Clinical and Dopamine Transporter Imaging Characteristics of Leucine Rich Repeat Kinase 2 (LRRK2) and Glucosylceramidase Beta (GBA) Parkinson's Disease Participants in the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the phenotypic and dopamine transporter (DAT) imaging characterization of the Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with leucine rich kinase 2 (LRRK2) and glucosylceramidase beta (GBA) mutations. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine baseline clinical and DAT imaging characteristics in GBA and LRRK2 mutation carriers with early PD compared with sporadic PD. METHODS: The Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative is an ongoing observational longitudinal study that enrolled participants with sporadic PD, LRRK2 and GBA PD carriers from 33 sites worldwide. All participants are assessed annually with a battery of motor and nonmotor scales, 123-I Ioflupane DAT imaging, and biologic variables. RESULTS: We assessed 158 LRRK2 (89% G2019S), 80 GBA (89 %N370S), and 361 sporadic PD participants with the mean (standard deviation) disease duration of 2.9 (1.9), 3.1 (2.0), and 2.6 (0.6) years, respectively. When compared with sporadic PD, the GBA PD patients had no difference in any motor, cognitive, or autonomic features. The LRRK2 PD patients had less motor disability and lower rapid eye movement behavior disorder questionnaire scores, but no meaningful difference in cognitive or autonomic features. Both genetic cohorts had a higher score on the impulse control disorders scale when compared with sporadic PD, but no difference in other psychiatric features. Both genetic PD cohorts had less loss of dopamine transporter on DAT imaging when compared with sporadic PD. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm previous reports of milder phenotype associated with LRRK2-PD. A previously reported more aggressive phenotype in GBA-PD is not evident early in the disease in N370s carriers. This observation identifies a window for potential disease-modifying interventions. Longitudinal data will be essential to define the slope of progression for both genetic cohorts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01141023). © 2020 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

A cluster randomized trial to evaluate a centralized remote clinical pharmacy service in large, health system primary care clinics.

Background: We developed a remote cardiovascular risk service (CVRS) managed by clinical pharmacists to support primary care teams. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the CVRS could improve guideline adherence in primary care clinics with diverse geographic and patient characteristics. Methods: This study was a cluster-randomized trial initiated in 20 primary care clinics across the US. Clinics were stratified as high or low minority and then randomized to receive the intervention or maintain usual care for 12 months. The primary outcome was adherence to relevant The Guideline Advantage (TGA) criteria met. TGA is a compilation of criteria from practice guidelines intended to improve the quality of primary care. Post-hoc outcomes included changes in individual TGA measures. Results: A total of 401 study subjects were included in the analysis. Mean TGA scores remained the same in the intervention group (n=193, 0.72) and slightly decreased in the usual care group (n=208, 0.67 to 0.66) over the 12-month study period. There was no significant difference between the mean TGA scores in intervention and usual care groups for the overall population at 12 months (0.72 versus 0.66 respectively, p=0.10). For under-represented minority subjects, there was no significant difference between TGA scores at 12 months (n=186; 0.70 versus 0.67, respectively, p=0.50). In a post-hoc analysis of subjects uncontrolled at baseline, there was a significant improvement in systolic BP at 12 months in the intervention group versus usual care (model-based difference of -8.03mmHg, p=0.03). Conclusions: Improvements in individual TGA measures were limited, in part, due to higher than expected baseline TGA scores. Future studies of this model should focus on patients with uncontrolled conditions at high risk for cardiovascular events. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02215408; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02215408?id=NCT02215408.

