Placebo047

[back to top]

Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 16 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 16 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Improved 10 or more lettersNot improved 10 or more letters
Levodopa/Carbidopa1572
Placebo1036

[back to top]

Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 26 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Improved 10 or more lettersNot improved 10 or more letters
Levodopa/Carbidopa1769
Placebo540

[back to top]

Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 4 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Improved 10 or more lettersDid not improve 10 or more letters
Levodopa/Carbidopa484
Placebo245

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks

(NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/25 (78-82 letters)20/32 (73-77 letters)20/40 (68-72 letters)20/50 (63-67 letters)20/63 (58-62 letters)20/80 (53-57 letters)20/100 (48-52 letters)20/125 (43-47 letters)20/160 or worse (<=42 letters)
Levodopa/Carbidopa0572018121743
Placebo016595937

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline

"The primary outcome is the amblyopic eye visual acuity letter score measured at the 18-week primary outcome visit following a rapid taper of study medicine beginning at week 16. The primary analytic approach will be a treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity adjusted for baseline acuity.~Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line." (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
10-14 letters worse5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better>= 15 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa023536103
Placebo01231911

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 10 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
10-14 letters worse5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better>= 15 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa14433073
Placebo0130890

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 16 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 16 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
10-14 letters worse5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better>= 15 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa01413096
Placebo002610100

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better>= 15 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa33630143
Placebo1231650

[back to top]

Distribution of Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 4 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
10-14 letters worse5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better>= 15 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa06552340
Placebo02281511

[back to top]

Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 10 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Improved 10 or more lettersNot improved 10 or more letters
Levodopa/Carbidopa1078
Placebo939

[back to top]

Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 26 Weeks

Similar to the analysis for the amblyopic eye, the fellow eye visual acuity will be evaluated to determine if study treatment had an adverse effect on the occluded eye. The analysis will be a treatment group comparison of the mean fellow eye visual acuity at 26 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/12 (93-97 letters)20/16 (88-92 letters)20/20 (83-87 letters)20/25 (78-82 letters)20/32 (73-77 letters)
Levodopa/Carbidopa15342890
Placebo7221321

[back to top]

Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 18 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the primary outcome (18 week) visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.17
Placebo1.28

[back to top]

Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 18 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=15 letters worse10-14 letters worse5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa00468150
Placebo0033930

[back to top]

Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
>=15 letters worse10-14 letters worse5-9 letters worsewithin 4 letters5-9 letters better10-14 letters better
Levodopa/Carbidopa1027472
Placebo0043560

[back to top]

Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 18 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the primary outcome (18 week) visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.17
Placebo1.17

[back to top]

Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 16 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 16 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 16 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.25
Placebo1.38

[back to top]

Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 10 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 10 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.33
Placebo1.42

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 4 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 4 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa2.2
Placebo2.5

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 26 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 26 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa5.0
Placebo4.2

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 16 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 16 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 16 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa5.1
Placebo4.2

[back to top]

Mean Change in Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity From Baseline at 10 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity at 10 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa3.8
Placebo3.7

[back to top]

Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline

"The primary outcome is the amblyopic eye visual acuity letter score measured at the 18-week primary outcome visit following a rapid taper of study medicine beginning at week 16. The primary analytic approach will be a treatment group comparison of the mean amblyopic eye visual acuity adjusted for baseline acuity.~Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line." (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa5.2
Placebo3.8

[back to top]

Mean Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa58.7
Placebo54.8

[back to top]

Amblyopic Eye Visual Acuity Improvement Treatment Group Comparison at 18 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons of the proportion of subjects who have improved from baseline by 10 or more letters. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Levodopa/Carbidopa13
Placebo2

[back to top]

Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 26 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 26 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.23
Placebo1.33

[back to top]

Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at 4 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 4 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 4 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.42
Placebo1.51

[back to top]

Mean Child Symptom Survey Score at Enrollment

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at enrollment. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: At enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.60
Placebo1.73

[back to top]

Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa88.1
Placebo88.0

[back to top]

Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 26 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa88.0
Placebo88.2

[back to top]

Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 18 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.5
Placebo0.5

[back to top]

Mean Fellow Eye Visual Acuity Change From Baseline at 26 Weeks

Visual acuity was measured in each eye (right eye first) by a study-certified VA tester using the Electronic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS©) visual acuity protocol. Five letters is equivalent to one logMAR line. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 26 weeks after enrollment

Interventionletters (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.4
Placebo0.8

[back to top]

Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 10 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 10 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.22
Placebo1.30

[back to top]

Distribution of Fellow Eye Visual Acuity at 18 Weeks

Similar to the analysis for the amblyopic eye, the fellow eye visual acuity will be evaluated to determine if study treatment had an adverse effect on the occluded eye. The analysis will be a treatment group comparison of the mean fellow eye visual acuity at 18 weeks after enrollment, adjusted for baseline acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 18 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/12 (93-97 letters)20/16 (88-92 letters)20/20 (83-87 letters)20/25 (78-82 letters)20/32 (73-77 letters)
Levodopa/Carbidopa12442281
Placebo4221630

[back to top]

Mean Parent Symptom Survey Score at 16 Weeks

A treatment group comparison of symptom survey scores at the 16 week visit. The average of the overall item responses will be calculated and compared by treatment group with a t-test for difference in means. A higher number reflects a more negative response (5=always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=rarely, 1=never). (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 16 weeks after enrollment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa1.24
Placebo1.25

[back to top]

Amblyopia Resolution at 16 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 16 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/25 or better20/32 or worse
Levodopa/Carbidopa186
Placebo046

[back to top]

Amblyopia Resolution at 10 Weeks

Treatment group comparisons adjusted for baseline acuity scores using logistic regression of the proportion of subjects with 20/25 or better visual acuity. (NCT01190813)
Timeframe: 10 weeks after enrollment

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
20/25 or better20/32 or worse
Levodopa/Carbidopa088
Placebo048

[back to top]

UPDRS (Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale) Sections I (ON), II (ON and OFF), and III (ON)

"Total UPDRS SCORE (I, II (ON), and III) Change from Baseline to Endpoint~UPDRS I evaluation of mentation, behavior, and mood~UPDRS II self-evaluation of the activities of daily life (ADLs) including speech, swallowing, handwriting, dressing, hygiene, falling, salivating, turning in bed, walking, and cutting food~UPDRS III clinician-scored monitored motor evaluation The UPDRS I, II and III scores and subscores are calculated as the sum of all individual items. If one or two items in a scale are missing, they will be imputed with the mean of the non-missing items of that scale.~Subscale has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe~The final cumulative score will range from 0 (no disability) to 199 (total disability)." (NCT01227655)
Timeframe: 14-15 weeks

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineEndpoint
BIA 9-1067 25 mg30.826.6
BIA 9-1067 50 mg31.728.7
Placebo31.528.1

[back to top]

Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)

"The Parkinson's disease Sleep Scale (PDSS) is a specific scale for the assessment of sleep disturbances in subjects with PD. The PDSS score is calculated as the sum of all single items. If one or two items are missing, they will be imputed with the mean of the non-missing items. If three or more items are missing, no imputation will be done and the score will be set to missing.~Subscale has 0-10 ratings, where 0 = severe and 10 = normal~The PDSS total score is a sum score of all 15 questions and ranges from 0 to 150, with lower scores meaning more disability." (NCT01227655)
Timeframe: 14-15 weeks

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineVisit 5Visit 7
BIA 9-1067 25 mg95.7597.9998.79
BIA 9-1067 50 mg102.62103.05103.25
Placebo101.76107.11105.39

[back to top]

Efficacy of 2 BIA 9-1067 (25 mg, and 50 mg) Compared With Placebo, When Administered With the Existing Treatment of L-DOPA Plus a DDCI (DOPA Decarboxylase Inhibitor)

Efficacy of 2 BIA 9-1067 (25 mg, and 50 mg) compared with placebo, when administered with the existing treatment of L-DOPA plus a DDCI (DOPA decarboxylase inhibitor), in patients with PD and end-of-dose motor fluctuations. The primary efficacy variable will be the change from baseline in absolute OFF-time at the end of the DB period. (NCT01227655)
Timeframe: 14-15 weeks

Interventionminutes (Mean)
BIA 9-1067 25 mg-102.8
BIA 9-1067 50 mg-124.0
Placebo-64.5

[back to top]

Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS)

"The Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) consists of 30 questions, covering 9 dimensions, whereby each item is scored for severity and frequency: Severity None 0 Mild (symptoms present but causes little distress) 1 Moderate (some distress or disturbance to subject) 2 Severe (major source of distress or disturbance to subject) 3~Frequency Rarely (<1/wk) 1 Often (1/wk) 2 Frequent (several times per week) 3 Very Frequent (daily or all the time) 4~The product of frequency and severity is calculated for each item and each dimension score is defined as the sum of the frequency*severity of the respective items. If frequency or severity of a single item is missing, the domain score will not be calculated. The NMSS total score is defined as the sum of all domain scores.~The NMSS total score is calculated by adding all domain scores (0-360), and lower scores mean less disability." (NCT01227655)
Timeframe: 14-15 weeks

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineVisit 5Visit 7
BIA 9-1067 25 mg38.233.735.0
BIA 9-1067 50 mg36.733.231.5
Placebo38.233.531.6

[back to top]

Bayley Cognitive Age Equivalent at 1 Year

(NCT01281475)
Timeframe: 12 months

Interventionmonths (Mean)
Levodopa19
Placebo19

[back to top]

Presence of Tremors

(NCT01281475)
Timeframe: 1 year

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Levodopa14
Placebo12

[back to top]

Cocaine Use Based on Urine Drug Screening

The mean of the predicted probabilities (derived from generalized linear mixed models) of negative drug screens over all 10 weeks is reported, as per the analysis proposed in the protocol. (NCT01393457)
Timeframe: 10 weeks

Interventionnumber of negative drug screens (Mean)
Ldopa + Ropinirole Low Dose20.36
Ldopa + Ropinirole High Dose15.57
Ldopa22.3
Placebo27.8

[back to top]

Number of Participants Who Completed the 10 Week Trial

(NCT01393457)
Timeframe: 10 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Ldopa + Ropinirole Low Dose14
Ldopa + Ropinirole High Dose14
Ldopa16
Placebo15

[back to top]

Language Quotient (LQ) on the Western Aphasia Battery

"Includes a measure of auditory comprehension, oral expression, reading and written expression skills.~The scale ranges from 1 - 100 with 100 being better. The change or gain score from baseline to immediately post-treatment (at 6 weeks) is reported. The larger the change score, the greater the improvement." (NCT01429077)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline in Western Aphasia Battery LQ at 6 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa3.16
Inactive Pill2.59

[back to top]

Retention in Treatment

The number of participants who completed the 12-week medication phase of the study. (NCT01468012)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Levodopa Carbidopa and Entacapone (LCE)7
Placebo9
Non-randomized0

[back to top]

Hoehn&Yahr (H&Y) Staging

"The Hoehn and Yahr scale is a commonly used scale for describing how the symptoms of Parkinson's disease progress and the disease stages. Bigger numbers indicate more symptoms and disease progression. H&Y stage range from 0-5; the greater, the more severe.~The H&Y stages of patients were evaluated at baseline (1st visit, V1), and 1 year after baseline (final visit, V5)." (NCT01470859)
Timeframe: twice baseline and 1 year

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
H&Y at baseline(V1)H&Y at 1 year(V5)
Levodopa1.351.65
Pramipexole1.431.82

[back to top]

Longitudinal Change of Brain Network Activity

"The brain network activity is evaluated by Parkinson's disease-related spatial covariance pattern(PDRP) value (Z score).~The change of brain network activity is calculated by the PDRP value (Z score) at V5 - the PDRP value (Z score) at V1." (NCT01470859)
Timeframe: twice, baseline and 1 year after baseline

,
InterventionZ-score in PDRP (Mean)
Change from baseline (V5-V1)Z score at baseline (V1)Z score at 1 year (V5)
Levodopa0.412.212.29
Pramipexole0.613.614.09

[back to top]

Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ39)

"The PDQ39 score was assessed at baseline (1st visit, V1) and 1 year after baseline (final visit, V5).~PDQ39 score ranges from 0-156 (0-4 each item); the more score, the more severe." (NCT01470859)
Timeframe: twice baseline and 1 year

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
PDQ39 at baseline (V1)PDQ39 at 1 year (V5)
Levodopa19.3820.36
Pramipexole20.3621.07

[back to top]

Patients With Clinical Improvement as Evaluated by Global Impression Scale (CGI).

"Patients with a score <= 2 (very much or much improved in relation to baseline) are considered as clinically improved.~The numbers of participants with clinical improvement are reported here. The completion of dosage titration within 10 weeks after baseline (visit 2) and 1 year after baseline (final visit)" (NCT01470859)
Timeframe: twice, at 10 weeks(V2) and 1 year(V5)

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Patients with improvement at V2Patients with improvement at V5
Levodopa62
Pramipexole44

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Score (UPDRS II, III)

baseline (1st visit, V1), completion of dosage titration within 10 weeks after baseline (2nd visit, V2), 1 year after baseline (final visit, V5) UPDRS II score 0-52 (13 items); UPDRS III score 0-56 (14 items); The more scores,the more severe; the two scales were evaluated separately. (NCT01470859)
Timeframe: three times: baseline, 10 weeks, 1 year

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
UPDRS II at baseline (V1)UPDRS II (V2)UPDRS II at 1 year (V5)UPDRS III at baseline (V1)UPDRS III (V2)UPDRS III at 1 year (V5)
Levodopa7.35.87.418.712.719.5
Pramipexole7.14.98.423.120.124.3

[back to top]

Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging at Baseline and End of Treatment

Participant's ON and OFF states staged according to the Modified Hoehn and Yahr criteria, an 8-point scale for staging: 0, No signs of disease; 1, Unilateral disease; 1.5, Unilateral plus axial involvement; 2, Bilateral disease; 2.5, Mild bilateral disease; 3, Mild to moderate bilateral disease; 4, Severe disability; and 5, Wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided. ON time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. OFF time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
ON state staging, BaselineON state staging, EndpointOFF state staging, BaselineOFF state staging, Endpoint
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel2.53.04.04.0

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs), Serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs Leading to Discontinuation During the Run-in Period

AE: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE: an event that results in the death of a subject, is life threatening, results in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or other important medical event. Severity was rated as mild, moderate, or severe. AEs of special interest included: device-associated gastrointestinal disorders; cardiovascular fatalities; aspiration including aspiration pneumonia; a diagnosis of peripheral polyneuropathy (axonal, demyelinating or mixed type); possible symptoms of peripheral polyneuropathy; clinically significant weight loss. 'AEs at least possibly related' are defined as those that were assessed by investigator as probably related or possibly related. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: During the Run-in period (up to approximately 28 days)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
AEAE at least possibly related to study drug/deviceSevere AESAEAE leading to discontinuation of study drugSAE at least possibly drug or drug device-relatedAE of special interestAE caused by study drugAE caused by devicesAE caused by NJ tube insertionFatal AE
Oral Levodopa/Carbidopa Tablet75001005NANA0

[back to top]

Number of Participants With AEs, SAEs, and AEs Leading to Discontinuation During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

AE: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. SAE: an event that results in the death of a subject, is life threatening, results in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, is a congenital anomaly, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or other important medical event. Severity was rated as mild, moderate, or severe. AEs of special interest included: device-associated gastrointestinal disorders; cardiovascular fatalities; aspiration including aspiration pneumonia; a diagnosis of peripheral polyneuropathy (axonal, demyelinating or mixed type); possible symptoms of peripheral polyneuropathy; clinically significant weight loss. 'AEs at least possibly related' are defined as those that were assessed by investigator as probably related or possibly related. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: From NJ placement to end of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21) +30 days

Interventionparticipants (Number)
AEAE at least possibly related to study drug/deviceSevere AESAEAE leading to discontinuation of study drugSAE at least possiby drug or drug device-relatedAE of special interestAE caused by study drugAE caused by devicesAE caused by NJ tube insertionFatal AE
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel43111123010

[back to top]

Number of Participants With PCS Blood Biochemistry Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

M=male, F=female, γ-GTP=gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Low PCS Blood urea nitrogen [mg/dL]: 6High PCS Blood urea nitrogen [mg/dL]: 20Low Creatinine [mg/dL]: 0.61 M / 0.47 FHigh Creatinine [mg/dL]: 1.04 M / 0.79 FLow PCS Total bilirubin [mg/dL]: 0.2High PCS Total bilirubin [mg/dL]: 1.0Low PCS Alanine aminotransferase [U/L]: 5High PCS Alanine aminotransferase [U/L]: 40Low PCS Aspartate aminotransferase [U/L]: 10High PCS Aspartate aminotransferase [U/L]: 40Low PCS Alkaline phosphatase [U/L]: 115High PCS Alkaline phosphatase [U/L]: 359Low PCS γ-GTP [U/L]: 0High PCS γ-GTP [U/L]: 70 M / 30 FLow PCS Sodium [mEq/L]: 136High PCS Sodium [mEq/L]: 147Low PCS Potassium [mEq/L]: 3.6High PCS Potassium [mEq/L]: 5.0Low PCS Calcium [mg/dL]: 8.7High PCS Calcium [mg/dL]: 10.1Low PCS Chloride [mEq/L]: 98High PCS Chloride [mEq/L]: 109Low PCS Magnesium [mg/dL]: 1.8High PCS Magnesium [mg/dL]: 2.6Low PCS Inorganic Phosphors [mg/dL]: 2.4High PCS Inorganic Phosphors [mg/dL]: 4.3Low PCS Uric acid [mg/dL]: 3.7 M / 2.5 FHigh PCS Uric acid [mg/dL]: 7 M / 7.0 FLow PCS Total cholesterol [mg/dL]: 150High PCS Total cholesterol [mg/dL]: 219Low PCS Total protein [g/dL]: 6.7High PCS Total protein [g/dL]: 8.3Low PCS Albumin [g/dL]: 4.0High PCS Albumin [g/dL]: 5.0Low PCS Glucose [mg/dL]: 70High PCS Glucose [mg/dL]: 109Low PCS Triglycerides [mg/dL]: 50High PCS Triglycerides [mg/dL]: 149Low PCS Creatine kinase [U/L]: 57 M / 32 FHigh PCS Creatine kinase [U/L]: 197 M / 180 FLow PCS Bicarbonate [mEq/L]: 22High PCS Bicarbonate [mEq/L]: 29Low PCS Lactate dehydrogenase [U/L]: 115High PCS Lactate dehydrogenase [U/L]: 245
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel01200000100100100030100101200250300110130001

[back to top]

Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale at Baseline and End of Treatment

The Schwab and England scale was used to rate the subject's activities of daily living by recording the percentage score, ranging between being completely independent (100%) and totally dependent (10%). (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
BaselineEndpoint
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel80.080.0

[back to top]

Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax), Average Plasma Concentration (Cavg), Trough Plasma Concentration (Cmin), and Cmin Within 2 and 12 Hours (Cmin [2-12 Hours]) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187

Cmax, Cavg, Cmin, and Cmin (2-12 hours) of levodopa, carbidopa, and 3-OMD after administration of the oral L/C tablets (Day -1) and intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187 (Day 21). Cmin values for levodopa and carbidopa during the 16 hours of infusion were observed either at time 0 or 15 min after start of the infusion and were a result of drug washout prior to establishment of infusion. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

,
Interventionµg/mL (Mean)
Cmax: LevodopaCmax: CarbidopaCmax: 3-OMDCavg: LevodopaCavg: CarbidopaCavg: 3-OMDCmin: LevodopaCmin: CarbidopaCmin: 3-OMDCmin (2-12 hours): LevodopaCmin (2-12 hours):CarbidopaCmin (2-12 hours): 3-OMD
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel4.380.27311.72.870.1729.800.0610.0167.782.380.1308.14
Oral Levodopa-carbidopa Tablets5.960.1289.272.370.0797.360.2680.0145.670.7340.0505.72

[back to top]

Time to Reach Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax) After Administration of Oral Levodopa/Carbidopa (L/C) Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187

Tmax of levodopa, carbidopa, and its metabolite 3-O-methyldopa (3-OMD) after administration of oral L/C tablets and intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1): pre-dose; 15, 30, 45, 60 mins post-morning dose; every 30 mins thereafter for 12 hrs. Day 21: pre-dose; 15, 30, 45, 60 mins post-infusion; every 30 mins from hrs 1 to 12 post-infusion; every 2 hrs from 12 to 16 hrs post-infusion.

,
Interventionhours (Mean)
LevodopaCarbidopa3-OMD
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel1.04.511
Oral Levodopa-carbidopa Tablets3.07.811

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Hematology Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

M=male, F=female, MCV=mean corpuscular volume, MCH=mean corpuscular hemoglobin, MCHC=mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Low PCS Hematocrit [%]: 39.8 M / 33.4 FHigh PCS Hematocrit [%]: 51.8 M / 44.9 FLow PCS Hemoglobin [g/dL]: 13.5 M / 11.3 FHigh PCS Hemoglobin [g/dL]: 17.6 M / 15.2 FLow PCS RBC Count [*10^4/µL]: 427 M / 376 FHigh PCS RBC Count [*10^4/µL]: 570 M / 500 FLow PCS WBC Count [/µL]: 3900 M / 3500 FHigh PCS WBC Count [/µL]: 9800 M / 9100 FLow PCS Neutrophils [%]: 40.0High PCS Neutrophils [%]: 74.0Low PCS Lymphocytes [%]: 18.0High PCS Lymphocytes [%]: 59.0Low PCS Monocytes [%]: 0.0High PCS Monocytes [%]: 8.0Low PCS Basophils [%]: 0.0High PCS Basophils [%]: 2.0Low PCS Eosinophils [%]: 0.0High PCS Eosinophils [%]: 6.0Low PCS Platelet count [*10^4/µL]: 13.1 M / 13.0 FHigh PCS Platelet count [*10^4/µL]: 36.2 M/ 36.9 FLow PCS MCV [FL]: 82.7 M / 79.0 FHigh PCS MCV [FL]: 101.6 M / 100.0 FLow PCS MCH [Pg]: 28 M / 26.3 FHigh PCS MCH [Pg]: 34.6 M / 34.3 FLow PCS MCHC [%]: 31.6 M / 30.7 FHigh PCS MCHC [%]: 36.6 M / 36.6 F
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel30303010000001000001000010

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant (PCS) Vital Signs Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

↓=decrease, ↑=increase, BL=baseline, temp.=temperature, SBP=systolic blood pressure, Sup.=supine, Sta.=standing, DBP=diastolic blood pressure. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Low PCS Weight [kg]: ≥7% ↓ from BLHigh PCS Weight [kg]: ≥7% ↑ from BLHigh PCS Body temp. [⁰C]: ≥38.8 and ≥1.1 ↑ from BLLow PCS SBP Sup. [mmHg]: ≤90 and >30 ↓ from BLHigh PCS SBP Sup. [mmHg]: ≥180 and >40 ↑ from BLLow PCS SBP Sta. [mmHg]: ≤90 and >30 ↓ from BLHigh PCS SBP Sta. [mmHg]: ≥180 and >40 ↑ from BLLow PCS SBP Orthostatic [mmHg]: ↓ of ≥30 in SBPLow PCS DBP Sup. [mmHg]: ≤50 and >30 ↓ from BLHigh PCS DBP Sup. [mmHg]: ≥105 and >30 ↑ from BLLow PCS DBP Sta. [mmHg]: ≤50 and >30 ↓ from BLHigh PCS DBP Sta. [mmHg]: ≥105 and >30 ↑ from BLLow PCS DBP Orthostatic [mmHg]: ↓ of ≥20 in DBPPulse rate [bpm]: ≤50 and >30 ↓ from BLPulse rate [bpm]: ≥120 and >30 ↑ from BL
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel000001010000100

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Urinalysis Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

(NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Low PCS Specific gravity: 1.002High PCS Specific gravity: 1.030Low PCS pH: 4.5High PCS pH: 8.0High PCS Protein: > traceHigh PCS Glucose: > traceHigh PCS Occult blood: > negativeHigh PCS Ketone: > negative
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel00010000

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Product Quality Complaints (PQC) During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

(NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Any PQCAny PQC related to an AEAny serious PQCAny PQC leading to discontinuation of study drugAny PQC by pumpAny PQC by NJ-tube insertionAny PQC by adapterAny PQC by cassettesWithout any PQCs
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel200002014

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Parkinson's Disease Diary Assessment

For each half hour period during 3 consecutive days prior to each assessment of the diary, participants (and/or their caregivers) entered into a diary whether they were asleep, in the ON motor state or in the OFF motor state in the following 5 grades: asleep, OFF, ON (no dyskinesia [D]), ON with non-troublesome dyskinesia (NTD), ON with troublesome dyskinesia (TD). ON time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. OFF time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. Dyskinetic time is time with involuntary muscle movement. The ON or OFF times were calculated as the average of 3 daily times from the diaries. w/o = without, w/ = with (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionhours (Mean)
Daily OFF timeDaily ON time w/o D + time w/ NTDDaily ON time w/o D + time w/ NTD + time w/ TD
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel-1.020.761.02

[back to top]

Baseline and Endpoint (End of Treatment) Video Scoring of Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Items and Dyskinesia

