Directional Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Results of an International Crossover Study With Randomized, Double-Blind Primary Endpoint.

OBJECTIVE: Published reports on directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) have been limited to small, single-center investigations. Therapeutic window (TW) is used to describe the range of stimulation amplitudes achieving symptom relief without side effects. This crossover study performed a randomized double-blind assessment of TW for directional and omnidirectional DBS in a large cohort of patients implanted with a DBS system in the subthalamic nucleus for Parkinson's disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants received omnidirectional stimulation for the first three months after initial study programming, followed by directional DBS for the following three months. The primary endpoint was a double-blind, randomized evaluation of TW for directional vs omnidirectional stimulation at three months after initial study programming. Additional data recorded at three- and six-month follow-ups included stimulation preference, therapeutic current strength, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) part III motor score, and quality of life. RESULTS: The study enrolled 234 subjects (62 ± 8 years, 33% female). TW was wider using directional stimulation in 183 of 202 subjects (90.6%). The mean increase in TW with directional stimulation was 41% (2.98 ± 1.38 mA, compared to 2.11 ± 1.33 mA for omnidirectional). UPDRS part III motor score on medication improved 42.4% at three months (after three months of omnidirectional stimulation) and 43.3% at six months (after three months of directional stimulation) with stimulation on, compared to stimulation off. After six months, 52.8% of subjects blinded to stimulation type (102/193) preferred the period with directional stimulation, and 25.9% (50/193) preferred the omnidirectional period. The directional period was preferred by 58.5% of clinicians (113/193) vs 21.2% (41/193) who preferred the omnidirectional period. CONCLUSION: Directional stimulation yielded a wider TW compared to omnidirectional stimulation and was preferred by blinded subjects and clinicians.

Clinical outcomes of asleep vs awake deep brain stimulation for Parkinson disease.

OBJECTIVE: To compare motor and nonmotor outcomes at 6 months of asleep deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson disease (PD) using intraoperative imaging guidance to confirm electrode placement vs awake DBS using microelectrode recording to confirm electrode placement. METHODS: DBS candidates with PD referred to Oregon Health & Science University underwent asleep DBS with imaging guidance. Six-month outcomes were compared to those of patients who previously underwent awake DBS by the same surgeon and center. Assessments included an "off"-levodopa Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) II and III, the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, motor diaries, and speech fluency. RESULTS: Thirty participants underwent asleep DBS and 39 underwent awake DBS. No difference was observed in improvement of UPDRS III (+14.8 ± 8.9 vs +17.6 ± 12.3 points, p = 0.19) or UPDRS II (+9.3 ± 2.7 vs +7.4 ± 5.8 points, p = 0.16). Improvement in "on" time without dyskinesia was superior in asleep DBS (+6.4 ± 3.0 h/d vs +1.7 ± 1.2 h/d, p = 0.002). Quality of life scores improved in both groups (+18.8 ± 9.4 in awake, +8.9 ± 11.5 in asleep). Improvement in summary index (p = 0.004) and subscores for cognition (p = 0.011) and communication (p < 0.001) were superior in asleep DBS. Speech outcomes were superior in asleep DBS, both in category (+2.77 ± 4.3 points vs -6.31 ± 9.7 points (p = 0.0012) and phonemic fluency (+1.0 ± 8.2 points vs -5.5 ± 9.6 points, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Asleep DBS for PD improved motor outcomes over 6 months on par with or better than awake DBS, was superior with regard to speech fluency and quality of life, and should be an option considered for all patients who are candidates for this treatment. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01703598. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with PD undergoing DBS, asleep intraoperative CT imaging-guided implantation is not significantly different from awake microelectrode recording-guided implantation in improving motor outcomes at 6 months.

Diffusion of botulinum toxins.

BACKGROUND: It is generally agreed that diffusion of botulinum toxin occurs, but the extent of the spread and its clinical importance are disputed. Many factors have been suggested to play a role but which have the most clinical relevance is a subject of much discussion. METHODS: This review discusses the variables affecting diffusion, including protein composition and molecular size as well as injection factors (e.g., volume, dose, injection method). It also discusses data on diffusion from comparative studies in animal models and human clinical trials that illustrate differences between the available botulinum toxin products (onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, incobotulinumtoxinA, and rimabotulinumtoxinB). RESULTS: Neither molecular weight nor the presence of complexing proteins appears to affect diffusion; however, injection volume, concentration, and dose all play roles and are modifiable. Both animal and human studies show that botulinum toxin products are not interchangeable, and that some products are associated with greater diffusion and higher rates of diffusion-related adverse events than others. DISCUSSION: Each of the botulinum toxins is a unique pharmacologic entity. A working knowledge of the different serotypes is essential to avoid unwanted diffusion-related adverse events. In addition, clinicians should be aware that the factors influencing diffusion may range from properties intrinsic to the drug to accurate muscle selection as well as dilution, volume, and dose injected.