Phase 2 Trial of Rituximab in Acetylcholine Receptor Antibody-Positive Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: The BeatMG Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether rituximab is safe and potentially beneficial, warranting further investigation in an efficacy trial for acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive generalized MG (AChR-Ab+ gMG). METHODS: The B-Cell Targeted Treatment in MG (BeatMG) study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase-2 trial that utilized a futility design. Individuals 21-90 years of age, with AChR-Ab+ gMG (MG Foundation of America Class II-IV) and receiving prednisone ≥15 mg/day were eligible. The primary outcome was a measure of steroid-sparing effect, defined as the proportion achieving ≥75% reduction in mean daily prednisone dose in the 4-weeks prior to week 52 and with clinical improvement or no significant worsening as compared to the 4-week period prior to randomization. The co-primary outcome was safety. Secondary outcomes included MG-specific clinical assessments. Fifty-two individuals were randomized (1:1) to either a two-cycle rituximab/placebo regimen, with follow-up through 52-weeks. RESULTS: Of the 52 participants included, mean (±SD) age at enrollment was 55.1 (±17.1) years; 23 (44.2%) were female, and 31 (59.6%) were MGFA Class II. The mean (±SD) baseline prednisone dose was 22.1 (±9.7) mg/day. The primary steroid-sparing outcome was achieved in 60% of those on rituximab vs. 56% on placebo. The study reached its futility endpoint (p=0.03) suggesting that the pre-defined clinically meaningful improvement of 30% due to rituximab over placebo was unlikely to be achieved in a subsequent, larger trial. No safety issues identified. CONCLUSIONS: While rituximab was safe and well-tolerated, these results suggest that there is a low probability of observing the defined clinically meaningful steroid-sparing effect over a 12-month period in a phase-3 trial of mild-moderately symptomatic AChR-Ab+ gMG. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for mild-to-moderate AChR-Ab+ gMG, compared with placebo, rituximab is safe but unlikely to reduce steroid use by an absolute difference of at least 30% at 1 year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02110706.

Clinical and dopamine transporter imaging characteristics of non-manifest LRRK2 and GBA mutation carriers in the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI): a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) is an ongoing observational, longitudinal cohort study of participants with Parkinson's disease, healthy controls, and carriers of the most common Parkinson's disease-related genetic mutations, which aims to define biomarkers of Parkinson's disease diagnosis and progression. All participants are assessed annually with a battery of motor and non-motor scales, 123-I Ioflupane dopamine transporter (DAT) imaging, and biological variables. We aimed to examine whether non-manifesting carriers of LRRK2 and GBA mutations have prodromal features of Parkinson's disease that correlate with reduced DAT binding. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis is based on assessments done at enrolment in the subset of non-manifesting carriers of LRRK2 and GBA mutations enrolled into the PPMI study from 33 participating sites worldwide. The primary objective was to examine baseline clinical and DAT imaging characteristics in non-manifesting carriers with GBA and LRRK2 mutations compared with healthy controls. DAT deficit was defined as less than 65% of putamen striatal binding ratio expected for the individual's age. We used t tests, χ2 tests, and Fisher's exact tests to compare baseline demographics across groups. An inverse probability weighting method was applied to control for potential confounders such as age and sex. To account for multiple comparisons, we applied a family-wise error rate to each set of analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01141023. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 1, 2019, the study enrolled 208 LRRK2 (93% G2019S) and 184 GBA (96% N370S) non-manifesting carriers. Both groups were similar with respect to mean age, and about 60% were female. Of the 286 (73%) non-manifesting carriers that had DAT imaging results, 18 (11%) LRRK2 and four (3%) GBA non-manifesting carriers had a DAT deficit. Compared with healthy controls, both LRRK2 and GBA non-manifesting carriers had significantly increased mean scores on the Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (total score 4·6 [SD 4·4] healthy controls vs 8·4 [7·3] LRRK2 vs 9·5 [9·2] GBA, p<0·0001 for both comparisons) and the Scale for Outcomes for PD - autonomic function (5·8 [3·7] vs 8·1 [5·9] and 8·4 [6·0], p<0·0001 for both comparisons). There was no difference in daytime sleepiness, anxiety, depression, impulsive-compulsive disorders, blood pressure, urate, and rapid eye movement (REM) behaviour disorder scores. Hyposmia was significantly more common only in LRRK2 non-manifesting carriers (69 [36%] of 194 healthy controls vs 114 [55%] of 208 LRRK2 non-manifesting carriers; p=0·0003). Finally, GBA but not LRRK2 non-manifesting carriers showed increased DAT striatal binding ratios compared with healthy controls in the caudate (healthy controls 2·98 [SD 0·63] vs GBA 3·26 [0·63]; p<0·0001), putamen (2·15 [0·56] vs 2·48 [0·52]; p<0·0001), and striatum (2·56 [0·57] vs 2·87 [0·55]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Our data show evidence of subtle motor and non-motor signs of Parkinson's disease in non-manifesting carriers compared with healthy controls that can precede DAT deficit. Longitudinal data will be essential to confirm these findings and define the trajectory and predictors for development of Parkinson's disease. FUNDING: Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research.