Participants were video recorded a total of 10 times for 1 to 2 minutes every 60 minutes while performing a standardized sequence of motor tasks. Based on these video recordings, a Video Evaluation Committee consisting of 3 neurologists individually evaluated the video under blinded conditions using the following assessments: Tremor at Rest (UPDRS item #20), Finger Taps (UPDRS #23), Rapid Alternating Movement of Hands (UPDRS #25), Arising from Chair (UPDRS #27), Gait (UPDRS #29), Postural Stability (UPDRS #30), Body Bradykinesia and Hypokinesia (UPDRS #31), and Dyskinesia (evaluated with the Goetz Dyskinesia Rating Scale). The UPDRS score is the sum of the answers to individual questions, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4), with higher scores associated with more disability. The Goetz Dyskinesia Rating Scale is a 5-point scale of the severity of dyskinesias, from 0 (absent) to 4 (violent dyskinesias). (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), Endpoint (Day 21)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Tremor at rest, BaselineTremor at rest, EndpointFinger taps, BaselineFinger taps, EndpointRapid alternating movement of hands, BaselineRapid alternating movement of hands, EndpointArising from chair, BaselineArising from chair, EndpointGait, BaselineGait, EndpointPostural stability, BaselinePostural stability, EndpointBody bradykinesia and hypokinesia, BaselineBody bradykinesia and hypokinesia, EndpointDyskinesia, Baseline
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel0.000.000.400.401.000.600.100.000.600.601.601.101.000.800.400.90

[back to top]

AUC0-12/Dose0-12, AUC0-16/Dose0-16 After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187

AUC0-12/Dose0-12 of levodopa, carbidopa, and 3-OMD after administration of the oral L/C tablets (Day -1) and intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187 (Day 21). AUC0-16/Dose0-16 of levodopa, carbidopa, and 3-OMD after administration of intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187 (Day 21). (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

,
Interventionµg*h/mL/mg (Mean)
AUC0-12/Dose0-12: LevodopaAUC0-12/Dose0-12: CarbidopaAUC0-12/Dose0-12: 3-OMDAUC0-16/Dose0-16: LevodopaAUC0-16/Dose0-16: CarbidopaAUC0-16/Dose0-16: 3-OMD
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel0.0320.0080.1130.0350.0080.125
Oral Levodopa-carbidopa Tablets0.0360.0120.112NANANA

[back to top]

"Mean Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Percentage of Ratings in the OFF and Dyskinesia States on the TRS I and the Normal, OFF, and Dyskinesia States on the TRS II"

"Participants were video recorded a total of 10 times for 1 to 2 minutes every 60 minutes while performing a standardized sequence of motor tasks: rest, finger taps, rapid alternating movement of hands, arising from chair and gait, including confirmation of postural stability. Based on these video recordings, a Video Evaluation Committee consisting of 3 neurologists individually evaluated the following Video Assessment and TRS under blinded conditions: Finger Taps, Rapid Alternating Movement of Hands, Arising from Chair, Gait, Body Bradykinesia and Hypokinesia, Dyskinesia for TRS I, with the addition of Tremor at Rest and Postural Stability for TRS II. The average of the 3 neurologists' evaluations was calculated as a percentage of ratings in the Normal state (ie, mild OFF to ON with mild dyskinesia), the Off state (moderate OFF to severe OFF), and the Dyskinesia state (ON with moderate dyskinesia to ON with severe dyskinesia) on the TRS I or II." (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionpercentage of ratings (Mean)
"TRS I OFF state""TRS I Dyskinesia state""TRS II Normal state""TRS II OFF state""TRS II Dyskinesia state"
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel-15.330.0014.67-15.330.67

[back to top]

Ratio of Metabolite 3-OMD to Levodopa (M/P [AUC0-12]) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187

M/P (AUC0-12) after administration of the oral L/C tablets (Day -1) and intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187 (Day 21). (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionratio (Mean)
Oral Levodopa-carbidopa Tablets3.11
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel3.53

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Results During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

High potentially clinically significant Bazett's heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTcB) values were: 450 msec for males / 470 msec for females. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel0

[back to top]

"Mean Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in Percentage of Ratings in the Normal State on the Treatment Response Scale (TRS) I"

"Participants were video recorded a total of 10 times for 1 to 2 minutes every 60 minutes while performing a standardized sequence of motor tasks: rest, finger taps, rapid alternating movement of hands, arising from chair and gait, including confirmation of postural stability. Based on these video recordings, a Video Evaluation Committee consisting of 3 neurologists individually evaluated the following Video Assessment and Treatment Response Scale (TRS) under blinded conditions: Finger Taps, Rapid Alternating Movement of Hands, Arising from Chair, Gait, Body Bradykinesia and Hypokinesia, Dyskinesia. The average of the neurologists' evaluations was calculated as a percentage of ratings in the Normal state (ie, mild OFF to ON with mild dyskinesia) on the TRS I (total 10 assessments per day)." (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionpercentage of ratings (Mean)
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel15.33

[back to top]

Number of Participants With PCS Values in Special Laboratory Parameters During the ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period

M=male, F=female (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Low PCS Vitamin B6 pyridoxamine [ng/mL]: Low PCS Vitamin B6 pyridoxal [ng/mL]: 6.0 M/4.0 FHigh PCS Vitamin B6 pyridoxal [ng/mL]: 40 M / 19 FLow PCS Vitamin B6 pyridoxine [ng/mL]: Low PCS Vitamin B12 [pg/mL]: 180High PCS Vitamin B12 [pg/mL]: 914Low PCS Homocysteine [nmol/mL]: 3.7High PCS Homocysteine [nmol/mL]: 13.5Low PCS Folic acid [ng/mL]: < 3.1
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel041010041

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in the Japanese Version of Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ-39) Total Score and Domain Scores

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients, including Mobility, Activities of Daily Living, Emotional Well-being, Stigma, Social Support, Cognition, Communication, and Bodily Discomfort, as well as a Summary Index Total Score. Scores for each are on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Total scoreDomain: MobilityDomain: Activities of daily livingDomain: Emotional well-beingDomain: StigmaDomain: Social supportDomain: CognitionDomain: CommunicationDomain: Bodily discomfort
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel1.2610.00-0.83-8.331.25-5.00-5.001.678.33

[back to top]

The Area Under the Concentrations-time Curve From 0 to 12 and 0 to 16 Hours (AUC0-12, AUC0-16) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187

AUC0-12 and AUC0-16 of levodopa, carbidopa, and 3-OMD after administration of the oral L/C tablets (Day -1) and intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187 (Day 21). (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

,
Interventionµg*h/mL (Mean)
AUC0-12: LevodopaAUC0-12: CarbidopaAUC0-12: 3-OMDAUC0-16: LevodopaAUC0-16: CarbidopaAUC0-16: 3-OMD
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel34.42.0711846.72.80165
Oral Levodopa-carbidopa Tablets28.40.9488.3NANANA

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) Score at Baseline and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Baseline and End of Treatment

The CGI-S is a global assessment by the Investigator of current symptomatology and impact of illness on functioning. The ratings of the CGI-S are as follows: normal, borderline ill, mildly ill, moderately ill, markedly ill, severely ill, and among the most extremely ill. The CGI-I is a global assessment by the Investigator of the change in clinical status since the start of treatment. The CGI-I ratings are as follows: very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, very much worse. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
CGI-S, Baseline: NormalCGI-S, Baseline: Borderline illCGI-S, Baseline: Mildly illCGI-S, Baseline: Moderately illCGI-S, Baseline: Markedly illCGI-S, Baseline: Severely illCGI-S, Baseline: Among the most extremely illCGI-S, Endpoint: NormalCGI-S, Endpoint: Borderline illCGI-S, Endpoint: Mildly illCGI-S, Endpoint: Moderately illCGI-S, Endpoint: Markedly illCGI-S, Endpoint: Severely illCGI-S, Endpoint: Among the most extremely illCGI-I: Very much improvedCGI-I: Much improvedCGI-I: Minimally improvedCGI-I: No changeCGI-I: Minimally worseCGI-I: Much worseCGI-I: Very much worse
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel000230010031001310000

[back to top]

Degree of Fluctuation (2-12 Hours) After Administration of Oral L/C Tablets and Intra-jejunal Administration of ABT-SLV187

Degree of Fluctuation (calculated as [Cmax - Cmin] / Cavg)) of levodopa, carbidopa, and 3-OMD after administration of the oral L/C tablets (Day -1) and intra-jejunal administration of ABT-SLV187 (Day 21). (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

,
Interventionratio (Mean)
LevodopaCarbidopa3-OMD
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel0.380.780.35
Oral Levodopa-carbidopa Tablets2.10.970.48

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to the End of Treatment in UPDRS Total Scores and Subscores

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale. The total score ranges from 0-176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 no disability. The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions related to Mentation, Behavior and Mood, and ranges from 0-16. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions related to Activities of Daily Living, and ranges from 0-52. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers related to Motor Examination, and ranges from 0-108. The Part IV Score is the sum of the answers to the 11 questions related to Complications of Therapy, and ranges from 0-23. The Part IV dyskinesia subscore ranges from 0-12. For each part of the UPDRS, higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT01479127)
Timeframe: Baseline (Day -1), End of ABT-SLV187 Treatment Period (Day 21)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Total scorePart IPart IIPart II (Off-time)Part IIIPart IV subscore of dyskinesia
Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.600.200.60-2.20-1.402.20

[back to top]

Responder Rate According to the Clinical Global Impression-global Improvement (CGI-I) Scale at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period

"The CGI-I scale allows the investigator to rate the participant's total improvement since the beginning of treatment (Baseline). Baseline is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The scale is rated from 1-7 where 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse. The responder rate is defined as the percentage of participants with a score of 1 or 2. The Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) model was used to determine CGI responder rate with treatment, visit, and treatment by visit interaction included in the model. Only scheduled visits were included." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionPercentage of participants (Number)
Treatment Group A: Placebo35
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day28
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day39
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day42
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day46
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day56

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Absolute Awake Time Spent on Without Troublesome Dyskinesia (TD) at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Dyskinesias are involuntary twisting, turning movements caused by medication during on time in Parkinson's Disease (PD). TD is defined as those movements that interfere with function and cause meaningful discomfort. Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit. The total number of awake hours spent on without TD per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent on without TD in each 24 hour diary card. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the MP Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM). Par with a non-missing efficacy observation at BL and during the MP were analyzed." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo1.76
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day1.21
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day2.69
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day2.16
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day2.49
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day2.24

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline (BL) in Total Awake Time Spent Off at Week 4 of Maintenance Period"

"Off time is defined as the state in which the participants(par) symptoms include lack of mobility(bradykinesia) with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. Par were asked to record awake time off , awake time on, troublesome dyskinesias(TD) during awake time on, or time asleep for 30 minute intervals in 24 hr diary cards for 2 days preceding visits. Total number of awake hrs spent off per 24-hr period was the average of the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent off in each 24-hr diary card. BL is the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose, change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the MP Week 4 values. Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) model used BL total awake time 'Off', treatment, visit and treatment by visit" (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-1.91
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-2.04
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-2.92
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-2.34
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-2.80
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-2.37

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Absolute Awake Time Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hours spent on per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of the awake hours spent on in each 24 hour diary card. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo1.70
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day1.20
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day2.69
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day2.23
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day2.62
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day2.34

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in the Percent Awake Time Spent Off at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The off state is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility(bradykinesia), with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hours spent off per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent off in each 24-hour diary card. The percentage of awake time spent off= Awake time spent off divided by (Awake time spent off + Awake time spent on) × 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the MP Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of off time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-12.43
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-11.60
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-18.41
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-15.36
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-17.81
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-15.01

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in the Percent Awake Time Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Par. were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hours spent on per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent on in each 24-hour diary card. The percentage of awake time spent on= Awake time spent on divided by (Awake time spent on + Awake time spent off) × 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of on time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo12.43
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day11.60
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day18.41
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day15.36
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day17.81
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day15.01

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in the Percent Awake Time Spent on Without TD at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Dyskinesias are involuntary twisting, turning movements caused by medication during on time in PD. TD is defined as those movements that interfere with function and cause meaningful discomfort. Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hr diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hr spent on without TD per 24-hr period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hr spent on without TD in each 24-hr diary card. Percentage of awake time spent onwithout TD= Awake time spent on without TD divided by(Awake time spent on + Awake time spent off) × 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date, change from BL was calculated by subtracting BL values from MP Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of on time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo12.89
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day11.58
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day18.34
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day14.99
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day17.05
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day14.56

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in the Percent of a 24- Hour Day Spent on Without TD at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Dyskinesias are involuntary twisting, turning movements caused by medication during on time in PD. TD is defined as those movements that interfere with function and cause meaningful discomfort. Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hr diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit. The total number of day awake hr spent on without TD per 24-hr period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent on without TD in each 24-hour diary card. The percentage of 24 hr day spent on without TD= awake time spent on without TD divided by 24 × 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date, change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the MP Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of on time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo7.32
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day5.03
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day11.19
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day8.99
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day10.40
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day9.34

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in the Percent of a 24-hour Day Spent Off at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The off state is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility (bradykinesia), with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of day awake hours spent off per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent off in each 24-hour diary card. The percentage of 24 hour day spent off= awake time spent off divided by 24 x 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the MP Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of off time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-7.94
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-8.50
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-12.17
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-9.75
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-11.65
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-9.86

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in the Percent of a 24-hour Day Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Par. were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of day awake hours spent on per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent on in each 24-hour diary card. The percentage of a 24-hour day spent on = Awake time spent on divided by 24 × 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of on time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo7.08
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day4.99
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day11.20
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day9.28
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day10.94
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day9.76

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Motor Score With Participants in an on State, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The UPDRS is a clinician based rating scale used to measure motor impairments and disability. The UPDRS assesses six features of PD impairment. These are evaluated using a combination of data collected by interview and examination of the par.. One of the six features include the Part III-motor examination where scores can range 0 to 108 with par. in an on state where the maximum score indicates the worse condition. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionScore on scale (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-4.75
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-10.38
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-8.43
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-8.34
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-8.86
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-10.06

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in UPDRS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Score With Participants in an on State, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The UPDRS Part II is the ADL score and can range from 0 to 52 as determined by the physician. The higher score indicates the worse condition. Test were performed when the par. is in the on state of PD. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionScore on scale (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-1.32
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-3.08
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-3.06
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-2.18
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-2.63
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-3.04

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in UPDRS ADL Score With Participants in an Off State, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The UPDRS Part II is the ADL score and can range from 0 to 52 as determined by the physician. The higher score indicates the worse condition. Test was performed when the par is in the off state of PD. The off time is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility (bradykinesia) with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionScore on scale (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-2.94
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-4.50
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-4.72
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-4.29
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-5.76
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-4.77

[back to top]

"Percent Change From Baseline in Awake Time Spent Off at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The off state is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility (bradykinesia), with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. Par. were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hours spent off per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent off in each 24-hour diary card. The percent change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values divided by BL values multiplied (×) the results with 100. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of off time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-30.44
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-30.47
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-46.65
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-37.26
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-48.36
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-34.37

[back to top]

"Percent Change From Baseline in Awake Time Spent on at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Par. were asked to recordawake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hours spent on per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent on in each 24-hour diary card. The percent change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values divided by BL values × 100. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of on time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo21.31
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day15.05
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day35.68
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day31.28
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day32.34
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day32.43

[back to top]

"Percent Change From Baseline in Awake Time Spent on Without TD at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"Dyskinesias are involuntary twisting, turning movements caused by medication during on time in PD. TD is defined as those movements that interfere with function and cause meaningful discomfort. Par. were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total number of awake hours spent on without TD per 24-hour period was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of awake hours spent on without TD in each 24-hour diary card. The percent change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values divided by BL values × 100. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Intervention"Percentage of on time in hours" (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo24.55
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day15.20
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day35.20
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day32.02
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day34.45
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day29.58

[back to top]
=1 Hour Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"-NCT01494532">

"Percentage of Participants With a >=1 Hour Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The off time is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility (bradykinesia) with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The percent change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. Percentage of participants meeting the criterion (LS mean on inverse linked scale), odds ratio with 95% CI and p-value comparing against placebo were estimated by Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) model. Baseline 'off-time', treatment, visit and treatment*visit are included in the model." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Interventionpercentage of participants (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo72.1
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day70.1
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day80.6
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day73.5
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day83.2
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day81.4

[back to top]
=2 Hours Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"-NCT01494532">

"Percentage of Participants With a >=2 Hours Reduction in Baseline Off Time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period"

"The off time is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility (bradykinesia) with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The percent change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. Percentage of participants meeting the criterion (LS mean on inverse linked scale), odds ratio with 95% CI and p-value comparing against placebo were estimated by Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) model. Baseline 'off-time', treatment, visit and treatment*visit are included in the model." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Interventionpercentage of participants (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo53.7
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day45.6
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day68.2
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day53.6
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day63.2
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day51.3

[back to top]

"Responder Rate Defined as the Percentage of Participants With a 20% Reduction in Baseline (BL) Off Time at Week-4 of Maintenance Period"

"The responder rate was defined as the percentage of par with greater than or equal to (>=) 20 percent (%) reduction in their individual BL off time at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period. The off time is defined as the state in which the participants' symptoms include lack of mobility (bradykinesia) with or without additional features such as tremor or rigidity. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. Responder Rate (Least Squares [LS] means on inverse linked scale), odds ratio with 95% CI and p-value comparing against placebo were estimated by Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) model. Baseline total awake time 'Off', treatment, visit and treatment*visit are included in the model." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

Interventionpercentage of participants (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo65.4
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day68.0
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day75.4
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day64.3
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day77.9
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day72.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline for Total Sleep Time During the Night Time Hours of Sleep at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period

"Par. were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total sleep hours during the night time hours of sleep was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of time (hours) asleep during night time in each 24-hour diary card. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo0.22
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day0.86
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day0.22
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day0.15
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day0.14
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day0.04

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time During the Night Time Hours of Sleep as a Percentage of a 24-hour Day, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period

"Par were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total sleep hours during the night time hours of sleep was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of time (hours) asleep during night time in each 24-hour diary card. The percentage of a 24-hour day spent asleep during the night time hours = Total sleep hours during the night time hours of sleep divided by 24 × 100. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionPercentage of time in hours (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo0.91
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day3.57
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day0.92
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day0.63
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day0.58
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day0.18

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part I at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period

"The UPDRS Part I scores mentation, behavior and mood as determined by a physician and par. were tested during the on phase of PD. This component of the UPDRS is the total score for 4 items (the items 1 to 4 include intellectual impairment, thought disorder, motivation / initiative, and depression) and may have a value ranging from 0 to 16 as determined by a physician. The higher score (16) indicates the maximum score and the worse condition. All 4 items have to be present for a total score to be calculated. If one or more items are missing, the total score for the component would also be missing. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the individual post-randomization values. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline (BL) and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionScore on scale (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo-0.24
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day-0.44
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day-0.33
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day-0.24
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day-0.47
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day-0.45

[back to top]

Percent Change From Baseline in Total Sleep Time During the Night Time Hours of Sleep, at Week 4 of the Maintenance Period

"Par. were asked to record awake time off, awake time on, TD during awake time on, or time asleep for all 30 minute time intervals in 24 hour diary cards for the 2 days preceding each visit of the study. The total sleep hours during the night time hours of sleep was the average across the 2 diary cards of the sum of time (hours) asleep during night time in each 24-hour diary card. BL is defined as the last non-missing assessment measured on or before the first dose date. The percent change from BL was calculated by subtracting the BL values from the Maintenance Period Week 4 values divided by BL value × 100. LS means, 95% CIs and P-values were estimated from MMRM." (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 4 of the Maintenance Period (Study Week 17)

InterventionPercentage of total sleep time in hours (Least Squares Mean)
Treatment Group A: Placebo3.99
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day10.79
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day4.94
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day3.41
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day3.60
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day0.91

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants Withdrawn From the Study Due to Lack of Efficacy

The percentage of participants who withdrew from the study due to lack of efficacy as defined by either the participant or the investigator is presented here. All participants with a non-missing efficacy observation at Baseline and at least one post-Baseline efficacy assessment at any time during the study were analyzed. (NCT01494532)
Timeframe: From start of study treatment until end of treatment (assessed up to 18 weeks)

InterventionPercentage of participants (Number)
Treatment Group A: Placebo0
Treatment Group B: 4 mg/Day0
Treatment Group C: 8 mg/Day0
Treatment Group D: 12 mg/Day0
Treatment Group E: 16 mg/Day3
Treatment Group F: 24 mg/Day0

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to the Last Sampling Time at Which the Drug Concentration Was at or Above the Lower Limit of Quantification.

AUC0-t - Area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of levodopa from time zero to the last sampling time following a single oral administration of Sinemet® 100/25 on Day 8, and 5 mg, 15 mg and 30 mg BIA 9-1067 once-daily (QD), 200 mg entacapone thrice-daily (TID), and placebo, for 8 days (NCT01519284)
Timeframe: 8 days

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Group 11578
Group 21785
Group 32102
Group 42202
Group 52146

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to Infinity

AUC0-∞ - Area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of levodopa from time zero to infinity. (NCT01519284)
Timeframe: 8 days

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Group 11649
Group 21873
Group 32233
Group 42381
Group 52253

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa

Cmax - Maximum plasma concentration of levodopa following a single oral administration of Sinemet® 100/25 on Day 8, and 5 mg, 15 mg and 30 mg BIA 9-1067 once-daily (QD), 200 mg entacapone thrice-daily (TID), and placebo, for 8 days (NCT01519284)
Timeframe: 8 days

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Group 11076
Group 21106
Group 3943
Group 4981
Group 5928

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa

Tmax - Time to Reach maximum plasma concentration of levodopa following a single oral administration of Sinemet® 100/25 on Day 8, and 5 mg, 15 mg and 30 mg BIA 9-1067 once-daily (QD), 200 mg entacapone thrice-daily (TID), and placebo, for 8 days. (NCT01519284)
Timeframe: 8 days

Interventionhours (Median)
Group 10.75
Group 20.75
Group 30.75
Group 40.75
Group 50.75

[back to top]

Correlation Coefficient Between UPDRS III Score and Independent Components Analysis Network Strength in Left Parietal Cortex.

Correlation coefficient between UPDRS III score and independent components analysis network strength in left parietal cortex. UPDRS III is the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale composite motor score. (NCT01528592)
Timeframe: 1 hour

Interventionunitless (Number)
On / Off Medication0.5869

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (3-OMD)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of 3-O-methyl-levodopa (3-OMD) (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg11193
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h7730
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly89962

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (BIA 9-1067)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of BIA 9-1067 (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
BIA 9-1067 50 mg2165
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h2360
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly2678

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve Extrapolated to Infinity (Carbidopa)

Pharmacokinetic parameters of carbidopa. For tmax = time to Cmax values are presented as median with range values. (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg668
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h683
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly745

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Occurrence of Cmax (3-OMD)

Pharmacokinetic parameters of 3-O-methyl-levodopa (3-OMD). For tmax = time to Cmax values are presented as median with range values. (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose

Interventionhours (Median)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg6.00
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h5.00
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly5.00

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (3-OMD)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of 3-O-methyl-levodopa (3-OMD) (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg10296
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h6940
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly8149

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (BIA 9-1067)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of BIA 9-1067 (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
BIA 9-1067 50 mg2094
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h2130
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly2245

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (Carbidopa)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of carbidopa (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg656
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h670
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly732

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point (L-DOPA)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of L-beta-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (levodopa) (L-DOPA) (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg2289
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h2611
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly2459

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (3-OMD)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of 3-O-methyl-levodopa (3-OMD) (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg490
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h336
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly401

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (BIA 9-1067)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of BIA 9-1067 (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
BIA 9-1067 50 mg648
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h625
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly628

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (Carbidopa)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of carbidopa (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg134
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h136
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly142

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (L-DOPA)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of L-beta-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (levodopa) (L-DOPA) (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg1070
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h1105
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly1198

[back to top]

Tmax - Time of Occurrence of Cmax Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration (L-DOPA)

Pharmacokinetic parameters of L-beta-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (levodopa) (L-DOPA). For tmax = time to Cmax values are presented as median with range values. (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionhours (Median)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg1.0
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h1.0
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly0.5

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Occurrence of Cmax (Carbidopa)

Pharmacokinetic parameters of carbidopa. For tmax = time to Cmax values are presented as median with range values. (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionhours (Median)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg3.00
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h3.00
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly3.00

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero to Infinity (L-DOPA)

Mean pharmacokinetic parameters of L-beta-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (levodopa) (L-DOPA) (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Sinemet® 100/25 mg2397
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h2730
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly2603

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Occurrence of Cmax (BIA 9-1067)

Pharmacokinetic parameters of BIA 9-1067. For tmax = time to Cmax values are presented as median with range values. (NCT01533077)
Timeframe: Pre-dose, ½, 1, 1½, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h after dose.