Effects of a dopamine agonist on the pharmacodynamics of levodopa in Parkinson disease.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of Parkinson disease commonly includes levodopa and dopamine agonists; however, the interaction of these 2 drugs is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a dopamine agonist on the motor response to levodopa. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trial. SETTING: Ambulatory academic referral center. Patients Thirteen patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease taking levodopa and experiencing motor fluctuations and dyskinesia. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible individuals were randomly assigned to receive pramipexole dihydrochloride or placebo for 4 weeks followed by a 2-hour intravenous levodopa infusion on consecutive days at 2 rates and with blinded assessments. They were then crossed over to the alternate oral therapy for 4 weeks followed by levodopa infusion and reassessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in finger-tapping speed, measured using the area under the curve (AUC) for finger taps per minute across time; peak finger-tapping speed; duration of response; time to "ON" (defined as a 10% increase in finger-tapping speed above baseline); walking speed; and dyskinesia AUC. RESULTS: Pramipexole with levodopa infusion increased finger-tapping speed beyond the change in baseline by a mean (SE) of 170 (47.2) per minute x minutes (P = .006) and more than doubled the AUC for finger-tapping speed. Pramipexole increased peak finger-tapping speed by a mean (SE) of 18 (8.5) taps per minute (P = .02) and improved mean (SE) walking speed (15.9 [0.70] vs 18.9 [0.70] seconds, P = .004). Pramipexole prolonged duration of response after levodopa infusion and shortened time to ON. Pramipexole increased mean (SE) baseline dyskinesia scores (26.0 [5.85] vs 12.1 [5.85] points, P = .05) and peak dyskinesia scores with levodopa infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Pramipexole augmented the motor response to levodopa beyond a simple additive effect and increased the severity of levodopa-induced dyskinesia. When considering a combination of these therapies, an appropriate balance should be maintained regarding gain of motor function vs worsening of dyskinesia. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00666653.

Initial pharmacotherapy in a population of veterans with Parkinson disease.

The authors analyzed patient and prescribing provider characteristics for 530 veterans identified from VA pharmacy records with Parkinson disease (PD) and initial pharmacotherapy. Neurologists prescribed 29% of initial therapy. While a patient being younger and seeing a movement disorder specialist predicted receiving dopamine agonists, only 20% of patients younger than age 65 years received dopamine agonists. Initial pharmacotherapy is strongly influenced by the provider's specialty but mostly initiated by providers without PD expertise.

OFF-off rebound dyskinesia in subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation of Parkinson's disease.

A 61-year-old man with Parkinson's disease (PD), motor fluctuations, and dyskinesias underwent bilateral implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes in the subthalamic nucleus (STN). One month after surgery, DBS was optimized to bilateral monopolar settings at the most proximal electrode just superior to the STN, which improved motor fluctuations and dyskinesias. At several postoperative evaluations off medications overnight, both stimulators were turned off and within 60 seconds he developed severe dyskinesias. When the stimulators were turned back on, the dyskinesias soon resolved. This article is a first report of a unique pattern of rebound-type dyskinesia that occurred in the off medication state produced by stopping STN DBS.

Randomized controlled trial of intraputamenal glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor infusion in Parkinson disease.

OBJECTIVE: Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) exerts potent trophic influence on midbrain dopaminergic neurons. This randomized controlled clinical trial was designed to confirm initial clinical benefits observed in a small, open-label trial using intraputamenal (Ipu) infusion of recombinant human GDNF (liatermin). METHODS: Thirty-four PD patients were randomized 1 to 1 to receive bilateral continuous Ipu infusion of liatermin 15 microg/putamen/day or placebo. The primary end point was the change in Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor score in the practically defined off condition at 6 months. Secondary end points included other UPDRS scores, motor tests, dyskinesia ratings, patient diaries, and (18)F-dopa uptake. RESULTS: At 6 months, mean percentage changes in "off" UPDRS motor score were -10.0% and -4.5% in the liatermin and placebo groups, respectively. This treatment difference was not significant (95% confidence interval, -23.0 to 12.0, p = 0.53). Secondary end point results were similar between the groups. A 32.5% treatment difference favoring liatermin in mean (18)F-dopa influx constant (p = 0.019) was observed. Serious, device-related adverse events required surgical repositioning of catheters in two patients and removal of devices in another. Neutralizing antiliatermin antibodies were detected in three patients (one on-study and two in the open-label extension). INTERPRETATION: Liatermin did not confer the predetermined level of clinical benefit to patients with PD despite increased (18)F-dopa uptake. It is uncertain whether technical differences between this trial and positive open-label studies contributed in any way this negative outcome.

Sleepiness in Parkinson's disease: a controlled study.

Sudden-onset sleep episodes while driving have been reported in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, and termed sleep attacks because they were reported to be irresistible and to occur without warning. We postulate that these episodes are due to excessive daytime sleepiness secondary to the high frequency of sleep disorders in PD patients and the sedative effects of dopaminergic medications. We assessed the frequency and relationship between excess daytime sleepiness and sleep episodes while driving (SE) in patients with PD. We evaluated 101 consecutive PD patients presenting to the Movement Disorder Center at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine using a questionnaire that incorporated a subjective estimate of sleepiness, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and information on disease severity and dopaminergic medications. One hundred age-matched respondents without PD served as a control population. Excess daytime sleepiness was reported in 76% of PD patients compared to 47% of controls (P < 0.05). The mean ESS scores for PD patients was 9.1 +/- 6.1 versus 5.7 +/- 4.4 in controls (P < 0.001). ESS scores > or =10 were observed in 40.6% of PD patients compared to 19% of controls (P < 0.01) and 24% of PD patients had scores > or =15, compared to 5% of controls (P < 0.001). Sleep episodes while driving were experienced by 20.8% of PD drivers compared to 6% of control drivers (P < 0.05). The mean daily levodopa (L-dopa) dose equivalent was 1,142 +/- 858 mg in PD drivers who experienced a SE while driving compared to 626 +/- 667 mg in those who had not (P < 0.05). Similarly, ESS was significantly greater in drivers with a SE than in those without (11.6 +/- 6.4 vs. 8.4 +/- 4.1; P < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that ESS and mean daily L-dopa dose equivalents were predictors of sleep episodes while driving, whereas age, gender, disease severity, and individual dopaminergic agents were not. These findings support the notion that sleep episodes while driving in PD patients are related to excess daytime sleepiness and dopaminergic load. Physicians should advise and treat patients accordingly.