Lack of independent mood-enhancing effect for dopaminergic medications in early Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: A direct antidepressant effect has been reported for certain dopaminergic medications used in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). OBJECTIVE: To examine whether dopaminergic medications may exert differential effects on mood in early PD. METHODS: We analyzed prospectively-collected 5-year data on 405 early, drug-naïve (at baseline) PD patients enrolled in the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) cohort study, initiated on levodopa, dopamine agonists (DAs), or monoamine-oxidase type B inhibitors (iMAO-B) under naturalistic conditions. The outcome for depressive symptoms was the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) score. Potential motor and cognitive confounders were measured using the Unified Parkinson's disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS-III) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Three statistical models were used to determine medication effects on GDS-15 scores: unadjusted, adjusted, and a marginal structural model. RESULTS: One-third of patients in this cohort met GDS-15 threshold for clinically-significant depressive symptoms (GDS-15 ≥ 5). There was a marginal positive effect on GDS-15 scores after iMAO-B treatment initiation (-0.35 95%; CI: -0.73, 0.04; p = 0.08). There were no significant interactions between any of the three medication groups, but robust interactions between MoCA scores and both DAs (p = 0.005) and iMAO-B (p = 0.03) use on GDS-15 scores. Specifically, as MoCA scores worsened, DAs yielded a steeper worsening of GDS-15 scores while iMAO-B a moderating effect on GDS-15. CONCLUSION: Dopaminergic medications have no direct effect on mood in early, unselected PD patients.

Pharmacist Intervention for Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Diabetes and/or Chronic Kidney Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine if hypertensive patients with comorbid diabetes mellitus (DM) and/or chronic kidney disease (CKD) receiving a pharmacist intervention had a greater reduction in mean blood pressure (BP) and improved BP control at 9 months compared with those receiving usual care; and compare Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) guideline and 2014 guideline (JNC 8) BP control rates in patients with DM and/or CKD. METHODS: This cluster randomized trial included 32 medical offices in 15 states. Clinical pharmacists made treatment recommendations to physicians at intervention sites. This post hoc analysis evaluated mean BP and BP control rates in the intervention and control groups. MAIN RESULTS: The study included 335 patients (227 intervention, 108 control) when mean BP and control rates were evaluated by JNC 7 inclusion and control criteria. When JNC 8 inclusion and control criteria were applied, 241 patients (165 intervention, 76 control) remained and were included in the analysis. The pharmacist-intervention group had significantly greater mean systolic blood pressure reduction compared with usual care at 9 months (8.64 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI] -12.8 to -4.49, p<0.001). The pharmacist-intervention group had significantly higher BP control at 9 months than usual care by either the JNC 7 or JNC 8 inclusion and control groups (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.97, 95% CI 1.01-3.86, p=0.0470 and OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.21-3.85, p=0.0102, respectively). PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that a physician-pharmacist collaborative intervention was effective in reducing mean systolic BP and improving BP control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension with DM and/or CKD, regardless of which BP guidelines were used.

Physician-Pharmacist Collaborative Management: Narrowing the Socioeconomic Blood Pressure Gap.

Physician-pharmacist collaboration improves blood pressure, but there is little information on whether this model can reduce the gap in healthcare disparities. This trial involved 32 medical offices in 15 states. A clinical pharmacist was embedded within each office and made recommendations to physicians and patients in intervention offices. The purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate whether the pharmacist intervention could reduce healthcare disparities by improving blood pressure in high-risk racial and socioeconomic subjects compared with the control group. The analyses in minority subjects were prespecified secondary analyses, but all other comparisons were secondary, post hoc analyses. The 9-month visit was completed by 539 patients: 345 received the intervention, and 194 were in the control group. Following the intervention, mean systolic blood pressure was found to be 7.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 2.4, 12.3) lower in subjects from racial minority groups who received the intervention compared with the control group (P=0.0042). Subjects with ≤12 years of education in the intervention group had a systolic blood pressure 8.1 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 3.2, 13.1) lower than the control group with lower education (P=0.0001). Similar reductions in blood pressure occurred in patients with low incomes, those receiving Medicaid, or those without insurance. This study demonstrated that a pharmacist intervention reduced racial and socioeconomic disparities in the treatment of blood pressure. Although disparities in blood pressure were reduced by the intervention, there were still nonsignificant gaps in mean systolic blood pressure when compared with intervention subjects not at risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00935077.

Physician-pharmacist collaboration versus usual care for treatment-resistant hypertension.