Interventionhours (Median)
BIA 9-1067 50 mg2.50
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Separated 1 h3.50
BIA 9-1067 50 mg + Sinemet® 100/25 mg Concomitantly4.00

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve to Last Measurable Time Point

AUC0-t - area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to last observed concentration 3-OMD - 3-O-methyl-dopa - metabolite of L-DOPA (levodopa) AUC0-t (Levodopa) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® AUC0-t (3-OMD) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® AUC0-t (BIA 9-1067) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® (NCT01533116)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 h

,,,
Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
AUC0-t (Levodopa) Sinemet® 100/25AUC0-t (Levodopa) Prolopa® 100-25AUC0-t (3-OMD) Sinemet® 100/25AUC0-t (3-OMD) Prolopa® 100/25AUC0-t (BIA 9-1067) Sinemet® 100/25AUC0-t (BIA 9-1067) Prolopa® 100/25
15 mg BIA 9-10672952344228363473872836
30 mg BIA 9-1067275340561751262311011185
5 mg BIA 9-10673386411551476205223232
Placebo18372438763111371NANA

[back to top]

tEmax - Time of Occurrence of Maximum Observed Effect on S-COMT Activity

tEmax - time of occurrence of maximum observed effect on S-COMT activity COMT - Catechol-O-Methyltransferase (NCT01533116)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 h

Interventionhours (Mean)
Placebo8.12
5 mg BIA 9-10672.71
15 mg BIA 9-10674.67
30 mg BIA 9-10673.50

[back to top]

AUEC0-24 - Area Under the Effect-time Curve (AUEC) to 24 h Post-dose

AUEC0-24 - Area under the effect-time curve (AUEC) to 24 h post-dose. (NCT01533116)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 h

Interventionpmol/mg Hb/h.h (Mean)
Placebo906
5 mg BIA 9-1067454
15 mg BIA 9-1067319
30 mg BIA 9-1067226

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Maximum Plasma Concentration

Tmax - time to maximum plasma concentration Tmax (Levodopa) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® Tmax (3-OMD) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® Tmax (BIA 9-1067) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® (NCT01533116)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 h

,,,
Interventionhours (Median)
Tmax (Levodopa) Sinemet® 100/25Tmax (Levodopa) Prolopa® 100-25Tmax (3-OMD) Sinemet® 100/25Tmax (3-OMD) Prolopa® 100/25Tmax (BIA 9-1067) Sinemet® 100/25Tmax (BIA 9-1067) Prolopa® 100/25
15 mg BIA 9-10670.51.06.06.03.02.5
30 mg BIA 9-10671.01.08.04.04.03.0
5 mg BIA 9-10670.751.08.08.01.53.0
Placebo0.51.04.04.0NANA

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration

Cmax - maximum plasma concentration Cmax (Levodopa) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® Cmax (3-OMD) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® Cmax (BIA 9-1067) Sinemet® or Prolopa® - following administration of Sinemet® or Prolopa® (NCT01533116)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 h

,,,
Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Cmax (Levodopa) Sinemet® 100/25Cmax (Levodopa) Prolopa® 100-25Cmax (3-OMD) Sinemet® 100/25Cmax (3-OMD) Prolopa® 100/25Cmax (BIA 9-1067) Sinemet® 100/25Cmax (BIA 9-1067) Prolopa® 100/25
15 mg BIA 9-106712001727167206263281
30 mg BIA 9-10679441795115160310370
5 mg BIA 9-10671245210030736075.095.5
Placebo9851704456688NANA

[back to top]

Tmax = Time to Cmax Day 3

tmax = time to Cmax (values are median) (NCT01568034)
Timeframe: Day 3

,,,
Interventionhours (Median)
Tmax (levodopa)Tmax (3-OMD)Tmax (BIA 9-067)
BIA 9-1067 100 mg0.51.752.00
BIA 9-1067 25 mg1.01.752.00
BIA 9-1067 50 mg0.52.502.00
Placebo0.52.00NA

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration Day 3

Cmax - Maximum plasma concentration (ng/mL) (NCT01568034)
Timeframe: Day 3

,,,
Interventionng/ml (Mean)
Cmax (levodopa)Cmax (3-OMD)Cmax (BIA 9-067)
BIA 9-1067 100 mg26574085816
BIA 9-1067 25 mg21124193320
BIA 9-1067 50 mg23664284590
Placebo21033996NA

[back to top]

AUC0-6 - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to 6 Hours Post-dose (Day 3)

AUC0-6 - area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 6 hours post-dose (ng.h/mL) (NCT01568034)
Timeframe: Day 3

,,,
Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
AUC0-6 (levodopa)AUC0-6 (3-OMD)AUC0-6 (BIA 9-1067)
BIA 9-1067 100 mg5440222002647
BIA 9-1067 25 mg454522026776
BIA 9-1067 50 mg4580235151694
Placebo395822334NA

[back to top]

AUC0-6 - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) From Time Zero to to 6 h Postdose (AUC [0-6])

"Baseline period - to be switched respectively to standard-release levodopa/carbidopa 100/25 mg (Sinemet®) or levodopa/benserazide 100/25 mg (Madopar®/Restex®) and to adjust the number of daily doses.~Test Period - After the baseline period during the 21 to 28 days" (NCT01568047)
Timeframe: 28 days

,,,
Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
AUC0-6 (levodopa) BaselineAUC0-6 (levodopa) TestAUC0-6 (3-OMD) BaselineAUC0-6 (3-OMD) TestAUC0-6 (BIA 9-067) Test
BIA 9-1067 15 mg27344044187486685698
BIA 9-1067 30 mg386262973417790591188
BIA 9-1067 5 mg345140412393414883627
Placebo284125102330121228NA

[back to top]

Cmax - Observed Maximum Concentration

"Baseline period - to be switched respectively to standard-release levodopa/carbidopa 100/25 mg (Sinemet®) or levodopa/benserazide 100/25 mg (Madopar®/Restex®) and to adjust the number of daily doses.~Test Period - After the baseline period during the 21 to 28 days" (NCT01568047)
Timeframe: 28 days

,,,
Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Cmax (levodopa) BaselineCmax (levodopa) TestCmax (3-OMD) BaselineCmax (3-OMD) TestCmax (BIA 9-067) Test
BIA 9-1067 15 mg1753180635291197233
BIA 9-1067 30 mg1832258462221603480
BIA 9-1067 5 mg1446186846312633240
Placebo1484120347013770NA

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Observed Maximum Concentration

"Baseline period - to be switched respectively to standard-release levodopa/carbidopa 100/25 mg (Sinemet®) or levodopa/benserazide 100/25 mg (Madopar®/Restex®) and to adjust the number of daily doses.~Test Period - After the baseline period during the 21 to 28 days" (NCT01568047)
Timeframe: 28 days

,,,
Interventionng/mL (Median)
Cmax (levodopa) BaselineCmax (levodopa) TestCmax (3-OMD) BaselineCmax (3-OMD) TestCmax (BIA 9-067) Test
BIA 9-1067 15 mg0.50.752.253.02.0
BIA 9-1067 30 mg1.00.53.03.02.0
BIA 9-1067 5 mg1.01.03.01.52.0
Placebo1.01.02.02.0NA

[back to top]

Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS)

"The Non-motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) consists of 30 questions, covering 9 dimensions, whereby each item is scored for severity and frequency: Severity None 0 Mild (symptoms present but causes little distress) 1 Moderate (some distress or disturbance to subject) 2 Severe (major source of distress or disturbance to subject) 3~Frequency Rarely (<1/wk) 1 Often (1/wk) 2 Frequent (several times per week) 3 Very Frequent (daily or all the time) 4~The product of frequency and severity is calculated for each item and each dimension score is defined as the sum of the frequency*severity of the respective items. If frequency or severity of a single item is missing, the domain score will not be calculated. The NMSS total score is defined as the sum of all domain scores.~The NMSS total score is calculated by adding all domain scores (0-360), and lower scores mean less disability." (NCT01568073)
Timeframe: 14 to 15 weeks

,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineVisit 5Visit 7Endpoint
Entacapone32.127.927.527.5
OPC 25mg39.834.034.634.4
OPC 50mg36.430.233.733.4
OPC 5mg36.130.229.529.5
Placebo38.833.432.332.0

[back to top]

Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)

"The Parkinson's disease Sleep Scale (PDSS) is a specific scale for the assessment of sleep disturbances in subjects with PD. The PDSS score is calculated as the sum of all single items. If one or two items are missing, they will be imputed with the mean of the non-missing items. If three or more items are missing, no imputation will be done and the score will be set to missing.~Subscale has 0-10 ratings, where 0 = severe and 10 = normal~The PDSS total score is a sum score of all 15 questions and ranges from 0 to 150, with lower scores meaning more disability." (NCT01568073)
Timeframe: 14 to 15 weeks

,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineVisit 5Visit 7Endpoint (14 to 15 weeks)
Entacapone100.7102.5103.2102.8
OPC 25mg92.7101.7100.6100.4
OPC 50mg98.0100.2100.7100.9
OPC 5mg97.8103.8102.8102.9
Placebo97.597.697.798.5

[back to top]

Total UPDRS SCORE (I, II (ON), and III)

"Total UPDRS (Part I, II (ON) and III)~UPDRS I evaluation of mentation, behavior, and mood~UPDRS II self-evaluation of the activities of daily life (ADLs) including speech, swallowing, handwriting, dressing, hygiene, falling, salivating, turning in bed, walking, and cutting food~UPDRS III clinician-scored monitored motor evaluation The UPDRS I, II and III scores and subscores are calculated as the sum of all individual items. If one or two items in a scale are missing, they will be imputed with the mean of the non-missing items of that scale.~Subscale has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe~The final cumulative score will range from 0 (no disability) to 199 (total disability)." (NCT01568073)
Timeframe: 14 to 15 weeks

,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline (Day 0)Endpoint (14 to 15 weeks)Change from Baseline to Endpoint
Entacapone35.429.8-6.0
OPC 25mg40.132.0-7.6
OPC 50mg38.831.5-6.5
OPC 5mg38.231.0-7.6
Placebo37.632.1-5.6

[back to top]

Efficacy of 3 BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 25 mg, and 50 mg) Compared With 200 mg of Entacapone or Placebo,

The primary efficacy variable will be the change from baseline in absolute OFF-time at the end of the DB period, This results refers when administered with the existing treatment of L-DOPA plus a DDCI, in patients with PD and end-of-dose motor fluctuations (NCT01568073)
Timeframe: 14 to 15 weeks

Interventionminutes (Mean)
Placebo-56.0
Entacapone-96.3
OPC 5mg-91.3
OPC 25mg-85.9
OPC 50mg-116.8

[back to top]

Percentage of Responders From Baseline to the End of the Doubleblind Maintenance Period

A Responder is defined as a subject with an ≥ 30 % decrease in absolute time spent 'off' (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)36.9
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)48.8

[back to top]

"Change in Absolute Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was 'off' when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to 'on'.~Absolute time on is defined as the mean number of hours marked on during a 24-hour period from all valid daily diary cards." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)0.94
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)2.05

[back to top]

"Change in Relative Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was off when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to on.~Relative time spent on will be calculated in two stages. Each valid daily diary will have an associated relative time on calculated as relative time on for day = 100*[total absolute time on for day/ absolute time awake for day]. Relative time spent on is then calculated by averaging the daily relative time on for the valid days of that visit." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)6.78
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)14.49

[back to top]

"Change in the Number of Off Periods From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered off when he/she began to lose the optimum effects of anti-Parkinson's medication." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

InterventionNumber of 'off' Periods (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)-0.61
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)-0.89

[back to top]

"Change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS Part III Motor Examination) During on Periods From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"The UPDRS Part III (motor subscale) assessment consists of 27 questions, measured on a 5-Point scale (0 to 4). The sum score is calculated as sum of these 27 individual questions. This score ranges from 0 to 108, higher scores denote greater disability.~A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was 'off' when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to 'on'." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)-3.6
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)-10.4

[back to top]

"Percent Change in Absolute Time Spent Off From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered off when he/she began to lose the optimum effects of anti-Parkinson's medication.~Absolute time off is defined as the mean number of hours marked off during a 24-hour period from all valid daily diary cards." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercent change (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)-15.0
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)-36.03

[back to top]

"Percent Change in Absolute Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was 'off' when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to 'on'.~Note for percent change calculations: when absolute time at Baseline was 0 hours, the absolute Baseline value was assumed to be 1 minute for calculation purposes." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercent change (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)13.53
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)368.55

[back to top]

"Percent Change in Relative Time Spent Off From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered off when he/she began to lose the optimum effects of anti-Parkinson's medication.~Relative time spent off will be calculated in two stages. Each valid daily diary will have an associated relative time off calculated as relative time off for day = 100*[total absolute time off for day/ absolute time awake for day]. Relative time spent off is then calculated by averaging the daily relative time off for the valid days of that visit." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercent change (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)-14.86
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)-34.97

[back to top]

"Percent Change in Relative Time Spent on From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period"

"A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was off when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to on.~Note for percent change calculations: when relative time at Baseline was 0%, the relative Baseline value was assumed to be 0.1 for calculation purposes.~Relative time spent on will be calculated in two stages. Each valid daily diary will have an associated relative time on calculated as relative time on for day = 100*[total absolute time on for day/ absolute time awake for day]. Relative time spent on is then calculated by averaging the daily relative time on for the valid days of that visit." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercent change (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)14.99
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)616.80

[back to top]

Absolute Change in Absolute Time Spent 'Off' From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period

"A subject has been considered off when he/she began to lose the optimum effects of anti-Parkinson's medication. A negative mean indicates a reduction of the time off during the conduct of the study" (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)-1.13
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)-2.36

[back to top]

Change in Status of the Subject (Off) After Wake-up From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period

"A subject has been considered off when he/she began to lose the optimum effects of anti-Parkinson's medication.~The percentage of days from Baseline to the end of the double-blind Maintenance Period in which the subject woke in the off state is presented below." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercentage of days (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)-10.34
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)-21.14

[back to top]

Change in Status of the Subject (on) After Wake-up With Troublesome Dyskinesia From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period

"A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was 'off' when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to 'on'.~The percentage of days from Baseline to the end of the double-blind Maintenance Period in which the subject woke in the on with troublesome dyskinesia state is presented below." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercentage of days (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)2.42
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)1.24

[back to top]

Change in Status of the Subject (on) After Wake-up Without Troublesome Dyskinesia From Baseline to the End of Double-blind Maintenance Period

"A subject has been considered on when he/she felt the effects of L-dopa. The subject recorded the exact time of L-dopa intake and his/her status at the time of the L-dopa dose. In instances when the subject was 'off' when taking his/her L-dopa, he/she recorded the exact time their status changed to 'on'.~The percentage of days from Baseline to the end of the double-blind Maintenance Period in which the subject woke in the on without troublesome dyskinesia state is presented below." (NCT01646255)
Timeframe: From Baseline (Week 0) to end of Maintenance Period (up to Week 12)

Interventionpercentage of days (Mean)
Full Analysis Set (Placebo Treated Subjects)7.92
Full Analysis Set (Rotigotine Treated Subjects)22.55

[back to top]

Visual Acuity Change

Change in visual acuity from baseline to 3 months as measured in logMAR by Snellen or Sweep visual evoked potential (SVEP). logMar lower values equals better visual outcome. (NCT01663935)
Timeframe: 3 months

InterventionlogMar (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa 4mg/kg/Day.774

[back to top]

Contrast Sensitivity

Ancillary testing of visual/retinal function with contrast sensitivity testing. Contrast sensitivity testing measures how well the eyes can distinguish between finer and finer light increments compared to dark. This test is a chart with different capital letters organized in horizontal lines. The contrast decreases with each line. The person will move down the chart to determine the least level of contrast they can see. (NCT01663935)
Timeframe: 3 months

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa/Carbidopa 4mg/kg/Day23.7

[back to top] [back to top]

Change From Baseline for Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score

"The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The Total UPDRS score includes 31 items contributing to three subscales: (I) Mentation, Behavior, and Mood; (II) Activities of Daily Living; and (III) Motor Examination. Each question is answered on a scale from 0 (None) to 4 (Severe); Some questions require multiple grades assigned to each extremity. The UPDRS Total score was computed as the sum of these 3 UPDRS subscales and ranged from 0 to 176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 no disability." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-11.4-7.7

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia Based on PD Diary"

"The PD Diary was completed by the participant for 3 consecutive days prior to each visit. Participants recorded whether they had been On, Off, or Asleep and the severity of their dyskinesias (troublesome or not troublesome) for each 30-minute period during their normal waking time and upon awakening from sleep.~On was defined as time when medication was providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness. On time without troublesome dyskinesia is a composite of On time without dyskinesia (involuntary twisting, turning movements which are an effect of medication) plus On time with non-troublesome dyskinesia (dyskinesia that does not interfere with function or cause meaningful discomfort).~PD Diary times were normalized to a 16-hour waking time to account for variation in participants' sleep time. Normalized PD Diary times at a given visit were calculated as the average normalized time from the PD Diary for the 3 days prior to the visit." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel3.74.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 Item (PDQ-39) Summary Index

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~The PDQ-39 Summary Index (PDQ-SI) is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0 - 100 scale where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-11.2-10.2

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Normalized Off Time Based on Parkinson's Disease Diary"

"The Parkinson's Disease Diary was completed by the participant for 3 consecutive days prior to each visit for the full 24 hours of each day. Participants recorded whether they had been On, Off, or Asleep and the severity of their dyskinesias (troublesome or not troublesome) for each 30-minute period during their normal waking time and upon awakening from time asleep.~Off time was defined as time when medication has worn off and was no longer providing benefit with regard to mobility, slowness, and stiffness.~Parkinson's Disease Diary times were normalized to a 16-hour waking time to account for variation in participants' sleep time. Normalized PD Diary times at a given visit were calculated as the average normalized time from the PD Diary for the 3 days prior to the visit." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-4.1-4.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 60 in the Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS) Total Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; the total score is obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS total score ranges from 0 to 360 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-11.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS) Total Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; the total score is obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS total score ranges from 0 to 360 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-17.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in CANTAB Spatial Working Memory Strategy Score at Week 12

CANTAB is a computer-based test of the participant's ability to retain spatial information and to manipulate remembered items in working memory. The Spatial Working Memory module requires that subjects find a blue token in a series of displayed boxes and use these to fill up an empty column, while not returning to boxes where a blue token has been previously found. The Strategy score represents the number of times a participant begins a search with the same box for 6- and 8-box problems. Minimum score is 8 and maximum score is 56. Higher numbers indicate poorer performance. (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel0.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) Spatial Working Memory Between Errors Score at Week 12

CANTAB is a computer-based test of the participant's ability to retain spatial information and to manipulate remembered items in working memory. The Spatial Working Memory module requires that subjects find a blue token in a series of displayed boxes and use these to fill up an empty column, while not returning to boxes where a blue token has been previously found. The between errors score is the number of times the participant revisited a box in which a token was previously found; errors are calculated for 4-, 6-, and 8-box trials. Higher numbers indicate poorer performance. (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12

Interventionerrors (Mean)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Social Support Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel1.63.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Cardiovascular Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS cardiovascular including falls domain score ranges from 0 to 24 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.20.5

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With a Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Response of Improved

"The PGIC is a 7-point response scale. Participants were asked to rate their change in status using the following 7-point scale:~1 = Very much improved, 2 = Much improved, 3 = Minimally improved, 4 = No change, 5 = Minimally worse, 6 = Much worse, 7 = Very much worse.~The responses of Very much improved, Much improved and Minimally improved on the PGIC were used to define responders." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel78.971.1

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Adverse Events

"Adverse events (AEs) related to treatment are those the investigator determined as having a reasonable possibility being related to study drug based on evidence to suggest a causal relationship between the study drug and the adverse event.~A severe AE was defined as an adverse event that caused considerable interference with the participant's usual activities and might be incapacitating or life-threatening.~Serious AEs were defined as those that were life-threatening or resulted in death, hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, a congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or important medical events requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent a serious outcome." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Weeks 1-4 and Overall (from Week 1 through 30 days after the end of the LCIG Treatment Period; median duration of LCIG device exposure was 428 days)

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Any adverse eventAE related to LCIGAE related to oral LCSevere adverse eventSerious adverse eventAE leading to premature discontinuationGastrointestinal (GI) adverse eventAdverse event other than GIFatal adverse event
Overall37351158528371
Week 1-42826413122210

[back to top]

Number of Participants Who Used Healthcare Resources Through Week 60

"Use of healthcare resources was assessed by the investigator using the Health Resource Utilization Questionnaire (HRUQ), a questionnaire developed by the Sponsor regarding the use of healthcare resources due to the participant's Parkinson's disease. The standard version of the questionnaire addressed the following questions over the last 3 months:~Has the subject had a visit to an emergency room?~Has the subject had an outpatient visit to any of the following healthcare providers?~Has the subject been visited in his or her place of residence by a health care professional?~Has the subject received assistance from either of the following for their Parkinson's disease in their home?~Has the subject needed to contact either of the following for immediate assistance related to their Parkinson's disease?~Have family members or friends had to miss any paid work due to the subject's Parkinson's disease?~Has the subject fallen during the past month?" (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Week 60

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Q1. Emergency Room VisitQ2. Visit to Primary Care PhysicianQ2. Visit to GastroenterologistQ2. Visit to Interventional RadiologistQ2. Visit to SurgeonQ2. Visit to CardiologistQ2. Visit to EndocrinologistQ2. Visit to ImmunologistQ2. Visit to InternistQ2. Visit to PsychiatristQ2. Visit to UrologistQ2. Visit to PsychologistQ2. Visit to Social WorkerQ2. Visit to Other Healthcare ProviderQ3. Visited by PhysicianQ3. Visited by Nurse or Nurse PractitionerQ3. Visited by Physical or Occupational TherapistQ4. Received Unpaid Care From Family/FriendQ4. Received Care From Paid CaregiverQ5. Called 911Q5. Called Family/FriendQ6. Family/Friends Missed WorkQ7. Fall During Past Month
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel118311100102121001010201210

[back to top]

Number of Participants Who Used Healthcare Resources During the First 4 Weeks

"Use of healthcare resources was assessed by the investigator using the Health Resource Utilization Questionnaire (HRUQ), a questionnaire developed by the Sponsor regarding the use of healthcare resources due to the participant's Parkinson's disease. The Week 4 version of the questionnaire addressed the following questions during the first four weeks after the PEG-J procedure:~Has the subject had a visit to an emergency room?~Has the subject had a visit to an urgent care?~Has the subject had an outpatient visit to a neurologist?~Has the subject had an outpatient visit to a gastroenterologist, surgeon, or interventional radiologist?~Has the subject had an outpatient visit to a primary care physician?~Has the subject called the nursing support line?~Has the subject called a physician?" (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Weeks 1-4

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Q1. Emergency Room VisitQ2. Urgent Care VisitQ3. Neurologist VisitQ4. Gastroenterologist, Surgeon, Radiologist VisitQ5. Primary Care Physician VisitQ6. Called Nursing Support LineQ7. Called Physician
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel306118913

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part V: Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging Score

"The UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The modified Hoehn and Yahr scale is as follows:~Stage 0: No signs of disease~Stage 1.0: Symptoms are very mild; unilateral involvement only~Stage 1.5: Unilateral and axial involvement~Stage 2: Bilateral involvement without impairment of balance~Stage 2.5: Mild bilateral disease with recovery on pull test~Stage 3: Mild to moderate bilateral disease; some postural instability; physically independent~Stage 4: Severe disability; still able to walk or stand unassisted~Stage 5: Wheelchair bound or bedridden unless aided" (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.2-0.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part IV: Complications of Therapy Score

"The UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The complications of therapy section includes 11 items addressing dyskinesia duration, disability, and pain, early morning dystonia, offs-predictable, offs-unpredictable, offs-sudden, offs-duration, anorexia-nausea-vomiting, sleep disturbance, and symptomatic orthostasis. Four questions are answered on a scale from 0 (Normal) to 4 (Severe) and seven on a binary scale where 0=No and 1=Yes. The UPDRS Part IV: complications of therapy score was computed as the sum of these items and ranged from 0 (not affected) to 23 (most severely affected)." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-3.5-2.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part III: Motor Examination Score

"The UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The motor examination score includes 17 items addressing speech, facial expression, tremor at rest, action tremor, rigidity, finger taps, hand movements, hand pronation and supination, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, postural stability, and body bradykinesia. Each question is answered on a scale from 0 (Normal) to 4 (Severe), some items include multiple grades for each extremity. The UPDRS Part III: motor examination score was computed as the sum of these items and ranged from 0 (not affected) to 108 (most severely affected)." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-5.6-3.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part II: Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Score

"The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The activities of daily living score includes 13 items addressing speech, salivation, swallowing, handwriting, cutting food, dressing, hygiene, turning in bed, falling, freezing, walking, tremor, and sensory complaints. Each question is answered on a scale from 0 (Normal) to 4 (Severe). The UPDRS Part II: activities of daily living score was computed as the sum of these items and ranged from 0 (not affected) to 52 (most severely affected)." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-5.5-4.7

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Part I: Mentation, Behavior, and Mood Score

"The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The mentation, behavior, and mood score includes 4 items addressing intellectual impairment, thought disorder, motivation/initiative, and depression. Each question is answered on a scale from 0 (None) to 4 (Severe). The UPDRS Part I: mentation, behavior, and mood score was computed as the sum of these items and ranged from 0 (not affected) to 16 (most severely affected)." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.3-0.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in UPDRS Dyskinesia Items Score

"The UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS assessment was performed by an approved, trained rater.~The UPDRS was made up of the following sections:~Part I - Mentation, Behavior, and Mood~Part II - Activities of Daily Living~Part III - Motor Examination~Part IV - Complications of Therapy (including dyskinesias)~Part V - Modified Hoehn and Yahr Staging~The dyskinesia items score includes questions 32, 33 and 34 from the complications of therapy section of the UPDRS which address dyskinesia duration, disability, and pain. Each question was answered on a scale from 0 (Normal) to 4 (Severe); the UPDRS dyskinesia items score was computed as the sum of these items and ranged from 0 (not affected) to 12 (most severely affected)." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-1.1-0.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Stigma Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-9.5-5.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Mobility Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-18.5-19.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Emotional Well-Being Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-4.9-6.6

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) Verbal Fluency Scores at Week 60

"Letter fluency was assessed using a paper and pen test, in which participants were asked to generate as many words as possible in 60 seconds, starting with the letters F, A, or S.~The COWAT All Letters score is the number of words recalled in all post-baseline assessments, regardless of letter used.~The COWAT Baseline Letter score is the number of words recalled in post-baseline assessments that used the same letter as at Baseline." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 60

Interventionwords (Mean)
All Letters ScoreBaseline Letter Score
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.5-1.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Communication Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-13.0-10.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Cognition Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-8.4-7.3

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Bodily Discomfort Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-9.6-3.8

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in PDQ-39 Activities of Daily Living Domain Score

"The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing eight domains of health (mobility [10 items], activities of daily living [six items], emotional wellbeing [six items], stigma [four items], communication [three items] and bodily discomfort [three items]) which subjects consider to be adversely affected by the disease. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable).~Domain scores are calculated by summing the answers to the questions in the domain, dividing by the highest score possible and then multiplying by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status and higher scores are associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-12.1-11.9

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Urinary Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS urinary domain score ranges from 0 to 36 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-2.20.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Sleep/Fatigue Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS sleep/fatigue domain score ranges from 0 to 48 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-6.0-5.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Attention/Memory Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS attention/memory domain score ranges from 0 to 36 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-2.1-2.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Sexual Function Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS sexual function domain score ranges from 0 to 24 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-1.8-1.1

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Perceptual Problems/Hallucinations Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS perceptual problems/hallucinations domain score ranges from 0 to 36 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-0.50.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Mood/Cognition Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS mood/cognition domain score ranges from 0 to 72 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel0.00.5

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Miscellaneous Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS miscellaneous domain score ranges from 0 to 48 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-3.4-3.4

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in NMSS Gastrointestinal Tract Domain Score

"The NMSS measures the frequency and severity of a range of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease. It consists of 30 questions grouped into 9 domains: cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, gastro-intestinal tract, urinary, sexual function, and miscellaneous (pain, taste/smell, weight change, excessive sweating). Severity is rated on a scale from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and frequency is rated on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent).~Item scores are calculated as the product of severity and frequency; domain scores are obtained by summing the item scores. The NMSS gastrointestinal tract domain score ranges from 0 to 36 with a lower score indicating fewer symptoms; a negative change from baseline indicates improvement in symptoms." (NCT01736176)
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 12 and Week 60

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 12Week 60
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel-2.0-1.9

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline in Average Daily Time to on (TTO) by Subject Diary."

"Patients will record daily time to on or TTO following their regularly scheduled first L-Dopa dose in the baseline period for 7 consecutive days. Following initiation on Apokyn therapy, patients will inject Apokyn at their regularly scheduled L-Dopa time (L-Dopa dosing will be delayed by 40 minutes following Apokyn injection) and record time to on or TTO from the injection. Time to on for both periods will be recorded in a standardized subject diary. Daily TTO for the baseline period will be averaged for each subject and compared to the daily TTO for the same subject during the treatment period to assess APOKYN's effect on TTO." (NCT01770145)
Timeframe: L-Dopa Baseline Days 1-7 and APOKYN Treatment Days 1-7

Interventionminutes (Mean)
BaselineTreatment PeriodChange from Baseline
APOKYN60.8623.7237.14

[back to top]

Percent of Residual Pain Stratified by Gender for Individuals Receiving Treatment

Residual pain is computed based on pain ratings from the week prior to treatment and last week of study participation (at ~6months) (NCT01951105)
Timeframe: 6 months

Intervention% residual pain (Mean)
Carbidopa/Levodopa & Naproxen (Males)62.97
Carbidopa/Levodopa & Naproxen (Females)9.48
Placebo & Naproxen (Males)37.96
Placebo & Naproxen (Females)45.23
Observation (Males)85.55
Observation (Females)48.84

[back to top]

Number of Participants With 20% Reduction in Pain on the NRS Pain Intensity Scale

Primary outcome is 20% reduction in pain intensity at p<0.1 based on pain ratings during 1 week prior to treatment and last week of study participation (at ~6months) (NCT01951105)
Timeframe: 6 months

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Observation5
Carbidopa/Levodopa & Naproxen15
Placebo & Naproxen21

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IV Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part IV Score is the sum of the answers to the 11 questions that comprise Part IV, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4) or a 2-point scale (0 or 1). The Part IV score ranges from 0 to 23 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)8.75.5

[back to top]

Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Summary Index: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients. These include: mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort. The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of all answers divided by the highest score possible (i.e. number of answers multiplied by 4) which is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a 0-100 scale. Higher scores are associated with more severe symptoms. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)35.523.5

[back to top]

Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) Mobility, Emotional Well-Being, Stigma, Social Support, Cognition, Communication, and Bodily Discomfort Domain Scores: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The PDQ-39 is a self-administered questionnaire which comprises 39 items (each question answered on a 5-point scale) addressing 8 domains of health in Parkinson's disease patients: Mobility (e.g., fear of falling when walking) includes 10 questions; Emotional Well-being (e.g., feelings of isolation) includes 6 questions; Stigma (e.g., social embarrassment) includes 4 questions; Social Support includes 3 questions; Cognition includes 4 questions; Communication includes 3 questions; and Bodily Discomfort includes 3 questions. The domain scores are calculated by first summing the answers to the questions in the domain. The sum is divided by the highest score possible (i.e., number of answers multiplied by 4) and the quotient is multiplied by 100 to put the score on a scale from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremor and stiffness. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Mobility Domain-BaselineMobility Domain-Last PEG-J visitEmotional Well-Being Domain-BaselineEmotional Well-Being Domain-Last PEG-J visitStigma Domain-BaselineStigma Domain-Last PEG-J visitSocial Support Domain-BaselineSocial Support Domain-Last PEG-J visitCognition Domain-BaselineCognition Domain-Last PEG-J visitCommunication Domain-BaselineCommunication Domain-Last PEG-J visitBodily Discomfort Domain-BaselineBodily Discomfort Domain-Last PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)55.736.530.824.320.613.116.114.628.514.613.314.435.017.2

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Total Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The total score is the sum of the responses to the 31 questions (44 answers) that comprise Parts I-III of the scale. The total score will range from 0 to176, with 176 representing the worst (total) disability, and 0 representing no disability. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline and Final PEG-J Visit (up to Week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)27.722.9

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part I Score is the sum of the answers to the 4 questions that comprise Part I, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part I score ranges from 0 to 16 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)1.80.9

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part IIl Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers provided to the 14 Part III questions, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part III score ranges from 0-108 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineFinal PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)16.514.3

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit

The UPDRS is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (0-4). The Part II score ranges from 0-52 and higher scores are associated with more disability. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)9.47.6

[back to top]

"Average Daily Normalized Off Time at Baseline and Each Visit: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. n= the number of participants with available data at each time point." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12

Interventionhours (Mean)
Baseline (n=29)Week 2 (n=29)Week 4 (n=29)Week 6 (n=29)Week 8 (n=27)Week 10 (n=27)Week 12 (n=27)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)7.373.173.682.612.772.472.45

[back to top]

"Average Daily Normalized Off Time Excluding Subjects Who Did Not Receive LCIG During the Entire PEG-J Period: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)7.322.67

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)

"An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. A serious AE (SAE) is an event that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or prolongs hospitalization, results in a congenital anomaly, persistent or significant disability/incapacity or is an important medical event that, based on medical judgment, may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of the outcomes listed above. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) are defined as any event that began or worsened in severity after N-J placement. The investigator assessed the relationship of each event to the use of study drug as Reasonable Possibility or No Reasonable Possibility.~For more details on adverse events please see the AE section below." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: From N-J placement to the end of study or early termination of treatment, including the removal of PEG-J (up to 17 weeks), plus 30 days.

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Any TEAEAny TEAE at least possibly related to LCIGAny TEAE at least possibly related to LCIG SystemAny severe TEAEAny SAEAny TEAE Leading to Discontinuation of StudyDeathDeath related to AE
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)3103024111

[back to top]

"Average Daily Normalized Off Time Including All PD Diaries Regardless if They Were Completed After the Subject Had Used a Concomitant Anti-Parkinsonian Medication: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)7.372.78

[back to top]

"Average Daily Normalized Off Time: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Negative change from baseline for off time indicates improvement." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)7.372.72

[back to top]

"Average Daily Normalized On Time With Troublesome Dyskinesia: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Positive change from baseline for on time indicates improvement." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)1.120.12

[back to top]

"Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia: Change From Baseline To The Final PEG-J Visit"

"Based on the Parkinson's Disease Symptom Diary. On time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug. Off time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. The diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected clinic visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e. 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. Positive change from baseline for on time indicates improvement." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Baseline (end of screening period) and Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionhours (Mean)
BaselineLast PEG-J visit
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)7.5213.10

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Vital Sign Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include supine systolic blood pressure (SuSBP), standing systolic blood pressure (StSBP), orthostatic systolic blood pressure (OSBP), supine diastolic blood pressure (SuDBP), standing diastolic blood pressure (StDBP), orthostatic diastolic blood pressure (ODBP), supine pulse (SuP) in beats per minute (bpm), standing pulse (StP), body temperature (Temp), and baseline (BL). Increase and decrease are signified by ↑ and ↓, respectively. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: From Baseline (end of screening period) to Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
SuSBP <=90 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BLSuSBP >=180 and >40 mm Hg ↑ from BLStSBP <=90 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BLStSBP >=180 and >40 mm Hg ↑ from BLOSBP: ↓ >=30 mm Hg Supine to StandingSuDBP <=50 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BLSuDBP >=105 and >30 mm Hg ↑ from BLStDBP <=50 and >30 mm Hg ↓ from BLStDBP >=105 and >30 mm Hg ↑ from BLODBP: ↓ >=20 mm Hg Supine to StandingSuP <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BLSuP >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BLStP <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BLStP >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BLWeight <=7% ↓ from BLWeight >=7% ↑ from BL
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)31318113311000082

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG)

Terms abbreviated in the table include heart rate (HR) in beats per minute (bpm), PR interval (PRI), QT interval corrected for heart rate using Bazett's formula (QTcB), QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (QTcF), and baseline (BL). Increase and decrease are signified by ↑ and ↓, respectively. n = the number of participants with available data at each time point. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: From Baseline (end of screening period) to Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
HR <=50 and >30 bpm ↓ from BL (n=31)HR >=120 and >30 bpm ↑ from BL (n=31)PR Interval <120 msec (n=30)PR Interval >220 msec (n=30)QTcB Interval >480 msec (n=31)QTcB Interval >60 msec ↑ from BL (n=31)QTcF Interval >480 msec (n=31)QTcF Interval >60 msec ↑ from BL (n=31)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)00011101

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Clinical Chemistry Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include upper limit of normal (ULN), male (m), and female (f). (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: From Baseline (end of screening period) to Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Alanine Aminotransferase >3xULNAspartate Aminotransferase >3xULNGamma-glutamyl Transferase >3x ULNAlkaline Phosphatase >400 U/LTotal Bilirubin >2xULNCreatine Phosphokinase >3x ULNCreatinine >177 µmol/LBlood Urea Nitrogen >10.8 mmol/LUric Acid>500µmol/L(f);>590µmol/L(m)Calcium <1.75 mmol/LCalcium >3.0 mmol/LSodium <126 mmol/LSodium >156 mmol/LPotassium <3.0 mmol/LPotassium >6.0 mmol/LNon-fasting Glucose <2.78 mmol/LNon-fasting Glucose >16.0 mmol/LAlbumin <25 g/LAlbumin >70 g/LTotal Protein <45 g/LCholesterol >12.9 mmol/LTriglycerides >5.6 mmol/LLactate dehydrogenase >3x ULN
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)11000002000001011100000

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Values for Hematology Parameters

Terms abbreviated in the table include females (f), males (m), and femtoliters (fL). (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: From Baseline (end of screening period) to Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Haemoglobin <90 g/L (f); <100 g/L (m)Haematocrit <30% (f); <34% (m)Red Blood Cells <2.0 10^12/L (f); <2.5 10^12/L (m)Platelet Count <95 10^9/LPlatelet Count >700 10^9/LWhite Blood Cells <2.8 10^9/LWhite Blood Cells >16.0 10^9/LLymphocytes >80%Monocytes >30%Eosinophils >10%Mean Corpuscular Volume <60 fLMean Corpuscular Volume >120 fL
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)120100100100

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression - Change (CGI-I) Score at the Final PEG-J Visit

The CGI-I is a global assessment by the Investigator of the change in clinical status since the start of treatment. The CGI-I ratings are as follows: 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, 7 = very much worse. (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)1.9

[back to top]

Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) Score at the Final PEG-J Visit

"The PGI-C is a 7-point response scale. The subjects were to rate their change in status from Screening Visit 1 using the following 7-point scale: 1 = Very much improved, 2 = Much improved, 3 = Minimally improved, 4 = No change, 5 = Minimally worse, 6 = Much worse, 7 = Very much worse. The responses of Minimally improved, Much improved, and Very much improved on the PGI-C were used to define responders." (NCT01960842)
Timeframe: Final PEG-J Visit (up to week 12)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)2.0

[back to top]

Cocaine Treatment Outcome

Treatment effectiveness score based on number of positive urine drug screens (NCT02080819)
Timeframe: Baseline to 12 weeks

Interventionpositive drug screens (Mean)
Healthy Control0
Placebo14
Medication13

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to Infinity (Levodopa/Benserazide)

Levodopa pharmacokinetic parameters following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/benserazide administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 18 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Placebo2360.3
BIA 9-1067 5 mg2660.9
BIA 9-1067 15 mg3655.9
BIA 9-1067 50 mg3979.5

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to Infinity (Levodopa/Carbidopa)

Levodopa pharmacokinetic parameters following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 11 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Placebo1861.3
BIA 9-1067 5 mg2332.3
BIA 9-1067 15 mg2736.8
BIA 9-1067 50 mg3182.6

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to the Last Sampling Time at Which the Drug Concentration Was at or Above the Lower Limit of Quantification. (Levodopa/Benserazide)

Levodopa pharmacokinetic parameters following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/benserazide administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 18 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Placebo2278.8
BIA 9-1067 5 mg2549.8
BIA 9-1067 15 mg3521.1
BIA 9-1067 50 mg3819.7

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve (AUC) of Levodopa From Time Zero to the Last Sampling Time at Which the Drug Concentration Was at or Above the Lower Limit of Quantification. (Levodopa/Carbidopa)

AUC0-t - Area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of levodopa from time zero to the last sampling time following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 11 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Placebo1788.3
BIA 9-1067 5 mg2219.7
BIA 9-1067 15 mg2584.3
BIA 9-1067 50 mg2975.9

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Benserazide )

Levodopa pharmacokinetic parameters following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/benserazide administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 18 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Placebo1770.3
BIA 9-1067 5 mg1379.8
BIA 9-1067 15 mg2118.3
BIA 9-1067 50 mg1813.7

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Benserazide)

Levodopa pharmacokinetic parameters following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/benserazide administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 18 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionhours (Mean)
Placebo0.89
BIA 9-1067 5 mg1.08
BIA 9-1067 15 mg0.7
BIA 9-1067 50 mg1.08

[back to top]

Tmax - Time to Reach Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Carbidopa)

Tmax - Time to Reach maximum plasma concentration of levodopa following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 11 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionhours (Median)
Placebo0.78
BIA 9-1067 5 mg1
BIA 9-1067 15 mg0.95
BIA 9-1067 50 mg1

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa (Levodopa/Carbidopa)

Cmax - Maximum plasma concentration of levodopa following a single oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa administered 12 h after BIA 9-1067 (5 mg, 15 mg and 50 mg) or placebo on Day 11 (NCT02169414)
Timeframe: pre-dose and at the following times post-dose: 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 hours post-dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Placebo966.6
BIA 9-1067 5 mg1026.8
BIA 9-1067 15 mg1097.9
BIA 9-1067 50 mg1019.7

[back to top]

AUC0-∞ - Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time Zero up to Infinity With Extrapolation of the Terminal Phase

AUC0-∞ of levodopa (mean pharmacokinetic parameter) following first oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa on Day 12 with 25, 50 and 75 mg OPC or placebo and 200 mg Entacapone. (NCT02170376)
Timeframe: pre-first dose and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 h post-first and -second levodopa/carbidopa administration, and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 8.0 and 14.0 h post-third levodopa/carbidopa administration

,,,,
Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Post First DosePost Second DosePost Third Dose
ENT 200 mg275243674707
OPC 25 mg373249675614
OPC 50 mg336357275912
OPC 75 mg399862137177
Placebo230530703299

[back to top]

AUC0-5 - AUC Over 5 Hours

AUC0-5 - of levodopa (mean pharmacokinetic parameter) following first oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa on Day 12 with 25, 50 and 75 mg OPC or placebo and 200 mg Entacapone. (NCT02170376)
Timeframe: pre-first dose and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 h post-first and -second levodopa/carbidopa administration, and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 8.0 and 14.0 h post-third levodopa/carbidopa administration

,,,,
Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Post First DosePost Second DosePost Third Dose
ENT 200 mg204234463468
OPC 25 mg266536783802
OPC 50 mg238341513940
OPC 75 mg282945974882
Placebo198527742719

[back to top]

AUC0-t - Area Under the Plasma Concentration Versus Time Curve From Time Zero to the Time (t) Corresponding to the Last Quantifiable Concentration.

AUC0-t - of levodopa (mean pharmacokinetic parameter) following first oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa on Day 12 with 25, 50 and 75 mg OPC or placebo and 200 mg Entacapone. (NCT02170376)
Timeframe: pre-first dose and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 h post-first and -second levodopa/carbidopa administration, and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 8.0 and 14.0 h post-third levodopa/carbidopa administration

,,,,
Interventionng.h/mL (Mean)
Post First DosePost Second DosePost Third Dose
ENT 200 mg204134454366
OPC 25 mg266536785391
OPC 50 mg238341515685
OPC 75 mg282945976928
Placebo198527743123

[back to top]

Cmax - Maximum Plasma Concentration of Levodopa

Cmax - Maximum plasma concentration of levodopa (mean pharmacokinetic parameter) following first oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa on Day 12 with 25, 50 and 75 mg OPC or placebo and 200 mg Entacapone. (NCT02170376)
Timeframe: pre-first dose and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 h post-first and -second levodopa/carbidopa administration, and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 8.0 and 14.0 h post-third levodopa/carbidopa administration

,,,,
Interventionng/mL (Mean)
Post First DosePost Second DosePost Third Dose
ENT 200 mg87614371303
OPC 25 mg120316191393
OPC 50 mg103019741346
OPC 75 mg105721131658
Placebo104715501268

[back to top]

t1/2 - Terminal Plasma Half-life

t1/2 - Terminal plasma half-life of levodopa (mean pharmacokinetic parameter) following first oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa on Day 12 with 25, 50 and 75 mg OPC or placebo and 200 mg Entacapone. (NCT02170376)
Timeframe: pre-first dose and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 h post-first and -second levodopa/carbidopa administration, and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 8.0 and 14.0 h post-third levodopa/carbidopa administration

,,,,
InterventionHours (Mean)
Post First DosePost Second DosePost Third Dose
ENT 200 mg2.112.092.20
OPC 25 mg2.472.232.56
OPC 50 mg2.472.462.75
OPC 75 mg2.392.232.70
Placebo1.461.411.74

[back to top]

Tmax - Time of Occurrence of Maximum Plasma Concentration

Tmax - Time to Reach maximum plasma concentration of levodopa (mean pharmacokinetic parameter) following first oral administration of 100/25 mg levodopa/carbidopa on Day 12 with 25, 50 and 75 mg OPC or placebo and 200 mg Entacapone (NCT02170376)
Timeframe: pre-first dose and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 h post-first and -second levodopa/carbidopa administration, and at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 8.0 and 14.0 h post-third levodopa/carbidopa administration

,,,,
Interventionhours (Mean)
Post First DosePost Second DosePost Third Dose
ENT 200 mg1.130.9061.59
OPC 25 mg1.131.201.33
OPC 50 mg1.341.061.34
OPC 75 mg1.281.191.31
Placebo1.310.8751.69

[back to top]

PD Patient Diary

Change in total daily OFF times for 3 consecutive days prior to week 12 visit compared to 3 consecutive days prior to baseline visit. Participants recorded On or Off state in 30 minute intervals during waking hours. (NCT02240030)
Timeframe: post week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
CVT-301 Low Dose-0.58
CVT-301 High Dose-0.47
Placebo-0.48

[back to top]

Proportion of Patients Achieving Resolution of an OFF to an ON State Within 60 Minutes.

Examiner-assessed observation - Subject Achieving Resolution of an OFF to and ON state within 60 Minutes at TV4 - Observed (NCT02240030)
Timeframe: at week 12

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
CVT-301 Low Dose55
CVT-301 High Dose56
Placebo35

[back to top]

Proportion of Subjects Who Improved PGIC With CVT-301 vs. Placebo at Week 12

Patient Global impression of change at treatment visit 4 (week 12) by improvement category. Seven point Likert scale ranging from 1= much worse to 7= much better. (NCT02240030)
Timeframe: week 12

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
CVT-301 Low Dose61
CVT-301 High Dose70
Placebo45

[back to top]

Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III

Primary Efficacy Analysis: Change from Predose in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at 30 Minutes post-dose at Week 12 for CVT-301 High Dose versus Placebo (ITT Population). UPDRS Part III ranges from 0 minimum to 86 maximum, with lower scores indicating better movement. Units on a scale. (NCT02240030)
Timeframe: 30 minutes post-dose at week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
CVT-301 High Dose-9.83
Placebo-5.91

[back to top]

UPDRS Part III at 10 Min.

Change from Predose in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at 10 Minutes post-dose at Week 12 for CVT-301 High Dose versus Placebo (ITT Population). UPDRS Part III ranges from 0 minimum to 86 maximum, with lower scores indicating better movement. Units on a scale. (NCT02240030)
Timeframe: week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
CVT-301 Low Dose-5.16
CVT-301 High Dose-6.45
Placebo-4.18

[back to top]

UPDRS Part III Motor Score at 20 Minutes

Change from Predose in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score at 20 Minutes post-dose at Week 12 for CVT-301 High Dose versus Placebo (ITT Population) and CVT 301 Low Dose versus Placebo. UPDRS Part III ranges from 0 minimum to 86 maximum, with lower scores indicating better movement. Units on a scale. (NCT02240030)
Timeframe: at week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
CVT-301 Low Dose-8.47
CVT-301 High Dose-9.04
Placebo-6.49

[back to top]

Pulmonary Safety of CVT-301 Change From Baseline for FEV1.

To characterize the effects of CVT-301 on pulmonary safety, as assessed by spirometry FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) by treatment group and Treatment Visit (TV). This study was a 12-month, dose-level blinded, multi-center study of 2 inhaled dose levels of CVT-301 for the treatment of up to 5 OFF periods per day in PD (Parkinson's Disease) patients experiencing motor fluctuations (OFF periods). Baseline is defined as the last non-missing assessment before the first dose of CVT-301 in CVT-301-004 study and as the last non-missing assessment before the first dose of CVT-301 in CVT-301-004E study for the rest of the patients. (NCT02242487)
Timeframe: Change from baseline at 52 weeks

,
InterventionLiters (Mean)
BaselineTV3 (Week 12)TV4 (Week 24)TV5 (Week 36)TV6 (Week 52)
CVT-301 DL12.957-0.059-0.057-0.076-0.086
CVT-301 DL23.117-0.078-0.058-0.052-0.097

[back to top]

Count of Patients Achieving Resolution of an OFF to an ON State Within 60 Minutes.

Count of patients achieving resolution of an OFF to an ON state within 60 minutes after study drug is administered in the clinic, and maintaining the ON state at 60 minutes after study drug administration (per the examiner's subjective assessment). (NCT02242487)
Timeframe: At Treatment Visit - TV6 (Week 52)

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
CVT-301 DL178
CVT-301 DL292

[back to top]

Change From Baseline in OFF Time.

"Patient reported total daily OFF time and was assessed by the patient and recorded in the patient Diary. An OFF state is defined as the time when medication is not providing benefit with respect to mobility, slowness, and stiffness. OFF episodes may be heralded by non-motor symptoms (e.g., pain, anxiety) prior to the appearance of motor symptoms. Patients will record their ON and OFF states in their diaries at home." (NCT02242487)
Timeframe: Change from baseline through 12 months duration of outpatient use

,
InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
TV2 (Week 4)TV3 (Week 12)TV4 (Week 24)TV5 (Week 36)TV6 (Week 52)
CVT-301 DL1-0.33-0.23-0.65-0.49-0.70
CVT-301 DL2-0.55-0.38-0.73-0.92-0.88

[back to top]

Pulmonary Safety for CVT-301 Change From Baseline for (FEV1/FVC).

To characterize the effects of CVT-301 on pulmonary safety, as assessed by spirometry FEV1/FVC (FEV1-forced expiratory volume in 1 second and (FVC) forced vital capacity ratio) by treatment group and Treatment Visit (TV). This study was a 12-month, dose-level blinded, multi-center study of 2 inhaled dose levels of CVT-301 for the treatment of up to 5 OFF periods per day in PD (Parkinson's Disease) patients experiencing motor fluctuations (OFF periods). Baseline is defined as the last non-missing assessment before the first dose of CVT-301 in CVT-301-004 study and as the last non-missing assessment before the first dose of CVT-301 in CVT-301-004E study for the rest of the patients. (NCT02242487)
Timeframe: Change from baseline at 52 weeks

,
InterventionRatio % (Mean)
BaselineTV3 (Week 12)TV4 (Week 24)TV5 (Week 36)TV6 (Week 52)
CVT-301 DL177.2-0.2-0.3-0.3-0.2
CVT-301 DL277.2-0.3-0.3-0.3-0.7

[back to top]

Pulmonary Safety for CVT-301 Change From Baseline for FVC.

To characterize the effects of CVT-301 on pulmonary safety, as assessed by spirometry FVC, (forced vital capacity) by treatment group and Treatment Visit (TV). This study was a 12-month, dose-level blinded, multi-center study of 2 inhaled dose levels of CVT-301 for the treatment of up to 5 OFF periods per day in PD patients experiencing motor fluctuations (OFF periods). Baseline is defined as the last non-missing assessment before the first dose of CVT-301 in CVT-301-004 study and as the last non-missing assessment before the first dose of CVT-301 in CVT-301-004E study for the rest of the patients. (NCT02242487)
Timeframe: Change from baseline at 52 weeks

,
InterventionLiter (Mean)
BaselineTV3 (Week 12)TV4 (Week 24)TV5 (Week 36)TV6 (Week 52)
CVT-301 DL13.840-0.064-0.053-0.089-0.106
CVT-301 DL24.045-0.086-0.062-0.050-0.089

[back to top]

Pulmonary Safety Assessed by Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second [FEV1]

To characterize the pulmonary safety, as assessed by spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1], over a 12 month period. (NCT02352363)
Timeframe: Month 12 reported

InterventionLiters (Mean)
CVT-3012.778
Observational Cohort2.767

[back to top]

Pulmonary Safety Assessed by Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second / Forced Vital Capacity Ratio.

To characterize the pulmonary safety, as assessed by spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 second / forced vital capacity ratio). (NCT02352363)
Timeframe: Month 12 reported

InterventionRatio (%) (Mean)
CVT-30178.1
Observational Cohort76.1

[back to top]

Pulmonary Safety Assessed by Forced Vital Capacity [FVC].

To characterize the pulmonary safety, as assessed by spirometry (forced vital capacity). (NCT02352363)
Timeframe: Month 12 reported

InterventionLiters (Mean)
CVT-3013.558
Observational Cohort3.642

[back to top]

Diffusion Capacity of the Lungs for Carbon Monoxide (DLco).

To describe the effects of CVT-301 on diffusion capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLco) over a 12-month period. (NCT02352363)
Timeframe: Month 12 reported

InterventionmL/min/mmHg (Mean)
CVT-30123.273
Observational Cohort23.473

[back to top]

Reaction Time Task (CANTAB) Neurocognitive Test

The reaction time test includes simple and choice reaction time tasks and is divided into 5 stages requiring increasingly complex chains of responses. The task provided distinction between reaction (or decision) time and movement latencies (milliseconds) based on touch responses made to a single (simple) or chosen from multiple (choice) stimuli flashed on a computer screen. Results show mean response latency in milliseconds. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and approximately 2-3 hours post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionmilliseconds (Mean)
Baseline Simple Motor TimeBaseline Choice Motor TimeBaseline Simple Reaction TimeBaseline Choice Reaction TimeVisit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Simple Motor TimeVisit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Choice Motor TimeVisit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Simple Reaction TimeVisit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Choice Reaction TimeVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Simple Motor TimeVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Choice Motor TimeVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Simple Reaction TimeVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo Choice Reaction Time
Placebo/Sinemet276.12299.57356.53394.82258.53284.94348.93385.03268.37296.94361.76396.68
Sinemet/Placebo266.92286.82360.84397.60240.62268.69256.99397.07241.28260.47358.59395.22

[back to top]

Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), Anhedonia Subscale Score

The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) is a widely used self-report for measuring depression severity over the past two weeks and the anhedonia subscale is one of several validated subscales in the BDI-II. Responses are given on a 4-point scale where 0 = the symptom of depression has not been experienced and 3 = the symptom of depression is severe. The anhedonia subscale score is created by summing responses to four items of the BDI-II that assess loss of pleasure, loss of interest, loss of energy, loss of sex drive. The total score of the anhedonia subscale ranges from 0 to 12 where higher scores reflect greater severity of anhedonia symptoms. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Visit 1: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 2: Pre drug/placebo (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Visit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet5.95.9
Sinemet/Placebo6.45.7

[back to top]

Change in Functional Corticostriatal Connectivity

Corticostriatal connectivity was assessed by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Resting-state and task-based (monetary incentive delay [MID]) fMRI scans were conducted on a 3 Tesla Siemens Trio MRI scanner. Subject-level correlations for degree of cortical and striatal functional connectivity were Fisher's Z transformed {Z(R)=0.5ln[(1+R)/(1-R)]}, a standard method for calculating fMRI functional connectivity. Greater Fisher's Z-scores reflected stronger correlated fMRI activity (i.e., higher corticostriatal connectivity). (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Scans approximately 45 min post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
InterventionZ-score (Mean)
Visit 1 resting corticostriatal connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)Visit 2 resting corticostriatal connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)Visit 1 resting corticostriatal connectivity post drug/placeboVisit 2 resting corticostriatal connectivity post drug/placeboVisit 1 task (reward anticipation) corticostriatal connectivity post drug/placeboVisit 2 task (reward anticipation) corticostriatal connectivity post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet0.040.000.240.170.00-0.03
Sinemet/Placebo0.100.070.220.240.02-0.04

[back to top]

Change in Motivation and Pleasure (MAP) Scale Score

The motivation and pleasure (MAP) questionnaire is an 18-item self-report inventory that was created to disentangle state-wise motivational and consummatory components of everyday activities over a 24-hour period. This scale was used to assess self-reported changes in symptoms of anhedonia before and after inflammation blockade. Respondents respond to statements about daily activities on a scale from 0 (no pleasure/not at all) to 4 (extreme pleasure/very often). Total scores range from 0 to 72 where higher scores indicate greater motivation and effort given to everyday situations. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Visit 1: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo, Visit 2: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Visit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet26.625.425.125.1
Sinemet/Placebo25.526.928.929.2

[back to top]

Correlation Coefficient Between Change in Corticostriatal Connectivity and Levels of Plasma C-reactive Protein and Other Immune Markers

Peripheral blood samples were analyzed for levels of immune markers like plasma C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), soluble interleukin-6 receptor (sIL-6R), tumor necrosis factor (TNF) -alpha, soluble cytokine receptor2 (TNFR 2), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1 beta), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra), interleukin 10 (IL-10) and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1). (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Scans approximately 45 minutes post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
InterventionPearson's r Correlation Coefficient (Number)
CRP mg/L and Visit 1 resting connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)CRP mg/L and Visit 2 resting connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)CRP mg/L and Visit 1 resting connectivity post drug/placeboCRP mg/L and Visit 2 resting connectivity post drug/placeboCRP mg/L and Visit 1 task (reward anticipation) connectivity post drug/placeboCRP mg/L and Visit 2 task (reward anticipation) connectivity post drug/placeboCRP > vs. < 2 mg/ and Visit 1 resting connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)CRP > vs. < 2 mg/L and Visit 2 resting connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)CRP > vs. < 2 mg/L and Visit 1 resting connectivity post drug/placeboCRP > vs. < 2 mg/L and Visit 2 resting connectivity post drug/placeboCRP > vs. < 2 mg/L and Visit 1 task (reward anticipation) connectivity post drug/placeboCRP > vs. < 2 mg/L and Visit 2 task (reward anticipation) connectivity post drug/placeboSum of cytokine Z scores and Visit 1 resting connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)Sum of cytokine Z scores and Visit 2 resting connectivity response to drug/placebo (post minus pre)Sum of cytokine Z scores and Visit 1 resting connectivity post drug/placeboSum of cytokine Z scores and Visit 2 resting connectivity post drug/placeboSum of cytokine Z scores and Visit 1 task (reward anticipation) connectivity post drug/placeboSum of cytokine Z scores and Visit 2 task (reward anticipation) connectivity post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet-0.150.440.150.41-0.310.250.040.520.170.38-0.350.48-0.050.29-0.050.08-0.34-0.18
Sinemet/Placebo0.36-0.120.10-0.100.490.100.20-0.330.12-0.310.22-0.180.40-0.140.15-0.220.260.04

[back to top]

Digit Symbol Task Neurocognitive Test

The Digit Symbol Task was used to assess graphomotor speed, visual scanning and memory processing speed involving numbers and a corresponding blank box where subjects are asked to fill in matching symbol as fast as they can. Results show the average number of correct symbols completed in up to 100 boxes in 90 seconds. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and approximately 2-3 hours post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionnumber of correct symbols (Mean)
Baseline Visit (Task Practice)Visit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet54.964.566.4
Sinemet/Placebo52.061.366.6

[back to top]

Effort-Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT) Neurocognitive Test

The Effort-Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT) is a computer-based multi-trial task used to objectively assess motivation. Possible results range between 0 to1 with 1 being a better outcome. Results show mean probability of hard (high effort) choice. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and approximately 2-3 hours post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
InterventionProbability of hard/high effort choices (Mean)
Baseline Visit (Task Practice)Visit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet0.390.340.34
Sinemet/Placebo0.290.280.30

[back to top]

Finger Tapping Task (FTT) Neurocognitive Test

The Finger Tapping Task (FTT) assesses motor speed and can detect subtle motor impairment. The test measures the average number of taps per 10 second trial. A greater number of taps reflects faster motor speed. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and approximately 2-3 hours post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionnumber of taps (Mean)
Baseline Visit (Task Practice)Visit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet54.964.566.4
Sinemet/Placebo52.061.366.6

[back to top]

Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Self Report (IDS-SR) Questionnaire

The Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Self Report (IDS-SR) is a 30-item self-report instrument with excellent psychometric properties for measuring symptom constructs consistent with current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) nosology and that is widely used to measure depression severity in clinical trials. Response scores are summed and range from 0 to 84, with higher scores reflecting greater depression severity. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and Visit 1: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 2: Pre drug/placebo (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineVisit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet35.031.832.0
Sinemet/Placebo37.937.634.7

[back to top]

Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) Self-report Questionnaire

The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) is a 20-item self-report instrument designed to measure severity of fatigue based on five dimensions of fatigue, general fatigue, physical fatigue, mental fatigue, reduced motivation, and reduced activity. The total MFI scores range from 20 to 100 where high scores indicate greater fatigue. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineVisit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet72.774.274.1
Sinemet/Placebo74.776.775.7

[back to top]

Profile of Mood States (POMS) Scale

The Profile of Mood States (POMS) scale is a 30-item psychological rating scale used to assess transient, distinct mood states. Participants rate the extent to which they feel unhappy, blue, lonely, gloomy, and worthless on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). Scores range from 0 to 120 with higher scores reflecting a more negative mood state. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Visit 1: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo, Visit 2: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Visit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet57.051.556.251.0
Sinemet/Placebo60.254.053.048.5

[back to top]

Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) Self-report Questionnaire

"The Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), a 14-item self-report scale with high psychometric validity for assessing the presence of anhedonia, was used to assess hedonic capacity. Participants rated how much they agreed or disagreed with the 14 items phrased as I would enjoy __ based on their ability to experience pleasure. Of the four possible response categories (Definitely Agree, Agree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree), either of the Disagree responses received a score of 1 and either of the Agree responses received a score of 0. The SHAPS score calculated as the sum of these 14 items ranged from 0 to 14, and higher SHAPS scores indicated greater anhedonia." (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Visit 1: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo, Visit 2: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Visit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet5.84.64.93.9
Sinemet/Placebo4.74.34.24.2

[back to top]

State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) State Scale

The 20-item self-report State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) State scale was used to measure severity of anxiety symptoms. Total scores range from 20 to 80 with higher scores reflecting greater anxiety. Scores in the high 40s are considered clinically significant. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: Visit 1: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo, Visit 2: Pre drug/placebo, Visit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Visit 1: Pre drug/placeboVisit 1: 1-2 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: Pre drug/placeboVisit 2: 1-2 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet46.542.245.943.0
Sinemet/Placebo52.149.251.343.4

[back to top]

The Trail Making Test (TMT) Neurocognitive Assessment

The Trail Making Test (TMT) is used to measure basic attention and psychomotor processing speed. Time taken to complete each task is recorded in seconds, whereby the greater the number of seconds, the slower the psychomotor speed. (NCT02513485)
Timeframe: At baseline and approximately 2-3 hours post drug/placebo administration at Visit 1, Visit 2 (spaced by approximately 1 week)

,
Interventionseconds (Mean)
Baseline Visit (Task Practice)Visit 1: 2-3 hrs post drug/placeboVisit 2: 2-3 hrs post drug/placebo
Placebo/Sinemet23.721.019.7
Sinemet/Placebo24.021.723.0

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the NMSS Total Score

The NMSS consists of 30 questions in 9 domains (cardiovascular/falls, sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, perceptual problems/hallucinations, attention/memory, GI tract, urinary, sexual function, miscellaneous). Score of each question is calculated by multiplying severity*frequency. Severity and frequency are rated using a scale ranging from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) for severity and from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent) for frequency. Total score is the sum of 9 domains, and ranges from 0 to 360, with a lower value indicating a more desirable outcome. Repeated-measure analysis. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment-23.83
LCIG-32.04

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the Modified PDSS-2 Total Score

The PDSS-2 addresses PD-specific sleep disturbances such as restless leg syndrome (RLS), morning akinesia, pain, and sleep apnea. The frequency is assessed for the 15 sleep problems based on a 5-point Likert-type scale (ranging from 0 [never] to 4 [very often]). Scores are calculated for each of the 3 domains (motor symptoms at night, PD symptoms at night, and disturbed sleep) as well as a total score. The PDSS-2 domain scores range from 0 to 20 and the total score is a sum of the 3 domains and ranges from 0 to 60. Repeated measure analysis. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment-8.98
LCIG-7.41

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 26 in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-8) Summary Index Score

The PDQ-8 is a disease-specific instrument designed to measure aspects of health relevant to PD. Eight questions including the mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort are assessed on a 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable). Summary index score is the sum of each question divided by 32 and multiplied by 100. Scores range from 0 to 100 with lower values desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment-1.75
LCIG-5.56

[back to top]

Change From Baseline at Week 26 in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score

UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease of 42 total questions. Part I (Questions 1 - 4), Part II (Questions 5 - 17), Part III (Questions 18 - 31), and Part IV (Questions 32 - 42). Questions 35 - 38 and 40 - 42 are 2-point (0 and 1), all other questions are 5-point (0 - 4). Part II scores range from 0 to 52 with lower value desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment0.53
LCIG-2.26

[back to top]

Change From Baseline at Week 26 in Parkinson's Anxiety Scale (PAS) Total Score

PAS is a 12-item scale developed specifically to measure severity in anxiety in Parkinson's disease for the following items: Feeling anxious or nervous; Feeling tense or stressed; Being unable to relax; Excessive worrying about everyday matters; Fear of something bad, or even the worst, happening; Panic or intense fear; Shortness of breath; Heart palpitations or heart beating fast; Fear of losing control; Social situations; Public settings; Specific objects or situations. Severity for each item is rated as: 0, Never; 1 Rarely; 2, Sometimes; 3, Often; 4, Nearly always. Total score is the sum of the12 item scores, with a range of 0 to 48; a lower value is desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment-0.75
LCIG-2.29

[back to top]

Change From Baseline at Week 26 in Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) Score

"The GDS-15 is a short, self-report reliable and valid screening instrument for depression in the elderly of 15 yes/no questions: 1) Satisfied with life 2) Dropped many activities and interests 3) Life is empty 4) Often get bored 5) In good spirits most of the time 6) Afraid that something bad is going to happen 7) Feel happy most of the time 8) Often feel helpless 9) Prefer to stay at home, rather than going out and doing things 10) Feel that have more problems with memory than most 11) Think it is wonderful to be alive now 12) Feel worthless 13) Feel full of energy 14) Situation is hopeless 15) Most subjects are better off. Answers of 'yes' to questions 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15 are scored 1 point. Answers of 'no' to questions 1, 5, 7, 11, 13 are scored~1 point. The 15 items are summed and scores range from 0 - 15 with lower value desirable." (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment0.25
LCIG0.17

[back to top]

Change From Baseline at Week 26 in UPDRS Parts I, III, and IV Score

UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease of 42 total questions. Part I (Questions 1 - 4), Part II (Questions 5 - 17), Part III (Questions 18 - 31), and Part IV (Questions 32 - 42). Questions 35 - 38 and 40 - 42 are 2-point (0 and 1), all other questions are 5-point (0 - 4). Part I is the sum of Questions 1 - 4; scores range from 0 to 16 with lower value desirable. Part III is the sum of Questions 18 - 31 (Questions 20 - 26 apply to multiple body parts, resulting in 27 answers total); scores range from 0 to 108 with lower value desirable. Part IV is the sum of Questions 32 - 42; scores range from 0 to 23 with lower value desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Part IPart IIIPart IV
LCIG0.39-0.89-2.31
Optimized Medical Treatment0.201.32-0.61

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the NMSS Domain Scores

The NMSS consists of 30 questions in 9 domains. Score of each question is calculated by multiplying severity*frequency. Severity and frequency are rated using a scale ranging from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) for severity and from 1 (rarely) to 4 (very frequent) for frequency. Cardiovascular/falls scores range from 0 - 24 with lower value desirable. Sleep/fatigue scores range from 0 - 48 with lower value desirable. Mood/cognition scores range from 0 - 72 with lower value desirable. Perceptual problems/hallucinations scores range from 0 - 36 with lower value desirable. Attention/memory scores range from 0 - 36 with lower value desirable. Gastrointestinal tract scores range from 0 - 36 with lower value desirable. Urinary scores range from 0 - 36 with lower value desirable. Sexual function scores range from 0 - 24 with lower value desirable. Miscellaneous scores range from 0 - 48 with lower value desirable. Repeated-measure analysis. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Cardiovascular including fallsSleep/fatigueMood/cognitionPerceptual problems/hallucinationsAttention/memoryGastrointestinal tractUrinarySexual functionMiscellaneous
LCIG-1.76-6.06-7.84-1.14-2.15-3.43-4.830.10-5.16
Optimized Medical Treatment-1.84-7.11-5.99-1.53-1.20-0.85-3.650.88-3.87

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 26 in the Modified PDSS-2 Domain Scores

The PDSS-2 addresses PD-specific sleep disturbances such as restless leg syndrome (RLS), morning akinesia, pain, and sleep apnea. The frequency is assessed for the 15 sleep problems based on a 5-point Likert-type scale (ranging from 0 [never] to 4 [very often]). Scores are calculated for each of the 3 domains (motor symptoms at night, PD symptoms at night, and disturbed sleep) as well as a total score. The PDSS-2 domain scores range from 0 to 20 and the total score is a sum of the 3 domains and ranges from 0 to 60. Repeated measure analysis. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Motor symptoms at nightPD symptoms at nightDisturbed sleep
LCIG-2.79-1.53-2.89
Optimized Medical Treatment-2.21-1.77-4.88

[back to top]

Change From Baseline at Week 26 in King's PD Pain Scale (KPPS) Score

The KPPS score is a clinical PD-specific pain scale of 14 items addressing the following 7 domains: musculoskeletal pain, chronic pain, fluctuation-related pain, nocturnal pain, orofacial pain, neuropathic pain, radicular pain. Each domain item is scored by severity (0, none to 3, very severe) multiplied by frequency (0, never to 4, all the time) resulting in a subscore of 0 - 12 (with lower value desirable), the sum of the 14 items gives the total score with a range from 0 to 168 with lower value desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 26

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Total scoreMusculoskeletal Pain ScoreChronic pain scoreFluctuation related pain scoreNocturnal pain scoreOrofacial pain scoreDiscoloration and edema scoreRadicular pain score
LCIG-12.46-1.79-0.77-3.14-2.78-0.87-2.27-1.47
Optimized Medical Treatment-11.32-1.72-0.84-3.77-2.41-0.74-0.47-1.43

[back to top]

Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Final Score

The PGIC is a 7-point response scale. The participant was asked by the Investigator or qualified designee to rate their change in status using the following 7-point scale: 1 = Very much improved, 2 = Much improved, 3 = Minimally improved, 4 = No change, 5 = Minimally worse, 6 = Much worse, 7 = Very much worse. PGIC score ranges from 1 to 7 with lower score desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: End of Treatment Period (up to Week 26)

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment4.9
LCIG2.5

[back to top]

Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Final Score

CGI-C score is a clinician's impression of a subject's change in status on a 7-point scale (1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally Improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, 7 = very much worse). Scores range from 1 to 7, with lower score desirable. (NCT02549092)
Timeframe: End of Treatment Period (up to Week 26)

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment4.9
LCIG2.5

[back to top]

Functional Activation of Anterior Cingulate Cortex

Differential functional activation of the anterior cingulate cortex will be assessed with respect to the conditioned stimulus versus the control stimulus. The investigators will compare, at an aggregate level, the differential functional activation between the placebo, 100 mg, and 200 mg L-DOPA groups. (NCT02560389)
Timeframe: Within 30 days of the MRI

Interventionpercentage change (Mean)
Placebo0.08
100mg L-DOPA0.09
200mg L-DOPA0.07

[back to top]

Percentage Change in Functional Activation of Amygdala

"Amygdala is the part of the brain which controls emotions, survival instincts, and memory. PTSD patients exhibit hyperactivity in the amygdala in response to stimuli.~Differential functional activation of the amygdala will be assessed with respect to the conditioned stimulus versus the control stimulus. The investigators will compare, at an aggregate level, the differential functional activation between the placebo, 100 mg, and 200 mg L-DOPA groups." (NCT02560389)
Timeframe: Within 30 days of the MRI

InterventionPercentage change (Mean)
Placebo-0.1
100mg L-DOPA-0.06
200mg L-DOPA-0.05

[back to top]

Galvanic Skin Response

Differential galvanic skin response will be assessed with respect to the conditioned stimulus versus the control stimulus. The investigators will compare, at an aggregate level, the differential galvanic skin response between the placebo, 100 mg, and 200 mg L-DOPA groups. (NCT02560389)
Timeframe: Within 30 days of the MRI

InterventionUnitless (Mean)
Placebo.37
100mg L-DOPA.29
200mg L-DOPA.36

[back to top]

Change in Morning UPDRS Part III (Motor) Scores

The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. UPDRS part III (motor) score is calculated as the sum of the individual UPDRS items 18-31, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (i.e., 0 is normal and 4 indicates a severe abnormality). UPDRS part III was done as a motor examination on Day 1 before the first dose of standard oral LD/DDI and at the same time on Day 28. The range of score values is from 0 to 132. Higher scores correlate with greater motor impairment. (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion-19.1
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion-10.7

[back to top]

"Change in Daily Good ON Time as Assessed by a Blinded Rater"

"Based on Parkinson's disease symptom assessment, ON time is when there is good response to medication and few symptoms. OFF time is when no there is no response to medication and significant motor symptoms. Good ON time means ON time without troublesome dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movement), defined as the sum of ON time without dyskinesia and ON time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. An ON/OFF Log was completed by a blinded rater starting before the first dose of LD/DDI and following the first dose at 30 min intervals for 8 hrs. Daily total scores were normalized to 16 hours of awake time. Positive change from baseline for ON time without dyskinesia and for Good ON time, and a negative change in ON time with moderate or severe (troublesome) dyskinesia indicates improvement." (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion3.7
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion2.8

[back to top]

"Change in Daily OFF Time"

"Based on Parkinson's disease symptom assessment, ON time is when there is good response to medication and few symptoms. OFF time is when no there is no response to medication and significant motor symptoms. An ON/OFF Log was completed by a blinded rater starting before the first dose of LD/DDI and following the first dose at 30 min intervals for 8 hrs. The changes in OFF time as hours (normalized to 16 hrs of awake time) during the 8 hrs of data collection were estimated. Negative change from baseline for OFF time indicates improvement." (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

InterventionHours (Least Squares Mean)
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion-2.8
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion-1.3

[back to top]

CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) Score as Assessed by Investigator

"Global improvement was rated by the investigator or designee using Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I). The CGI-I employs a 7-point scale with 1 being very much improved and 7 being very much worse for improvement rating." (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Day 3: Subjects with improvementsDay 28: Subjects with improvementsCGI-I score on Day 28: Very much improvedCGI-I score on Day 28: Much improvedCGI-I score on Day 28: Minimally improvedCGI-I score on Day 28: No changeCGI-I score on Day 28: Minimally worseCGI-I score on Day 28: Much worseCGI-I score on Day 28: Very much worse
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion10145631100
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion9132745000

[back to top]

Change in PDQ-39 Summary Index and the 8-dimension Scores

Subjects were requested to rate their quality of life using the Quality of Life in Parkinson's Disease (PDQ)-39, a 39-item, self-administered questionnaire with 8 discrete dimensions (mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, communication, and bodily discomfort.). The PDQ-39 Summary Index is the sum of the dimension scores divided by the number of dimensions. The total score values range from 0 to 100%. Higher scores indicate a worse quality of life. (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 27

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion-7.5
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion-3.7

[back to top]

Change in PDSS-2 Total Score

The quality of night sleep was rated by the subjects using the Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS)-2, which includes questions addressing 15 commonly reported symptoms associated with sleep disturbance in PD. Each question is assessed from 0 (Always) to 10 (Never). The total score values range from 0 to 150. Higher scores indicate a lower quality of sleep, i.e., a reduction in the score indicates an improvement in sleep quality. (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 27

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion-4.1
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion-0.8

[back to top]

Change in UPDRS Part II (ADL) Scores

The Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (UPDRS) is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The UPDRS Part II (activity of daily living) score was calculated as the sum of the individual UPDRS items 5-17. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions that comprise Part II, each of which are measured on a 5-point scale (i.e., 0 is normal and 4 indicates a severe abnormality). The range of score values is from 0 to 52. Higher scores correlate with greater impairments for daily activities. (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion-2.9
ND0612 Regimen 2 - 14-hr Infusion-1.9

[back to top]

"Percentage of Subjects Who Achieved at Least Certain Percent Reduction in Average Daily Normalized OFF Time"

"Determination of percentage of subjects who had a complete and 50% reduction in daily OFF time from baseline to Day 28 during 8 hrs observations." (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
"Subjects who Achieved 50% reduction in average daily normalized OFF time""Subjects who Achieved complete reduction in average daily normalized OFF"
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion128

[back to top]

"The Percentage of Subjects With Full ON at Approximately 08:00 and Approximately 09:00, as Determined by the Subject"

"Based on Parkinson's disease symptom assessment, ON time is when there is good response to medication and few symptoms. OFF time is when no there is no response to medication and significant motor symptoms. Subjects were asked to indicate when exactly in their opinion they had turned to full ON (i.e. an ON response comparable to the ON response to standard oral LD/DDI treatment). Higher percentage of subjects with full ON on Day 28 indicates improvement." (NCT02577523)
Timeframe: Baseline to Day 28

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
"Baseline: Full ON by 8:00""Baseline: Full ON by 9:00""Day 28: Full ON by 8:00""Day 28: Full ON by 9:00"
ND0612 Regimen 1 - 24-hr Infusion37713

[back to top]

Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (24 Item)

Our target is depressive symptomatology as measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD). The HRSD is a 24-item questionnaire used as an indication of depression and a guide to evaluate recovery. Total scores range from 0-74, not including atypical symptoms sub-scale. A score of 16 or above is typically considered to indicate the presence of depressive symptoms. Higher scores indicate greater severity. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

InterventionUnits on a Scale (Mean)
L-DOPA10.94

[back to top]

Pattern Comparison

"This test required participants to identify whether two visual patterns are the same or not the same (responses were made by pressing a yes or no button). Patterns were either identical or varied on one of three dimensions: color (all ages), adding/taking something away (all ages), or one versus many. Scores reflected the number of correct items (of a possible 130) completed in 90 s; items were designed to minimize the number of errors that were made." (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Screening

Interventiontotal score (Mean)
L-DOPA24.72

[back to top]

Pattern Comparison

"This test required participants to identify whether two visual patterns are the same or not the same (responses were made by pressing a yes or no button). Patterns were either identical or varied on one of three dimensions: color (all ages), adding/taking something away (all ages), or one versus many. Scores reflected the number of correct items (of a possible 130) completed in 90 s; items were designed to minimize the number of errors that were made." (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

Interventiontotal score (Mean)
L-DOPA27.61

[back to top]

Post-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Limbic Striatum

Subjects received 2 [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) scans: baseline and post-L-DOPA treatment. High resolution anatomical T1-weighted MRI scans were acquired for each subject and PET data were co-registered to the MRIs using maximization of mutual information (SPM12, Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging). Regions of interest (ROIs) were applied to the MRIs and transferred to the PET data and included the sensorimotor striatum (post-commissural putamen, SMST), associative striatum (whole caudate and pre-commissural putamen, AST) and the limbic striatum (nucleus accumbens and the most ventral aspects of the pre-commissural caudate and putamen, LST). Additionally, an ROI was drawn on cerebellum as a reference tissue. ROI time activity curves were derived as the average activity in each ROI in each frame. The primary outcome measure was BPND, the binding potential with respect to the non-displaceable compartment, derived by the simplified reference tissue model. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

InterventionmCi/ ml (Mean)
L-DOPA2.04

[back to top]

Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report

Rating scale for depressive symptoms based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) criteria that has been increasingly used in antidepressant studies due to its equivalent weightings for each item, understandable anchor points, and inclusion of all Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria. Patients will be asked to circle the one response to each item that best describes them for the past seven days. The answers range 0-84. The higher the score the greater the depressive symptoms. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

Interventiontotal score (Mean)
L-DOPA15.09

[back to top]

Post-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Sensorimotor Striatum

Subjects received 2 [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) scans: baseline and post-L-DOPA treatment. High resolution anatomical T1-weighted MRI scans were acquired for each subject and PET data were co-registered to the MRIs using maximization of mutual information (SPM12, Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging). Regions of interest (ROIs) were applied to the MRIs and transferred to the PET data and included the sensorimotor striatum (post-commissural putamen, SMST), associative striatum (whole caudate and pre-commissural putamen, AST) and the limbic striatum (nucleus accumbens and the most ventral aspects of the pre-commissural caudate and putamen, LST). Additionally, an ROI was drawn on cerebellum as a reference tissue. ROI time activity curves were derived as the average activity in each ROI in each frame. The primary outcome measure was BPND, the binding potential with respect to the non-displaceable compartment, derived by the simplified reference tissue model. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

InterventionmCi/ ml (Mean)
L-DOPA2.19

[back to top]

Pre-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Associative Striatum

Subjects received 2 [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) scans: baseline and post-L-DOPA treatment. High resolution anatomical T1-weighted MRI scans were acquired for each subject and PET data were co-registered to the MRIs using maximization of mutual information (SPM12, Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging). Regions of interest (ROIs) were applied to the MRIs and transferred to the PET data and included the sensorimotor striatum (post-commissural putamen, SMST), associative striatum (whole caudate and pre-commissural putamen, AST) and the limbic striatum (nucleus accumbens and the most ventral aspects of the pre-commissural caudate and putamen, LST). Additionally, an ROI was drawn on cerebellum as a reference tissue. ROI time activity curves were derived as the average activity in each ROI in each frame. The primary outcome measure was BPND, the binding potential with respect to the non-displaceable compartment, derived by the simplified reference tissue model. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Baseline

InterventionmCi/ ml (Mean)
L-DOPA2.17

[back to top]

Pre-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Limbic Striatum

Subjects received 2 [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) scans: baseline and post-L-DOPA treatment. High resolution anatomical T1-weighted MRI scans were acquired for each subject and PET data were co-registered to the MRIs using maximization of mutual information (SPM12, Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging). Regions of interest (ROIs) were applied to the MRIs and transferred to the PET data and included the sensorimotor striatum (post-commissural putamen, SMST), associative striatum (whole caudate and pre-commissural putamen, AST) and the limbic striatum (nucleus accumbens and the most ventral aspects of the pre-commissural caudate and putamen, LST). Additionally, an ROI was drawn on cerebellum as a reference tissue. ROI time activity curves were derived as the average activity in each ROI in each frame. The primary outcome measure was BPND, the binding potential with respect to the non-displaceable compartment, derived by the simplified reference tissue model. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Baseline

InterventionmCi/ ml (Mean)
L-DOPA2.04

[back to top]

Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report

Rating scale for depressive symptoms based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) criteria that has been increasingly used in antidepressant studies due to its equivalent weightings for each item, understandable anchor points, and inclusion of all Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria. Patients will be asked to circle the one response to each item that best describes them for the past seven days. The answers range 0-84. The higher the score the greater the depressive symptoms. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Screening

Interventiontotal score (Mean)
L-DOPA26.42

[back to top]

Single Task Gait Speed

Patients' gait will be assessed as walking speed in m/s on a 15' walking course. Patients are instructed to walk at their usual or normal speed for a total of 27' (starting and ending at a point 6 feet prior to and after the 15' course to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects). Two trials will be completed, and gait speed will be based on the average of 2 trials. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Screening

Interventionm/s (Mean)
L-DOPA0.80

[back to top]

Single Task Gait Speed

Patients' gait will be assessed as walking speed in m/s on a 15' walking course. Patients are instructed to walk at their usual or normal speed for a total of 27' (starting and ending at a point 6 feet prior to and after the 15' course to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects). Two trials will be completed, and gait speed will be based on the average of 2 trials. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

Interventionm/s (Mean)
L-DOPA.92

[back to top]

Letter Comparison

Subjects will be asked to determine whether two strings of letters are the same or different. There are 3 pages and the subject is given 30 seconds per page. Scoring is based on the number answered correctly. The higher the number, the better the score. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Screening

InterventionTotal Correct (Mean)
L-DOPA14.36

[back to top]

Digit Symbol Substitution Test

Digit symbol substitution test (DSST) is a neuropsychological test sensitive to brain damage, dementia, age and depression. The test is not sensitive to the location of brain-damage (except for damage comprising part of the visual field). It consists of (e.g. nine) digit-symbol pairs (e.g. 1/-,2/┴ ... 7/Λ,8/X,9/=) followed by a list of digits. Under each digit the subject should write down the corresponding symbol as fast as possible. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time (e.g. 90 or 120 sec) is measured. The higher the number, the better the score. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Screening

Interventiontotal score (Mean)
L-DOPA31.86

[back to top]

Pre-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Sensorimotor Striatum

Subjects received 2 [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) scans: baseline and post-L-DOPA treatment. High resolution anatomical T1-weighted MRI scans were acquired for each subject and PET data were co-registered to the MRIs using maximization of mutual information (SPM12, Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging). Regions of interest (ROIs) were applied to the MRIs and transferred to the PET data and included the sensorimotor striatum (post-commissural putamen, SMST), associative striatum (whole caudate and pre-commissural putamen, AST) and the limbic striatum (nucleus accumbens and the most ventral aspects of the pre-commissural caudate and putamen, LST). Additionally, an ROI was drawn on cerebellum as a reference tissue. ROI time activity curves were derived as the average activity in each ROI in each frame. The primary outcome measure was BPND, the binding potential with respect to the non-displaceable compartment, derived by the simplified reference tissue model. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Baseline

InterventionmCi/ ml (Mean)
L-DOPA2.43

[back to top]

Digit Symbol Substitution Test

Digit symbol substitution test (DSST) is a neuropsychological test sensitive to brain damage, dementia, age and depression. The test is not sensitive to the location of brain-damage (except for damage comprising part of the visual field). It consists of (e.g. nine) digit-symbol pairs (e.g. 1/-,2/┴ ... 7/Λ,8/X,9/=) followed by a list of digits. Under each digit the subject should write down the corresponding symbol as fast as possible. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time (e.g. 90 or 120 sec) is measured. The higher the number, the better the score. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

Interventiontotal score (Mean)
L-DOPA41.42

[back to top]

Dual Task Gait Speed

For the Dual Task, patients are instructed to walk at their usual pace while simultaneously verbally listing as many animals as possible. In addition, a counting Dual Task will be used in which patients are instructed to walk at their usual pace while simultaneously performing serial subtractions by three starting at 100. Patients will start and end at a point 2 meters from the Gaitrite mat to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects. Dual Task will be assessed two times with the average used in the analyse. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

Interventionm/s (Mean)
L-DOPA0.82

[back to top]

Dual Task Gait Speed

For the Dual Task, patients are instructed to walk at their usual pace while simultaneously verbally listing as many animals as possible. In addition, a counting Dual Task will be used in which patients are instructed to walk at their usual pace while simultaneously performing serial subtractions by three starting at 100. Patients will start and end at a point 2 meters from the Gaitrite mat to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects. Dual Task will be assessed two times with the average used in the analyses (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Screening

Interventionm/s (Mean)
L-DOPA0.69

[back to top]

Letter Comparison

Subjects will be asked to determine whether two strings of letters are the same or different. There are 3 pages and the subject is given 30 seconds per page. Scoring is based on the number answered correctly. The higher the number, the better the score. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

InterventionTotal Correct (Mean)
L-DOPA15.69

[back to top]

Post-Treatment [11C]-Raclopride Binding Potential: Associative Striatum

Subjects received 2 [11C]-raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) scans: baseline and post-L-DOPA treatment. High resolution anatomical T1-weighted MRI scans were acquired for each subject and PET data were co-registered to the MRIs using maximization of mutual information (SPM12, Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging). Regions of interest (ROIs) were applied to the MRIs and transferred to the PET data and included the sensorimotor striatum (post-commissural putamen, SMST), associative striatum (whole caudate and pre-commissural putamen, AST) and the limbic striatum (nucleus accumbens and the most ventral aspects of the pre-commissural caudate and putamen, LST). Additionally, an ROI was drawn on cerebellum as a reference tissue. ROI time activity curves were derived as the average activity in each ROI in each frame. The primary outcome measure was BPND, the binding potential with respect to the non-displaceable compartment, derived by the simplified reference tissue model. (NCT02744391)
Timeframe: Week 3

InterventionmCi/ ml (Mean)
L-DOPA2.05

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS) Total Score

The Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS) is a tool used to assess dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease (PD) and contains both self-evaluation questions and items that are assessed directly by the physician to objectively rate the abnormal movements associated with PD. Part 1 contains 11 questions about the ON time dyskinesia and the impact of ON-dyskinesia on experiences of daily living. Part 2 contains 4 questions about OFF-dystonia rating. Part 3 contains 7 questions about objective evaluation of dyskinesia impairment and Part 4 contains 4 questions regarding dyskinesia disability. Each question is scored with respect to severity, which is rated on a scale where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3= moderate and 4 = severe. The UDysRS total score is obtained by summing the item scores, ranging from 0 to 104. Higher scores are associated with more disability. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)-2.33
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)-17.37

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-8 (PDQ-8) Summary Index

The Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-8 (PDQ-8) is a disease-specific instrument designed to measure aspects of health that are relevant to participants with PD, and which may not be included in general health status questionnaires. The PDQ-8 is a self-administered questionnaire. Each item is scored on the following 5-point scale: 0 = Never, 1 = Occasionally, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, 4 = Always (or cannot do at all, if applicable). Higher scores are consistently associated with the more severe symptoms of the disease such as tremors and stiffness. The results are presented as a summary index. The PDQ-8 summary index ranges from 0 to 100, where lower scores indicate a better perceived health status. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)-4.95
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)-21.62

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III Score (Motor Examination)

The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part III score is the sum of the 27 answers related to Motor Examination, and ranges from 0-108. Higher scores are associated with more disability. Negative values indicate improvement from baseline. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)-0.87
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)-4.93

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in ON Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia

The Parkinson's Disease (PD) Symptom Diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected study visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e., 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. ON time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug, and OFF time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. Positive change from baseline for ON time without troublesome dyskinesia indicates improvement. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)-0.12
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)3.15

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in OFF Time

The Parkinson's Disease (PD) Symptom Diary is completed every 30 minutes for the full 24 hours of each of 3 days prior to selected study visits. It reflects both time awake and time asleep. Daily totals are normalized to a 16-hour scale (i.e., 16 hours of awake time). The normalized totals for the 3 days prior to the visit are averaged for the analysis. ON time is when PD symptoms are well controlled by the drug, and OFF time is when PD symptoms are not adequately controlled by the drug. Negative change from baseline for OFF time indicates improvement. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)0.18
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)-2.17

[back to top]

Mean Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) Score at Week 12

The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) score is a clinician's rating scale for assessing Global Improvement of Change. The CGI-C rates improvement by 7 categories: very much improved (1), much improved (2), minimally improved (3), no change (4), minimally worse (5), much worse (6), very much worse (7). The CGI-C score ranges from 1 to 7, with lower scores indicating improvement. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)4.58
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)2.48

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part II Score (Activities of Daily Living)

The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) is an Investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of Parkinson's disease. The Part II score is the sum of the answers to the 13 questions related to Activities of Daily Living, and ranges from 0-52. Higher scores are associated with more disability. Negative values indicate improvement from baseline. (NCT02799381)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Optimized Medical Treatment (OMT)0.21
Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG)-5.33

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate RR Interval - Part B

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217823.0-19.067.5-32.5-10.07.0-23.5-24.550.0-16.0-26.016.566.0

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate RR Interval - Part A

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmilliseconds (msec) (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217950.0-32.5-43.5-99.0-98.5-56.0-102.0-133.0-65.0-63.0-113.5-76.5-104.5-120.0-10.0-86.0

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate QTcF Interval - Part B

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217407.03.0-2.50.00.5-1.51.00.05.5-1.0-2.02.00.5

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate QTcF Interval - Part A

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 hours postdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217419.0-1.02.0-0.56.5-3.02.0-7.04.50.5-2.52.00.0-2.5-0.5-7.0

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate QT Interval - Part B

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217374.03.510.02.03.50.0-1.0-5.511.0-5.03.52.514.0

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate QT Interval - Part A

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217406.0-4.0-4.5-9.0-15.5-8.5-12.0-22.0-4.5-9.0-13.0-12.5-13.0-23.00.0-16.0

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate QRS Duration - Part B

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21799.50.0-1.0-1.50.0-0.5-1.51.5-3.5-0.5-1.0-1.00.5

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate QRS Duration - Part A

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21788.0-1.00.02.00.0-2.00.0-1.0-2.0-0.50.0-2.00.0-1.5-1.03.0

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate PR Interval - Part B

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217174.02.50.0-2.0-1.53.51.52.0-1.5-2.00.0-1.5-2.5

[back to top]

CFB in Aggregate PR Interval - Part A

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmilliseconds (msec) (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217158.02.0-2.0-2.0-8.0-1.0-6.0-1.0-3.0-5.0-1.5-1.0-2.5-2.0-2.5-8.0

[back to top]

CFB in Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time - Part B

Coagulation measures included activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin international normalized ratio and prothrombin time. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21725.05-0.40-0.05-0.30-0.20

[back to top]

CFB in Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time - Part A

Coagulation measures included activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin international normalized ratio and prothrombin time. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionseconds (sec) (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21724.800.20-0.25-0.10-1.10

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) - Part A

An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug in humans, whether or not considered drug-related. A TEAE was as an AE that occurred after the first administration of study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Day 1 to Day 326.7
Part A: SAGE-217 Day 4 to Day 7100
Part A: Follow-up13.3

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With TEAEs - Part B

An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug in humans, whether or not considered drug-related. A TEAE was as an AE that occurred after the first administration of study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21757.1
Part B: Follow-up0

[back to top]

CFB in ECG Mean Heart Rate - Part B

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionbeats/min (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21771.40.1-6.60.2-0.3-1.62.21.8-2.40.2-0.71.4-6.1

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With TEAEs, Graded by Severity - Part B

Severity was assessed according to the following scale: mild (awareness of sign or symptom, but easily tolerated); moderate (discomfort sufficient to cause interference with normal activities); severe (incapacitating, with inability to perform normal activities). The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
MildModerateSevere
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21742.914.30
Part B: Follow-up000

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With a Response of 'Yes' to Any Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Suicidal Ideation or Suicidal Behavior Item - Part A

"The C-SSRS scale consisted of a baseline evaluation (at screening) that assessed the lifetime experience of participants with suicidal ideation (SI) and suicidal behavior (SB) and a postbaseline evaluation that focused on suicidality since the last study visit. The C-SSRS included yes or no' responses for assessment of suicidal ideation and behavior as well as numeric ratings for the severity of ideation, if present (from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most severe). The C-SSRS SI items involved wish to be dead, non-specific active suicidal thoughts, active SI with any methods, active SI with some intent and active SI with a specific plan. The C-SSRS SB items involved actual attempt, interrupted attempt, aborted attempt, preparatory acts or behavior, suicidal behavior and suicide. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study." (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Suicidal Ideation: Pre-treatmentSuicidal Ideation: Post-treatmentSuicidal Behavior: Pre-treatmentSuicidal Behavior: Post-treatment
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170000

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With a Response of 'Yes' to Any C-SSRS Suicidal Ideation or Suicidal Behavior Item - Part B

"The C-SSRS scale consisted of a baseline evaluation (at screening) that assessed the lifetime experience of participants with suicidal ideation (SI) and suicidal behavior (SB) and a postbaseline evaluation that focused on suicidality since the last study visit. The C-SSRS included yes or no' responses for assessment of suicidal ideation and behavior as well as numeric ratings for the severity of ideation, if present (from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most severe). The C-SSRS SI items involved wish to be dead, non-specific active suicidal thoughts, active SI with any methods, active SI with some intent and active SI with a specific plan. The C-SSRS SB items involved actual attempt, interrupted attempt, aborted attempt, preparatory acts or behavior, suicidal behavior and suicide. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study." (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Suicidal Ideation: Wish to be Dead: Pre-treatmentSuicidal Ideation: Wish to be Dead: Post-treatmentSuicidal Behavior: Pre-treatmentSuicidal Behavior: Post-treatment
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21714.3000

[back to top]

MDS-UPDRS Part III Total Score - Part A

Part III of the MDS-UPDRS assessed 18 motor categories, some of which included right and left measurements: speech, facial expression, kinetic tremor of hands, rest tremor amplitude, postural tremor of hands, rigidity of neck and 4 extremities, finger taps, hand movement, pronation/supination, toe tapping, constancy of rest tremor, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, freezing of gait, postural stability, global spontaneity of movement. Part III total score was calculated as the sum of individual item scores from these categories. Each item was rated from 0 (normal) to 4 (severe). The total score range for Part III is 0 to 132. Lower scores indicate less symptom severity. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Days 1 to 7 (2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose), Day 8 and Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseDay 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseDay 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseDay 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 4 (SAGE-217):8 Hours PostdoseDay 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseDay 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseDay 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseDay 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseDay 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseDay 8 (Follow-up)Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21725.430.034.335.127.131.135.136.126.529.035.236.235.730.933.433.333.832.430.933.031.531.832.734.536.435.836.035.635.430.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline (CFB) in Basophils - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells per liter (10^9 cells/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.06-0.02-0.010.02-0.02

[back to top]

CFB in Urea Nitrogen - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2175.9932.1421.2750.6630.153

[back to top]

CFB in Urea Nitrogen - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2175.8310.5870.8160.663-0.048

[back to top]

CFB in Urate - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.291-0.0010.0010.0060.007

[back to top]

CFB in Urate - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.337-0.0050.0100.014-0.014

[back to top]

CFB in the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part II/III Score - Part B

The modified MDS-UPDRS included 4 scales, with various subscales. Each item was rated from 0 (normal) to 4 (severe). The scales were Part I: nonmotor experiences of daily living (13 items); Part II: motor experiences of daily living (13 items); Part III: motor examination (33 scores based on 18 items [several with right, left or other body distribution scores]); and Part IV: motor complications (6 items). The Part II/III tremor score was calculated as the sum of 5 individual tremor item scores from Part II and Part III. The total score range for Part II/III is 0 to 44. Lower scores represent less symptom severity and higher scores represent more symptom severity. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement in symptom severity. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Baseline, Days 1 to 6 (12 and 23 hours postdose), Day 7 (12 hours postdose), Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21719.1-5.4-5.9-6.5-6.6-6.0-5.9-8.0-7.4-7.4-8.0-5.2-8.4-7.7-3.7

[back to top]

CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part III Total Score - Part B

Part III of the MDS-UPDRS assessed 18 motor categories, some of which included right and left measurements: speech, facial expression, kinetic tremor of hands, rest tremor amplitude, postural tremor of hands, rigidity of neck and 4 extremities, finger taps, hand movement, pronation/supination, toe tapping, constancy of rest tremor, leg agility, arising from chair, posture, gait, freezing of gait, postural stability, global spontaneity of movement. Part III total score was calculated as the sum of the individual item scores from these categories. Each item was rated from 0 (normal) to 4 (severe). The total score range for Part III is 0 to 132. Lower scores represent less symptom severity. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement in symptom severity. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Baseline, Days 1 to 6 (12 and 23 hours postdose), Day 7 (12 hours postdose), Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21752.4-8.4-10.8-11.6-13.5-12.4-10.9-14.3-14.8-14.5-18.1-14.8-19.5-18.6-14.5

[back to top]

CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part II Total Score - Part B

Part II of the MDS-UPDRS assessed 13 categories of motor experiences of daily living: speech, salivation and drooling, chewing and swallowing, eating tasks, dressing, hygiene, handwriting, doing hobbies and other activities, turning in bed, tremor, getting out of bed, car, or deep chair, walking and balance, and freezing. The Part II total score was calculated as the sum of the individual item scores from these categories. The total score range for Part II is 0 to 52. Lower scores indicate less symptom severity. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement in symptom severity. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Baseline, Days 1 to 6 (12 and 23 hours postdose), Day 7 (12 hours postdose), Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 23 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21715.1-1.9-1.7-2.1-2.2-2.0-3.1-3.4-2.4-4.6-2.9-2.9-3.9-3.9-3.9

[back to top]

CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part I-IV Total Score - Part B

The MDS-UPDRS assesses nonmotor experiences, motor experiences, motor skills, and motor complication categories. The MDS-UPDRS Part I-IV total score was calculated as the sum of the individual item scores from these categories. The total score range for Part I-IV is 0 to 260. Lower scores indicate less symptom severity. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement in symptom severity. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Baseline, Day 7 (12 hours postdose), Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21784.6-30.0-24.1

[back to top]

CFB in the MDS-UPDRS Part I Total Score - Part B

Part I of the MDS-UPDRS assessed 13 nonmotor experiences of daily living categories. Part I total score was calculated as the sum of the individual item scores from these categories. The total score range for Part I is 0 to 52. Lower scores indicate less symptom severity. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement in symptom severity. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Baseline, Day 7 (12 hours postdose), Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2179.9-4.7-3.9

[back to top]

CFB in Temperature - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiondegrees C (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21736.56-0.100.01-0.19-0.23-0.15-0.03-0.09-0.06-0.11-0.15-0.06-0.100.01-0.09-0.12-0.08-0.08-0.09-0.090.010.05-0.05-0.07-0.07-0.10-0.08-0.10-0.01

[back to top]

CFB in Eosinophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2172.00.70.10.4-0.4

[back to top]

CFB in Temperature - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiondegrees Celsius (degrees C) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21736.61-0.04-0.01-0.05-0.08-0.060.000.080.00-0.01-0.06-0.11-0.05-0.04-0.07-0.11-0.020.06-0.05-0.060.09-0.09-0.10-0.10-0.03-0.06-0.04-0.05-0.010.040.020.010.08-0.07-0.110.03-0.03-0.020.120.07-0.05-0.04-0.16-0.17-0.02-0.16-0.07-0.09-0.07-0.02-0.040.02-0.08-0.13-0.12-0.09-0.08-0.10-0.040.06-0.13-0.16-0.16-0.16-0.11-0.130.020.06-0.01-0.030.40.07

[back to top]

CFB in Supine Systolic Blood Pressure - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217131.7-1.7-1.40.3-3.32.90.16.1-1.2-0.1-1.6-1.1-1.4-1.1-4.31.2-5.7-4.0-3.62.3-10.9-6.5-2.8-4.1-1.72.42.5-1.23.4

[back to top]

CFB in Supine Systolic Blood Pressure - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmillimeters of mercury (mmHg) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217124.5-6.7-7.1-1.5-4.7-4.52.43.4-3.0-3.9-0.4-7.3-4.4-0.8-1.1-1.63.25.93.40.91.2-2.5-7.4-3.1-3.7-3.1-1.33.33.6-3.33.5-4.8-6.62.3-1.6-3.92.23.1-3.1-2.60.1-8.6-8.1-5.8-0.4-2.9-3.81.31.70.6-5.9-8.6-3.8-4.1-5.6-4.4-0.1-0.12.51.81.9-5.9-5.4-2.8-5.1-3.9-3.12.9-0.6-0.21.72.7

[back to top]

CFB in Supine Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21778.20.71.60.6-0.11.9-0.51.90.1-1.4-0.90.6-0.31.50.30.4-1.1-0.7-0.6-0.6-2.41.10.61.9-0.61.80.20.40.3

[back to top]

CFB in Supine Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21777.3-5.3-4.7-3.2-3.1-3.9-0.4-0.1-3.6-5.00.7-4.8-3.4-2.2-2.5-1.4-1.40.9-1.9-3.4-0.8-5.1-3.1-4.3-5.9-4.1-3.9-1.0-0.9-2.51.8-1.9-3.61.5-0.8-3.6-1.70.0-3.6-4.0-2.1-5.4-2.4-3.1-3.3-2.4-3.4-4.0-4.3-2.2-3.6-3.7-2.7-1.8-1.8-3.9-1.7-1.00.8-3.6-1.9-5.1-3.5-2.7-4.5-4.8-2.2-1.0-3.5-4.2-3.8-2.2

[back to top]

CFB in Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS) Score - Part A

The SSS was a participant-rated scale designed to quickly assess how alert a participant was feeling. Degrees of sleepiness and alertness were rated on a scale of one to seven, where the lowest score of 'one' indicated the participant was 'feeling active, vital, alert, or wide awake' and the highest score of 'seven' indicated the participant was 'no longer fighting sleep, sleep onset soon; having dream-like thoughts'. A negative change from baseline indicated less sleepiness. A positive change from baseline indicated more sleepiness. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 hour postdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2171.2-0.1-0.1-0.10.00.00.40.20.61.00.40.30.20.50.30.50.40.30.60.70.30.00.30.30.40.20.30.41.00.70.33.22.62.01.20.40.20.20.21.00.33.81.81.10.80.60.10.20.40.80.12.61.81.61.10.80.30.20.40.90.22.01.30.70.70.10.20.10.40.4-0.1-0.1

[back to top]

CFB in Standing Systolic Blood Pressure - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217127.8-2.9-2.40.6-3.4-1.51.7-0.8-4.2-0.8-4.40.0-4.5-4.1-5.5-3.8-7.5-3.9-5.6-2.3-9.4-6.6-4.7-8.6-1.21.43.5-7.50.7

[back to top]

CFB in Standing Systolic Blood Pressure - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217124.1-3.1-4.7-2.90.02.74.37.62.9-2.71.0-2.9-3.4-5.10.0-3.4-0.65.62.0-4.4-1.4-4.2-4.9-4.4-6.2-3.2-3.21.80.02.23.3-1.5-4.6-0.5-5.7-2.30.93.30.0-1.3-0.6-9.8-8.3-3.8-2.4-2.1-3.31.42.30.8-3.3-6.4-5.5-3.5-2.81.6-2.7-2.92.50.6-0.2-4.0-4.7-6.0-5.9-2.42.14.63.70.57.63.6

[back to top]

CFB in Standing Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21781.9-2.0-2.4-1.6-3.9-2.4-1.5-1.9-3.9-1.4-1.1-2.4-2.4-4.1-2.9-2.8-5.5-1.4-3.10.0-4.0-1.6-2.0-2.1-1.7-0.20.6-2.7-1.1

[back to top]

CFB in Standing Diastolic Blood Pressure - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionmmHg (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21776.70.4-2.90.72.30.93.12.61.31.64.01.61.11.13.80.31.64.33.70.14.4-1.1-0.9-1.7-0.7-0.6-1.00.61.83.84.61.82.45.63.70.31.94.81.92.82.6-2.5-0.83.82.71.60.10.20.40.8-0.40.90.82.01.21.62.30.73.12.82.40.3-2.0-0.2-1.4-0.92.72.02.91.12.11.5

[back to top]

CFB in Specific Gravity - Part B

Urinalysis measures included specific gravity and pH. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionratio (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2171.0180.0030.001-0.0040.000

[back to top]

CFB in Specific Gravity - Part A

Urinalysis measures included specific gravity and potential of hydrogen (pH). Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionratio (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2171.018-0.0010.0000.002

[back to top]

CFB in Sodium - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217141.80.10.10.4-0.1

[back to top]

CFB in Monocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2176.40.30.10.4-0.1

[back to top]

CFB in Sodium - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217140.00.81.30.70.5

[back to top]

CFB in Reticulocytes to Erythrocytes Ratio (%) - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2171.280.040.130.050.13

[back to top]

CFB in Monocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2176.10.20.60.50.3

[back to top]

CFB in Monocytes - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.400.090.030.030.01

[back to top]

CFB in Monocytes - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.360.020.060.020.05

[back to top]

CFB in Magnesium - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.873-0.014-0.0090.018-0.012

[back to top]

CFB in Magnesium - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.861-0.0120.0000.0150.016

[back to top]

CFB in Lymphocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21726.02.52.63.40.6

[back to top]

CFB in Lymphocytes to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21728.31.01.00.9-3.9

[back to top]

CFB in Lymphocytes - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2171.680.440.260.180.11

[back to top]

CFB in Lymphocytes - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2171.70-0.020.070.02-0.17

[back to top]

CFB in Reticulocytes to Erythrocytes Ratio (%) - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2171.410.00-0.030.000.03

[back to top]

CFB in Reticulocytes - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21759.31.15.12.45.1

[back to top]

CFB in Reticulocytes - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21764.6-0.30.30.20.3

[back to top]

CFB in Respiratory Rate - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionbreaths/min (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21715.60.60.60.8-0.9-0.90.40.80.5-0.4-0.60.6-0.2-0.4-0.31.40.41.40.60.40.4-0.10.50.4-1.11.6-0.70.60.3

[back to top]

CFB in Respiratory Rate - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionbreaths per minute (breaths/min) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21715.90.10.10.00.20.01.00.60.1-0.2-0.10.10.20.00.50.40.10.30.30.1-0.40.4-0.10.40.10.40.20.40.20.00.9-0.3-0.40.3-0.10.10.70.90.5-0.3-0.1-0.3-0.4-0.10.10.41.00.40.50.3-0.1-0.6-0.3-0.1-0.10.41.00.40.50.40.00.10.90.10.10.60.41.40.40.70.10.9

[back to top]

CFB in Pulse Oximetry- Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21796.9-0.30.20.20.1-0.2-0.1-0.1-0.4-0.7-0.6-0.4-0.4-0.2-0.7-0.50.4-0.1-0.6-0.2-0.5-1.1-0.4-0.3-0.10.3-0.10.00.4-0.20.0-1.6-0.7-0.1-0.4-0.4-0.4-0.1-0.2-0.30.2-1.3-1.20.10.0-0.2-0.1-0.4-0.6-1.1-0.5-1.10.1-0.9-0.40.10.00.0-0.40.10.3-1.4-0.4-0.50.40.30.30.30.30.20.30.5

[back to top]

CFB in Pulse Oximetry - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21796.9-0.60.00.4-0.30.10.10.30.10.3-0.50.0-0.60.60.1-0.30.50.60.00.4-0.20.10.10.30.2-0.40.00.10.5

[back to top]

CFB in Prothrombin Time - Part B

Coagulation measures included activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin international normalized ratio and prothrombin time. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21710.60-0.20-0.05-0.100.10

[back to top]

CFB in Prothrombin Time - Part A

Coagulation measures included activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin international normalized ratio and prothrombin time. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionsec (Median)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21710.700.000.000.10-0.10

[back to top]

CFB in Prothrombin International Normalized Ratio - Part B

Coagulation measures included activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin international normalized ratio and prothrombin time. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionratio (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.98-0.03-0.010.000.01

[back to top]

CFB in Prothrombin International Normalized Ratio - Part A

Coagulation measures included activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin international normalized ratio and prothrombin time. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionratio (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2171.040.01-0.030.050.01

[back to top]

CFB in Protein - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiong/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21769.6-0.8-0.90.9-0.1

[back to top]

CFB in Protein - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiong/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21769.4-2.3-1.5-0.4-1.1

[back to top]

CFB in Lipase - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21737.215.419.44.31.6

[back to top]

CFB in Lipase - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21734.516.635.173.3-1.6

[back to top]

CFB in Leukocytes - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2176.470.850.31-0.210.29

[back to top]

CFB in Leukocytes - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2176.04-0.240.15-0.090.30

[back to top]

CFB in Hemoglobin - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiong/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217140.14.9-1.41.8-0.7

[back to top]

CFB in Hemoglobin - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiongrams per liter (g/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217142.00.11.71.2-1.9

[back to top]

CFB in Hematocrit - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionL/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.4360.023-0.0110.006-0.002

[back to top]

Percentage of Participants With TEAEs, Graded by Severity - Part A

Severity was assessed according to the following scale: mild (awareness of sign or symptom, but easily tolerated); moderate (discomfort sufficient to cause interference with normal activities); severe (incapacitating, with an inability to perform normal activities). The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
MildModerateSevere
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Day 1 to Day 320.06.70
Part A: Follow-up6.76.70
Part A: SAGE-217 Day 4 to Day 7085.714.3

[back to top]

CFB in Hematocrit - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionliters per liter (L/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.4340.0030.004-0.002-0.013

[back to top]

CFB in Heart Rate - Part B

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionbeats/min (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 1 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 2 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 3 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Dose 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21772.90.10.1-3.6-1.60.42.5-3.00.3-0.13.1-0.12.51.41.4-1.62.51.9-0.4-4.12.11.61.22.4-1.7-1.70.9-1.3-5.0

[back to top]

CFB in Heart Rate - Part A

Vital sign measures included temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, supine systolic blood pressure, standing systolic blood pressure, supine diastolic blood pressure, standing diastolic blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionbeats per minute (beats/min) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 1 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdosCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 2 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 3 (L/C): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 2 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 3 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 4 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 6 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 8 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 14 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 16 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21766.62.11.3-0.5-1.30.80.45.50.51.4-0.22.11.9-0.3-0.92.13.83.91.61.2-0.74.72.41.20.61.75.92.63.63.91.43.71.63.40.62.72.15.15.24.61.53.84.43.41.37.64.28.46.63.74.64.32.94.23.25.14.64.85.25.48.46.05.33.94.46.04.89.56.75.61.84.1

[back to top]

CFB in Erythrocytes - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^12 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2174.650.16-0.11-0.02-0.06

[back to top]

CFB in Erythrocytes - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^12 cells per liter (10^12 cells/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2174.630.010.040.02-0.09

[back to top]

CFB in Eosinophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2172.90.70.30.0-0.3

[back to top]

CFB in Eosinophils - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.120.050.030.03-0.02

[back to top]

CFB in Eosinophils - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.170.070.040.020.00

[back to top]

CFB in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Mean Heart Rate - Part A

ECG measures included ECG mean heart rate, aggregate PR interval, aggregate RR interval, aggregate QT interval, aggregate QRS duration and aggregate QTcF interval. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. L/C indicated levodopa/carbidopa. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionbeats/min (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 3 (L/C): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 5 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseDay 6 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 1 Hour PostdoseCFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217): 12 Hours PostdoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21764.7-0.51.36.97.12.58.29.03.75.98.55.96.210.70.94.7

[back to top]

CFB in Creatinine - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionumol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21780.38111.3452.084-2.968-0.253

[back to top]

CFB in Creatinine - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionumol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21773.2542.3994.1044.4200.118

[back to top]

CFB in Chloride - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217102.10.10.2-0.5-0.2

[back to top]

CFB in Chloride - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217100.11.61.10.50.3

[back to top]

CFB in Calcium - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2172.3400.0060.0020.023-0.027

[back to top]

CFB in Calcium - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2172.342-0.0300.007-0.014-0.015

[back to top]

CFB in Bilirubin - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionumol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2178.306-2.993-2.795-0.1220.366

[back to top]

CFB in Bilirubin - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmicromoles per liter (umol/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2176.082-0.0290.9491.5450.543

[back to top]

CFB in Bicarbonate - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21724.6-1.2-0.9-1.1-0.3

[back to top]

CFB in Bicarbonate - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmillimoles per liter (mmol/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21722.4-0.90.3-0.10.7

[back to top]

CFB in Basophils to Leukocytes Ratio [Percentage (%)] - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as International System (SI) unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2170.80.10.30.00.1

[back to top]

CFB in Basophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2171.00.20.1-0.10.1

[back to top]

CFB in Basophils - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2170.060.020.02-0.030.00

[back to top]

CFB in Aspartate Aminotransferase - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21717.7-2.8-1.4-0.4-2.4

[back to top]

CFB in Aspartate Aminotransferase - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21723.2-0.4-2.4-1.01.8

[back to top]

CFB in Alkaline Phosphatase - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21784.01.42.12.2-1.1

[back to top]

CFB in Alkaline Phosphatase - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21780.6-1.7-2.4-0.50.0

[back to top]

CFB in Albumin - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiong/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21744.2-0.2-0.60.16-0.1

[back to top]

CFB in Albumin - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventiong/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21743.2-1.2-0.4-0.1-0.3

[back to top]

CFB in Alanine Aminotransferase - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionU/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21710.00.32.61.9-0.2

[back to top]

CFB in Potassium - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2174.570.03-0.11-0.11-0.01

[back to top]

CFB in Potassium - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2174.53-0.14-0.08-0.15-0.08

[back to top]

CFB in Platelets - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-217189.224.15.90.85.3

[back to top]

CFB in Platelets - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-217218.96.66.87.811.5

[back to top]

CFB in Phosphate - Part B

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2171.0910.1610.1800.0420.009

[back to top]

CFB in Phosphate - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionmmol/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2171.0980.0350.0760.083-0.034

[back to top]

CFB in pH - Part B

Urinalysis measures included specific gravity and pH. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionpH (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2176.11-0.18-0.320.39-0.12

[back to top]

CFB in pH - Part A

Urinalysis measures included specific gravity and pH. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

InterventionpH (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 7 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2175.870.18-0.11-0.07

[back to top]

CFB in Neutrophils- Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-2173.79-0.27-0.03-0.170.44

[back to top]

CFB in Neutrophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-21765.3-4.2-3.0-4.4-0.4

[back to top]

CFB in Neutrophils to Leukocytes Ratio (%) - Part A

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. The blood cell differential (ratio) data are presented as SI unit, percentage (%). (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionpercentage (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21762.5-2.4-2.4-2.23.6

[back to top]

CFB in Neutrophils - Part B

Hematology measures included basophils, basophils to leukocytes ratio, eosinophils, eosinophils to leukocytes ratio, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocytes to leukocytes ratio, monocytes, monocytes to leukocytes ratio, neutrophils, neutrophils to leukocytes ratio, platelets, reticulocytes and reticulocytes to erythrocytes ratio. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. Doses 1 to 7 were given on Days 1 to 7, respectively. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part B of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Intervention10^9 cells/L (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Dose 4 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Dose 6 (SAGE-217): PredoseCFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part B: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) + SAGE-2174.230.230.00-0.430.16

[back to top]

CFB in Alanine Aminotransferase - Part A

Clinical chemistry measures included alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, bicarbonate, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, lipase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea nitrogen. Baseline is the last measurement taken before the first dose of the study drug. The analysis was performed in participants included in Part A of the study. (NCT03000569)
Timeframe: Day 1 to Day 14

Interventionunits per liter (U/L) (Mean)
BaselineCFB at Day 4 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 6 (SAGE-217)CFB at Day 8 (Follow-up)CFB at Day 14 (Follow-up)
Part A: Antiparkinsonian Agent(s) Followed by SAGE-21715.815.313.97.22.3

[back to top]

Fluctuation of Levodopa Cmax/Cmin, Tau

Explore fluctuation of levodopa Cmax/Cmin, tau. Figures given are per performed statistical analysis. (NCT03055936)
Timeframe: 16 hours

Intervention(ng/ml)/(ng/ml) (Mean)
A1 50 mg LD + 12.5 mg CD12.24
B1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD7.49
C1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-1044.16
D1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1043.02
A2 100 mg LD + 25 mg CD11.00
B2 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD8.32
C2 100 mg of LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-1044.46
D2 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg of ODM-1043.35
A3 150 mg LD + 37.5 mg CD8.45
B3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD7.16
C3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-1043.67
D3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1042.82
A4 (Sinemet) 100 mg IR LD + 25 mg CD19.52
B4 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD9.18
C4 100 mg LD + 25 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1047.63
D4 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1043.04

[back to top]

Levodopa Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the 24 h PK Sample (AUC0-24) Time 0 to the 24 h PK Sample (AUC0-24)

Levodopa Area Under the Concentration-time Curve From Time 0 to the 24 h PK Sample (AUC0-24) (NCT03055936)
Timeframe: During 24 hours

Interventionh*ng/ml (Mean)
A1 50 mg LD + 12.5 mg CD4300
B1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD5423
C1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-1047439
D1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1049046
A2 100 mg LD + 25 mg CD9643
B2 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD10709
C2 100 mg of LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-10415257
D2 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg of ODM-10417896
A3 150 mg LD + 37.5 mg CD14285
B3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD15805
C3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-10422473
D3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-10425672
A4 (Sinemet) 100 mg IR LD + 25 mg CD7965
B4 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD8994
C4 100 mg LD + 25 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-10413866
D4 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-10416310

[back to top]

Levodopa Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)

Levodopa peak plasma concentration (Cmax) (NCT03055936)
Timeframe: 24 hours

Interventionng/ml (Mean)
A1 50 mg LD + 12.5 mg CD685.92
B1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD775.36
C1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-104908.86
D1 50 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-104950.38
A2 100 mg LD + 25 mg CD1519.92
B2 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD1593.85
C2 100 mg of LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-1041855.38
D2 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg of ODM-1041955.38
A3 150 mg LD + 37.5 mg CD2105.45
B3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD2072.73
C3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 50 mg ODM-1042545.45
D3 150 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1042616.67
A4 (Sinemet) 100 mg IR LD + 25 mg CD1634.62
B4 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD1367.36
C4 100 mg LD + 25 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1041711.43
D4 100 mg LD + 65 mg CD + 100 mg ODM-1041717.69

[back to top]

Cmax of L-dopa

Maximum Observed Plasma Concentration of L-dopa from Time = 0 to Time = 2 hours post dose. For the L-dopa 35 mg, L-dopa 70 mg, L-dopa 140 mg plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For the L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg treatment arm, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 35 mg, 70 mg, 140 mg plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
L-dopa 35 mg185.80
L-dopa 70 mg362.68
L-dopa 140 mg643.65
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg445.75

[back to top]

Duration of Response, Where Response is Defined as an Improvement of 30% in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score From Baseline.

MDS-UPDRS is a clinimetric assessment of subjective and objective symptoms and signs of Parkinson's disease created by the Movement Disorder Society with high internal consistency. MDS-UPDRS retains the four-scale structure with a reorganization of the various subscales. The subscale used in this study is Part III, motor examination (18 items). The subscale has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. Maximum score is 132, minimum is zero. High score means worse outcome. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: 2 hours

Interventionminutes (Mean)
Placebo66.9
L-dopa 35 mg23.3
L-dopa 70 mg57.3
L-dopa 140 mg37.5
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg15.0

[back to top]

Mean Maximum Change From Baseline in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score

MDS-UPDRS is a clinimetric assessment of subjective and objective symptoms and signs of Parkinson's disease created by the Movement Disorder Society with high internal consistency. MDS-UPDRS retains the four-scale structure with a reorganization of the various subscales. The subscale used in this study is Part III, motor examination (18 items). The subscale now has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. The total of the subscales has a maximum value of 132 and a minimum value of zero. Lower scores indicate better motor function. A negative change from baseline indicates improved motor function. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: From time = 0 to 2 hours post-dose

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Placebo-15.5
L-dopa 35 mg-14.0
L-dopa 70 mg-20.3
L-dopa 140 mg-15.3
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg-7.5

[back to top]

Mean Change From Baseline in MDS-UPDRS Score Over 2 Hours for C1, C2, C3 and Change From Baseline at 30, 60, 90, 120 Minutes for C4, in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score

MDS-UPDRS is a clinimetric assessment of subjective and objective symptoms and signs of Parkinson's disease created by the Movement Disorder Society with high internal consistency. MDS-UPDRS retains the four-scale structure with a reorganization of the various subscales. The subscale used in this study is Part III, motor examination (18 items). The subscale has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. Maximum score is 132, minimum is zero. High score means worse outcome. For the L-dopa 35 mg, L-dopa 70 mg, L-dopa 140 mg treatment groups, assessment occurred at pre-dose, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For the L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg treatment arm, assessment occurred at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 35 mg, 70 mg, 140 mg, assessment occurred at pre-dose, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, assessment occurred at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose.

,,,,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
15 minutes30 minutes45 minutes60 minutes90 minutes120 minutes
L-dopa 140 mg-9.0-12.7-13.7-13.5-9.0-7.2
L-dopa 35 mg-4.5-6.7-4.7-6.8-10.3-11.0
L-dopa 70 mg0.8-8.5-12.8-15.7-15.5-13.8
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mgNA-3.7NA-0.8-3.7-3.2
Placebo-3.5-8.5-13.5-12.5-10.8-8.8

[back to top]

Time to Response (Defined as Improvement of 30% in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score From Baseline)

MDS-UPDRS is a clinimetric assessment of subjective and objective symptoms and signs of Parkinson's disease created by the Movement Disorder Society with high internal consistency. MDS-UPDRS retains the four-scale structure with a reorganization of the various subscales. The subscale used in this study is Part III, motor examination (18 items). The subscale now has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: 2 hours

Interventionminutes (Median)
Placebo45.0
L-dopa 35 mgNA
L-dopa 70 mg54.0
L-dopa 140 mg30.0
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mgNA

[back to top]

Cumulative Number of Responders (Defined as Improvement of 30% in MDS-UPDRS Part III Score From Baseline)

MDS-UPDRS is a clinimetric assessment of subjective and objective symptoms and signs of Parkinson's disease created by the Movement Disorder Society with high internal consistency. MDS-UPDRS retains the four-scale structure with a reorganization of the various subscales. The subscale used in this study is Part III, motor examination (18 items). The subscale now has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: From time = 0 to 2 hours post-dose

,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
15 minutes30 minutes45 minutes60 minutes90 minutes120 minutes
L-dopa 140 mg255555
L-dopa 35 mg011122
L-dopa 70 mg113455
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mgNA1NA233
Placebo034666

[back to top]

Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Change From Baseline in MDS-UPDRS Part III Scores

MDS-UPDRS is a clinimetric assessment of subjective and objective symptoms and signs of Parkinson's disease created by the Movement Disorder Society with high internal consistency. MDS-UPDRS retains the four-scale structure with a reorganization of the various subscales. The subscale used in this study is Part III, motor examination (18 items). The subscale now has 0-4 ratings, where 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 35 mg, 70 mg, 140 mg, assessments were made at pre-dose, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120 minutes post-dose. For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, assessments were made at pre-dose, 50, 60, 90, 120 minutes post-dose.

,,,,
Interventionchange in score*minutes (Mean)
15 minutes30 minutes45 minutes60 minutes90 minutes120 minutes
L-dopa 140 mg-67.50-232.83-426.83-630.58-968.08-1210.58
L-dopa 35 mg-33.50-138.58-201.92-296.50-575.17-903.67
L-dopa 70 mg7.00-50.50-210.50-424.25-896.67-1324.83
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mgNA-230.08NA-295.25-362.75-465.25
Placebo-26.25-237.63-264.92-573.88-919.75-1215.75

[back to top]

Tmax of Carbidopa

Time to reach the maximum concentration of carbidopa (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose.

Interventionminutes (Mean)
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg44.50

[back to top]

Cmax of Carbidopa

Maximum concentration of carbidopa (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose.

Interventionng/mL (Mean)
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg80.23

[back to top]

Tmax of L-dopa

Time to Reach the Maximum Plasma Concentration (Cmax) of L-dopa (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 35 mg, 70 mg, 140 mg plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose.

Interventionminutes (Mean)
L-dopa 35 mg60.17
L-dopa 70 mg66.00
L-dopa 140 mg70.00
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg92.00

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events

Assessment of treatment emergent adverse events after single dosing with INP103 (L-dopa or L-dopa/carbidopa) (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: 7 days

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Placebo5
L-dopa 35 mg5
L-dopa 70 mg3
L-dopa 140 mg4
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg5

[back to top]

"Assessment of Time to ON as Evaluated by Subject Self-assessment"

"Subjects were asked to provide self-assessments at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, and 240 minutes post-dose as to whether they considered themselves to be ON." (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: 4 hours

Interventionminutes (Median)
Placebo40.0
L-dopa 35 mg240.0
L-dopa 70 mg39.0
L-dopa 140 mg30.0
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg232.5

[back to top]

"Subjective Time to ON as Evaluated by the Investigator"

"Investigators will evaluate subjects' fluctuations in motor functions at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, and 240 minutes post-dose to determine if they are ON." (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: 4 hours

Interventionminutes (Median)
Placebo45.0
L-dopa 35 mg240.0
L-dopa 70 mg30.0
L-dopa 140 mg30.0
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg240.0

[back to top]

AUC0-2h for Carbidopa

Area under the concentration time curve for carbidopa (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: Plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose and AUC calculated from these from time 0 to 120 minutes.

Interventionhours*ng/mL (Mean)
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg114.80

[back to top]

AUC0-2hr for L-dopa

Area under the Plasma Concentration-time Curve for L-dopa from Time = 0 to Time = 2 hours post dose. For the L-dopa 35 mg, L-dopa 70 mg, L-dopa 140 mg plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For the L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg treatment arm, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. (NCT03541356)
Timeframe: For L-dopa 35 mg, 70 mg, 140 mg plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes post-dose. For L-dopa 70 mg/carbidopa 7 mg, plasma samples were taken at pre-dose, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 min

Interventionhours*ng/mL (Mean)
L-dopa 35 mg240.71
L-dopa 70 mg463.49
L-dopa 140 mg725.29
L-dopa 70 mg/Carbidopa 7 mg552.75

[back to top]

Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self Report (IDS-SR)

The Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self Report (IDS-SR) is a rating scale for depressive symptoms based on standard diagnostic criteria for Major Depressive Disorder. The scale ranges from 0-84 with higher scores indicating more severe depression. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT03761030)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 8 Weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
L-DOPA Arm-9.8
Placebo Arm-12.1

[back to top]

Letter Comparison Test

Subjects were asked to determine whether two strings of letters are the same or different. There are 3 pages and the subject is given 30 seconds per page. Scoring is based on the number answered correctly. Scores range from 0 to 21, with the higher the number, the better the score. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT03761030)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 8 Weeks

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Mean)
L-DOPA Arm1.2
Placebo Arm0.7

[back to top]

Single Task Gait Speed

Patients' gait was assessed as walking speed in cm/s on a 15' walking course. Patients walked at their usual or normal speed for a total of 27' (starting and ending at a point 6 feet prior to and after the 15' course to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects). Two trials were completed, and gait speed was based on the average of 2 trials. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT03761030)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 8 Weeks

Interventioncm/s (Mean)
L-DOPA Arm3.7
Placebo Arm-3.8

[back to top]

Pattern Comparison Test

"This test required participants to identify whether two visual patterns are the same or not the same (responses were made by pressing a yes or no button). Patterns were either identical or varied on one of three dimensions: color (all ages), adding/taking something away (all ages), or one versus many. Scores reflect the number of correct items completed in 90 s, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 30. Items were designed to minimize the number of errors that were made. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations." (NCT03761030)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 8 Weeks

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Mean)
L-DOPA Arm0.6
Placebo Arm1.2

[back to top]

Change From Baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 24-Item Scale to Study Completion (8 Weeks)

The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) is a 24-item questionnaire used as an indication of depression and a guide to evaluate recovery. Total scores range from 0-74, not including atypical symptoms sub-scale. A score of 16 or above is typically considered to indicate the presence of depressive symptoms. Higher scores indicate greater severity. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT03761030)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 8 Weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
L-DOPA Arm-2.2
Placebo Arm-3.6

[back to top]

Digit Symbol Test

The Digit Symbol test is a neuropsychological test measuring information processing speed. It consists of digit-symbol pairs (e.g. 1/-,2/┴ ... 7/Λ,8/X,9/=) followed by a list of digits. Under each digit the subject should write down the corresponding symbol as fast as possible. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time is measured. Score ranges from 0-133, with higher scores indicating higher information processing speed. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT03761030)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 8 Weeks

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Mean)
L-DOPA Arm2.8
Placebo Arm5.0

[back to top]

Progression Free Survival

The proportion of successes will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients. Confidence intervals for the true success proportion will be calculated utilizing exact binomial methodology. (NCT03778294)
Timeframe: At 12 months after radiation therapy

Interventionproportion of successes (Number)
Treatment (18F-DOPA, PET/MRI, PET/CT, Temozolomide)0.72

[back to top]

Overall Survival (OS)

The proportion of successes will be estimated by the number of successes divided by the total number of evaluable patients. Confidence intervals for the true success proportion will be calculated utilizing exact binomial methodology. The distribution of survival time will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier (1958). (NCT03778294)
Timeframe: Time from registration to death due to any cause, assessed up to 12 months

Interventionproportion of successes (Number)
Treatment (18F-DOPA, PET/MRI, PET/CT, Temozolomide)0.54

[back to top]

Wechsler Adult Intelligence System Digit Symbol Substitution Test

Evaluation of cognitive functioning in which a participant is given a key of numbers 1-9, each paired with a unique symbol. Below the key, is a series of random numbers which they participant must fill in the corresponding symbol for. They have 120 seconds to complete the task. Participants receive one point for each correct symbol written. Score range from 0-133. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment65.89

[back to top]

Mini Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest)

The mini-BESTest is a 14-item evaluation of dynamic balance and postural control. It is scored from 0-28, with higher scores indicating better performance. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment22.89

[back to top]

Average Gait Speed

Average gait speed as measured using wearable sensors worn during walking tasks. Gait speed is measured in meters per second. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment.

Interventionmeters/second (Mean)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment0.973

[back to top]

Cognitive Z-score

Composite variable calculated based on the Stroop Color Word Interference test I-IV (assessment of attention) and Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Trail Making test I-V (assessment of executive function and working memory), adjusted based on normative data for older adults. A z-score of 0 represents the control population mean. Scores above the mean indicate better performance, while scores below the mean indicate poorer performance. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment

InterventionZ-score (Mean)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment0.271

[back to top]

Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)

Cognitive assessment used to evaluate individuals for mild cognitive impairment. Scores range from 0-30. Higher scores indicate better performance. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment

Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment27.44

[back to top]

Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part III Total

MDS-UPDRS part III is the motor examination portion of the UPDRS evaluation. Scores range from 0-132, with higher scores indicating greater severity of motor symptoms. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment31.18

[back to top]

Short Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale Score

Participants rate their level of confidence in doing specific activities without losing their balance as a percentage, with 0% indicating they are certain they would lose their balance and 100% indicating that they are certain they can complete the task without losing their balance. Scores on these 6 questions are averaged to determine total sABC score. Scores range from 0-100, with higher scores indicating greater balance confidence. (NCT04325503)
Timeframe: 7-13 days after beginning treatment

Interventionscore on a scale (Median)
Carbidopa and Carbidopa-Levodopa Treatment70.00

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Interquartile Range of Bradykinesia Score (BK75-BK25) as Assessed by the PKG Wearable Device

The PKG wearable device is an innovative mobile health technology that provides continuous, objective, ambulatory assessment of the symptoms of PD including tremor, bradykinesia, dyskinesia, and daytime somnolence. For each participant, the PKG watch collected data continuously and an algorithm calculated a bradykinesia score every 2 minutes between 9am-6pm across multiple days. Among these scores for this participant at this visit, the median of all the score values is defined as BK50 (there is no prespecified range of scores). BK75-BK25 is the difference between the third quartile (BK75) and first quartile (BK25) bradykinesia scores, and this interquartile range is a measure of variability of bradykinesia. A higher score indicates a higher degree of variability in bradykinesia scores. The BK75 and BK 25 scores for all participants across all visits were then analyzed with mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) and the LS mean (model-based mean) was obtained from the model. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9510.13
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD0.31

[back to top]

Number of Participants With TEAEs During the Double-Blind Treatment Period

An AE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An AE, whether associated with study drug or not, meeting any of the following criteria is considered an SAE: results in death; is life-threatening; results in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent a serious outcome. The severity of each AE is rated as mild, moderate, or severe, and having either a reasonable possibility or no reasonable possibility of relationship to study drug. Adverse events of special interest include polyneuropathy, weight loss, somnolence, hallucinations/psychosis. Events were considered treatment emergent if they arose after the first dose of study drug. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: From first dose of double-blind treatment up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period plus 30 days

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Any TEAEAny Serious TEAEAny TEAE Leading to DeathAny TEAE Leading to Study Drug DiscontinuationAny Severe TEAEAny TEAE Considered Related to Study DrugAny Serious TEAE Considered Related With Infusion PumpAll Deaths (Includes Non-Treatment-Emergent Deaths)Deaths Related to COVID-19Any Adverse Event of Special Interest
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD63601675230059
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9514241111501025

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Interquartile Range of Dyskinesia Score (DK75-DK25) as Assessed by the PKG Wearable Device

The PKG wearable device is an innovative mobile health technology that provides continuous, objective, ambulatory assessment of the symptoms of PD including tremor, bradykinesia, dyskinesia, and daytime somnolence. For each participant, the PKG watch collected data continuously and an algorithm calculated a dyskinesia score every 2 minutes between 9am-6pm across multiple days. Among these scores for this participant at this visit, the median of all the score values is defined as DK50 (there is no prespecified range of scores). DK75-DK25 is the difference between the third quartile (DK75) and first quartile (DK25) dyskinesia scores, and this interquartile range is a measure of variability of dyskinesia. A higher score indicates a higher degree of variability in dyskinesia scores. The DK75 and DK25 scores for all participants across all visits were then analyzed with mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) and the LS mean (model-based mean) was obtained from the model. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9512.72
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD-2.77

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Median Dyskinesia Score (DK50) as Assessed by the PKG Wearable Device

The PKG wearable device is an innovative mobile health technology that provides continuous, objective, ambulatory assessment of the symptoms of PD including tremor, bradykinesia, dyskinesia, and daytime somnolence. For each participant, the PKG watch collected data continuously and an algorithm calculated a dyskinesia score every 2 minutes between 9am-6pm across multiple days. Among these scores for this participant at this visit, the median of all the score values is defined as DK50. A higher score indicates worse dyskinesia (there is no prespecified range of scores). The DK50 scores for all participants across all visits were then analyzed with mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) and the LS mean (model-based mean) was obtained from the model. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9511.02
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD-1.71

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part II Score

The Part II MDS-UPDRS is an investigator-used rating tool to follow the longitudinal course of PD. MDS-UPDRS is multimodal scale assessing impairment and disability. Part II assesses the participant's motor experiences of daily living with 13 questions. (The numeric score for each question is between 0-4; 0=Normal,1=Slight,2=Mild,3=Moderate,4=Severe). Part II scores range from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms of PD. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-951-1.06
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD-2.65

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Quality of Life Assessed by Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 Item (PDQ-39) Summary Index Score

The PDQ-39 is a disease-specific instrument designed to measure aspects of health that are relevant to participants with PD, and which may not be included in general health status questionnaires. It evaluates the 8 dimensions of mobility, activities of daily living, emotional well-being, stigma, social support, cognition, and communication. Data from the PDQ-39 can be presented in either domain scores or as a summary index score. The full range of the PDQ-39 Summary Index score is from 0 (no patient-related symptoms/quality of life unaffected) to 100 (highest patient-related symptoms/low quality of life). (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-951-2.28
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD-6.38

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Quality of Life Assessed by the EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) Summary Index

The EQ-5D-5L is a standardized non-disease specific instrument for describing and valuing health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-5L descriptive system comprises 5 dimensions of health (mobility, self -care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) to describe the subject's current health state. Each dimension comprises 5 levels with corresponding numeric scores, where 1 indicates no problems, and 5 indicates extreme problems. The health status is converted to an index value using the country-specific weighted scoring algorithm for the United States (US). The summary index value for the US ranges from a worst score of -0.109 to a best score of 1. An increase in the EQ-5D-5L total score indicates improvement. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9510.002
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD0.051

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Dyskinesia (Hours)"

"On time is defined as periods of good motor symptom control, and was assessed by the PD diary. The normalized On time without dyskinesia is defined as the hours of average daily normalized On time without dyskinesia as assessed by the PD Diary (normalized to a 16-hour waking day averaged over 3 consecutive days).~Baseline value is defined as the average of normalized On time without dyskinesia collected over the 3 PD Diary days before randomization." (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9511.32
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD3.13

[back to top]

Number of Participants With a Subscore > 5 For Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson's Disease - Ration Scale (QUIP-RS) at Any Time During the Double-Blind Treatment Period

The QUIP-RS measures the severity of symptoms and support a diagnosis of impulse control disorders and related disorders in PD. QUIP-RS subscores include gambling (score 0 to 16), sex (score 0 to 16), buying (score 0 to 16), eating (score 0 to 16), hobbyism-punding (score 0 to 32), and PD medication use (score 0 to 16). Higher scores represent a worse outcome. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Impulse Control Disorder: Buying ScoreImpulse Control Disorder: Eating ScoreImpulse Control Disorder: Gambling ScoreImpulse Control Disorder: Sex ScoreAdditional Disorder: Hobbyism Punding ScoreAdditional Disorder: PD Medication Use Score
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD360476
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9513526125

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Average Daily Normalized Off Time (Hours)"

"Off time is defined as periods of poor mobility, tremor, slowness, and stiffness and was assessed by the PD Diary." (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-951-0.96
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD-2.75

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) During the Oral LD/CD Stabilization Period

An adverse event (AE) is defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with treatment. An AE, whether associated with study drug or not, meeting any of the following criteria is considered a serious AE (SAE): results in death; is life-threatening; results in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization; is a congenital anomaly; results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; is an important medical event requiring medical or surgical intervention to prevent a serious outcome. The severity of each AE is rated as mild, moderate, or severe, and having either a reasonable possibility or no reasonable possibility of relationship to study drug. Events were considered treatment emergent if they arose after the first dose of study drug. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: From first dose of stabilization period treatment up to the first dose of the double-blind treatment period

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Any TEAEAny Severe TEAEAny TEAE Considered Related to Study DrugAny TEAE Considered Associated With COVID-19 InfectionAny TEAE Leading to Premature Discontinuation of Study DrugAny TEAE Leading DeathAny Serious TEAEDeaths Related to COVID-19
LD/CD Stabilization Period413203040

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Potentially Clinically Significant Changes From Baseline in Hematology, Chemistry, Urinalysis, Special Laboratory Parameters, Vital Signs, and Electrocardiograms (ECGs)

Measures analyzed for prespecified potentially clinically significant criteria: hematology (hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cells, white blood cells, neutrophils, bands, lymphocytes, monocytes, basophils, eosinophils, platelets, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, mean corpuscular volume concentration, prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time), laboratory (blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, creatine phosphokinase, bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, lactate dehydrogenase, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, alkaline phosphatase, sodium, potassium, calcium, phosphorus, uric acid, total protein, albumin, glucose, sodium bicarbonate, chloride, triglycerides, cholesterol, magnesium), special lab criteria (vitamin B12, vitamin B6, folate, homocysteine, methylmalonic acid), vital signs (diastolic and systolic blood pressure, pulse rate), ECG (heart rate, PR, and QTcF interval), urinalysis (specific gravity, ketones, pH, protein, glucose, blood, bilirubin). (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Screening up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
HematologyChemistryUrinalysisSpecial Laboratory ParametersVital SignsECGs
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD000000
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-951000000

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Median Bradykinesia Score (BK50) as Assessed by the Parkinson's KinetiGraph/Personal KinetiGraph (PKG) Wearable Device

The PKG wearable device is an innovative mobile health technology that provides continuous, objective, ambulatory assessment of the symptoms of PD including tremor, bradykinesia, dyskinesia, and daytime somnolence. For each participant, the PKG watch collected data continuously and an algorithm calculated a bradykinesia score every 2 minutes between 9am-6pm across multiple days. Among these scores for this participant at this visit, the median of all the score values is defined as BK50. A higher score indicates worse bradykinesia (there is no prespecified range of scores). The BK50 scores for all participants across all visits were then analyzed with mixed-effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) and the LS mean (model-based mean) was obtained from the model. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-951-0.34
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD1.38

[back to top]

"Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Average Daily Normalized On Time Without Troublesome Dyskinesia"

"On time is defined as periods of good motor symptom control, and was assessed by the Parkinson's Disease (PD) diary. The normalized On time without troublesome dyskinesia is the sum of the normalized On time without dyskinesia and the normalized On time with non-troublesome dyskinesia. On time without dyskinesia plus On time with non-troublesome dyskinesia are based on the PD Diary (normalized to a 16-hour waking day averaged over 3 consecutive days). Baseline value is defined as the average of normalized On time without troublesome dyskinesia collected over the 3 PD Diary days before randomization." (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionhours (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9510.97
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD2.72

[back to top]

"Early Morning Off Status (Morning Akinesia) at Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period"

"Early morning Off status is assessed by the PD Diary as percentage of participants with early morning Off upon waking up at Week 12, based on the first morning symptom upon awakening on the last valid PD Diary day at Week 12.~Off time is defined as periods of poor mobility, tremor, slowness, and stiffness and was assessed by the PD Diary." (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-95163.3
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD17.0

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Irritation Grade Numeric Grade >= 5 or Letter Grade >= D on the Infusion Site Irritation Scale Across All Study Post-Baseline Visits

The investigator or qualified designee evaluated the infusion site area (abdomen). A 2-part (numeric and letter grading) evaluation scale was used to assess irritation. Irritation - Numeric Grades: 0 = No evidence of irritation; 1 = Minimal erythema, barely perceptible; 2 = Moderate erythema, readily visible; or minimal edema, or minimal papular response; 3 = Erythema and papules; 4 = Definite edema; 5 = Erythema, edema, and papules; 6 = Vesicular eruption; 7 = Strong reaction spreading beyond the test site. Irritation - Letter Grades: A = No finding; B = Slight glazed appearance; C = Marked glazing; D = Glazing with peeling and cracking; E = Glazing with fissures; F = Film of dried serous exudates covering all or portion of the patch site; G = Small petechial erosions and/or scabs. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Day 2 up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period plus 30 days

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
At Least 1 Observation of Numeric Grade >= 5At Least 1 Observation of Letter Grade >= DAt Least 1 Observation of Numeric Grade >= 5 or Letter Grade >= DAt Least 1 Observation of Numeric Grade >= 5 and Letter Grade >= D
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD106106
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9510000

[back to top]

Change From Baseline to Week 12 of the Double-Blind Treatment Period in Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale-2 (PDSS-2) Total Score

The PDSS-2 addresses PD-specific sleep disturbances such as restless leg syndrome (RLS), morning akinesia, pain, and sleep apnea. The frequency is assessed for the 15 sleep problems based on a 5-point Likert-type scale (ranging from 0 [never] to 4 [very often]). Scores are calculated for each of the 3 domains (motor symptoms at night, PD symptoms at night, and disturbed sleep) as well as a total score. The PDSS-2 domain scores range from 0 to 20 and the total score is a sum of the 3 domains and ranges from 0 to 60. Higher scores indicate higher frequency and more severe impact of PD on sleep. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Baseline (Week 0) up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

Interventionscore on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-951-2.52
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD-7.92

[back to top]

Number of Participants With Affirmative Responses on the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Across All Study Post-Baseline Visits During the Double-Blind Treatment Period

The C-SSRS is a systematically administered instrument developed to track suicidal adverse events across a treatment study. The instrument is designed to assess suicidal behavior and ideation, track and assess all suicidal events, as well as the lethality of attempts. Suicidal ideation categories include the following: wish to be dead; nonspecific active suicidal thoughts; active suicidal ideation without intent to act; active suicidal ideation with some intent to act but no plan; active suicidal ideation with plan and intent. Suicidal behavior categories include the following: actual attempt; interrupted attempt; aborted attempt; preparatory acts or behavior; suicidal behavior; completed suicide. (NCT04380142)
Timeframe: Screening up to Week 12 of the double-blind treatment period

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Participants With Any Suicidal IdeationsParticipants With Any Suicidal BehaviorsParticipants With Any Suicidal Behaviors or IdeationsParticipants With Non-Suicidal Self-Injurious Behavior
ABBV-951 + Placebo for LD/CD5050
LD/CD + Placebo for ABBV-9512020

[back to top]

Change in Single Task Gait Speed Test Following Step 2

Patients' gait was assessed as walking speed in cm/s on a 15' walking course. Patients walked at their usual or normal speed for a total of 27' (starting and ending at a point 6 feet prior to and after the 15' course to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects). Two trials were completed, and gait speed was based on the average of 2 trials. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Week 3 to Week 7 (post-Step 2)

Interventioncm/s (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-17.2
Placebo, Then L-DOPA7.0

[back to top]

[18F]-FDOPA PET Measure in Striatal Region of Interest

"[18F]-FDOPA PET quantifies dopamine synthesis capacity in specific brain regions. Lower [18F]-FDOPA uptake in the striatum has been associated with increased depression severity and worse cognitive and motor function in patients. Because [18F]-FDOPA uptake may be sensitive to deficits in dopamine synthesis capacity in older depressed patients, in this study depressed participants at baseline underwent a PET scan to quantify relative [18F]-FDOPA influx rate in the nucleus accumbens bilaterally. Time activity curves (TACs) were extracted within the nucleus accumbens region of interest (ROI) as the average radioactivity in the ROI over time. The occipital lobe, which has the lowest dopamine concentration in the brain, was used as the reference region to yield the Kocc measure of [18F]-FDOPA influx rate. Higher [18F]-FDOPA influx rate (kocc) numbers indicate greater relative influx rate and therefore greater dopamine synthesis capacity." (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Baseline (prior to LDOPA or placebo administration)

Interventionmin^-1 (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo0.0107

[back to top]

Change in Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) Following Step 2

QIDS-16-item, a participant-rated measure of depressive symptomatology. The total score ranges from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicative of greater severity. In contrast to other measures, which were not available at Week 4, Week 4 was selected as the baseline for post-Step 2 change on the QIDS since it followed the taper period taking place between study Steps. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Week 4 to Week 7 (post-Step 2)

Interventionunits on a scale (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-1.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA0.0

[back to top]

Change in Letter Comparison Test Following Step 2

Subjects were asked to determine whether two strings of letters are the same or different. There are 3 pages and the subject is given 30 seconds per page. Scoring is based on the number answered correctly. Scores range from 0 to 21, with the higher the number, the better the score. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Week 3 to Week 7 (post-Step 2)

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo0.5
Placebo, Then L-DOPA-1.5

[back to top]

Change in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale Following Step 2

Secondary outcome measured by the total score of the clinician rated MADRS, a measure of depression severity. The MADRS total score range is 0-60, where higher scores indicate greater depression severity. In contrast to other measures, which were not available at Week 4, Week 4 was selected as the baseline for post-Step 2 change on the MADRS since it followed the taper period taking place between study Steps. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Week 4 to Week 7 (post-Step 2)

Interventionunits on a scale (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo4.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA2.0

[back to top]

Change in Single Task Gait Speed Test Following Step 1

Patients' gait was assessed as walking speed in cm/s on a 15' walking course. Patients walked at their usual or normal speed for a total of 27' (starting and ending at a point 6 feet prior to and after the 15' course to eliminate acceleration and deceleration effects). Two trials were completed, and gait speed was based on the average of 2 trials. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

Interventioncm/s (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo4.6
Placebo, Then L-DOPA11.9

[back to top]

Change in Pattern Comparison Test Following Step 1

"This test required participants to identify whether two visual patterns are the same or not the same (responses were made by pressing a yes or no button). Patterns were either identical or varied on one of three dimensions: color (all ages), adding/taking something away (all ages), or one versus many. Scores reflect the number of correct items completed in 90 s, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 30. Items were designed to minimize the number of errors that were made. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations." (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-1.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA1.75

[back to top]

Change in Pattern Comparison Test Following Step 2

"This test required participants to identify whether two visual patterns are the same or not the same (responses were made by pressing a yes or no button). Patterns were either identical or varied on one of three dimensions: color (all ages), adding/taking something away (all ages), or one versus many. Scores reflect the number of correct items completed in 90 s, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 30. Items were designed to minimize the number of errors that were made. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations." (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Week 3 to Week 7 (post-Step 2)

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo1.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA-3.5

[back to top]

Change in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale Following Step 1

Secondary outcome measured by the total score of the clinician rated MADRS, a measure of depression severity. The MADRS total score range is 0-60, where higher scores indicate greater depression severity. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-1.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA-3.0

[back to top]

Change in Letter Comparison Test Following Step 1

Subjects were asked to determine whether two strings of letters are the same or different. There are 3 pages and the subject is given 30 seconds per page. Scoring is based on the number answered correctly. Scores range from 0 to 21, with the higher the number, the better the score. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-0.5
Placebo, Then L-DOPA-0.25

[back to top]

Change in Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT) Following Step 1

"In this task participants decide whether to work harder for a larger reward (high number of finger presses with their pinky) or expend less energy (low number of presses with a dominant index finger) for a lesser reward, with lower rewards being $1 dollar and higher rewards ranging from $1.20 to $5. Participants receive information about the probability of winning on each trial regardless of their pick and one trial from each run is randomly picked for payout. The primary output on this task is the percentage of time participants choose the high cost / high reward option on the EEfRT. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations.~This task was not completed following Step 2 of the study, so there are no EEfRT data reported for change in task performance following Step 2." (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

Interventionpercentage of high effort choices (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo0.18
Placebo, Then L-DOPA0.0

[back to top]

Change in Digit Symbol Test Following Step 2

The Digit Symbol test is a neuropsychological test measuring information processing speed. It consists of digit-symbol pairs (e.g. 1/-,2/┴ ... 7/Λ,8/X,9/=) followed by a list of digits. Under each digit the subject should write down the corresponding symbol as fast as possible. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time is measured. Score ranges from 0-133, with higher scores indicating higher information processing speed. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Week 3 to Week 7 (post-Step 2)

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Number)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo5.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA4.0

[back to top]

Change in Digit Symbol Test Following Step 1

The Digit Symbol test is a neuropsychological test measuring information processing speed. It consists of digit-symbol pairs (e.g. 1/-,2/┴ ... 7/Λ,8/X,9/=) followed by a list of digits. Under each digit the subject should write down the corresponding symbol as fast as possible. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time is measured. Score ranges from 0-133, with higher scores indicating higher information processing speed. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

InterventionNumber of items correctly completed (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-0.5
Placebo, Then L-DOPA9.0

[back to top]

Change in Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) Following Step 1

QIDS-16-item, a participant-rated measure of depressive symptomatology. The total score ranges from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicative of greater severity. Because the full sample was not enrolled and the results are considered unreliable, no statistical analysis was performed other than calculating means and standard deviations. (NCT04493320)
Timeframe: Change from Baseline to 3 weeks (post Step 1)

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
L-DOPA, Then Placebo-1.0
Placebo, Then L-DOPA-5.0

[back to top]

Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)

"The MADRS is a standard rater-administered measure of depression severity that will be used to measure changes in depressive symptoms during the study.~The total MADRS score ranges from a minimum score of 0 to a maximum score of 60. Higher scores indicate more severe depression." (NCT04650217)
Timeframe: Week 0 (Baseline)

Interventionscore on a scale (Number)
Non-randomized Participants25

[back to top]