Team-based care has been recommended for patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH), but its efficacy in this setting is unknown. We compared a physician-pharmacist collaborative model (PPCM) to usual care in patients with TRH participating in the Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians To Improve Outcomes Now study. At baseline, 169 patients (27% of Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians To Improve Outcomes Now patients) had TRH: 111 received the PPCM intervention and 58 received usual care. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment arms. After 9 months, adjusted mean systolic blood pressure was reduced by 7 mm Hg more with PPCM intervention than usual care (P = .036). Blood pressure control was 34.2% with PPCM versus 25.9% with usual care (adjusted odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-11.2). These findings suggest that team-based care in the primary care setting may be effective for TRH. Additional research is needed regarding the long-term impact of these models and to identify patients most likely to benefit from team-based interventions.

Pharmacist intervention for blood pressure control: medication intensification and adherence.

The objective of this study was to describe medication adherence and medication intensification in a physician-pharmacist collaborative management (PPCM) model compared with usual care. This study was a prospective, cluster, randomized study in 32 primary care offices from 15 states. The primary outcomes were medication adherence and anti-hypertensive medication changes during the first 9 months of the intervention. The 9-month visit was completed by 539 patients, 345 of which received the intervention. There was no significant difference between intervention and usual care patients in regards to medication adherence at 9 months. Intervention patients received significantly more medication changes (4.9 vs.1.1; P = .0003) and had significantly increased use of diuretics and aldosterone antagonists when compared with usual care (P = .01).The PPCM model increased medication intensification; however, no significant change in medication adherence was detected. PPCM models will need to develop non-adherence identification and intervention methods to further improve the potency of the care team.

Cluster-randomized trial of a physician/pharmacist collaborative model to improve blood pressure control.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate if a physician/pharmacist collaborative model would be implemented as determined by improved blood pressure (BP) control in primary care medical offices with diverse geographic and patient characteristics and whether long-term BP control could be sustained. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective, cluster-randomized trial of 32 primary care offices stratified and randomized to control, 9-month intervention (brief), and 24-month intervention (sustained). We enrolled 625 subjects with uncontrolled hypertension; 54% from racial/ethnic minority groups and 50% with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease. The primary outcome of BP control at 9 months was 43% in intervention offices (n=401) compared with 34% in the control group (n=224; adjusted odds ratio, 1.57 [95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.50]; P=0.059). The adjusted difference in mean systolic/diastolic BP between the intervention and control groups for all subjects at 9 months was -6.1/-2.9 mm Hg (P=0.002 and P=0.005, respectively), and it was -6.4/-2.9 mm Hg (P=0.009 and P=0.044, respectively) in subjects from racial or ethnic minorities. BP control and mean BP were significantly improved in subjects from racial minorities in intervention offices at 18 and 24 months (P=0.048 to P<0.001) compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of the primary outcome (BP control) were negative, the key secondary end point (mean BP) was significantly improved in the intervention group. Thus, the findings for secondary end points suggest that team-based care using clinical pharmacists was implemented in diverse primary care offices and BP was reduced in subjects from racial minority groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00935077.

A Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Centralized Clinical Pharmacy Cardiovascular Risk Service to Improve Guideline Adherence.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have demonstrated the value of including pharmacists in team-based care to improve adherence to cardiovascular (CV) guidelines, medication adherence, and risk factor control. However, there is limited information on whether these models can be successfully implemented more widely in diverse settings and populations. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a centralized, web-based cardiovascular risk service (CVRS) managed by clinical pharmacists will improve guideline adherence in multiple primary care medical offices with diverse geographic and patient characteristics. METHODS: This study is a prospective trial in 20 primary care offices stratified by the percent of under-represented minorities and then randomized to either the CVRS intervention or usual care. The intervention will last for 12 months and all subjects will have research visits at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome is the difference in guideline adherence between groups. Data will also be abstracted from the medical record at 24 months to determine if the intervention effect is sustained after it is discontinued. CONCLUSIONS: Patient enrollment will continue through 2016, with results expected in 2019. This study will provide information on whether a distant, centralized CVRS can be implemented in large numbers of medical offices, if it is effective in diverse populations, and if there is a long-term sustained effect.

Physician-pharmacist collaborative management of asthma in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if asthma control improves in patients who receive physician-pharmacist collaborative management (PPCM) during visits to primary care medical offices. DESIGN: Prospective pre-post study of patients who received the intervention in primary care offices for 9 months. The primary outcome was the sum of asthma-related emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations at 9 months before, 9 months during, and 9 months after the intervention. Events were analyzed using linear mixed-effects regression. Secondary analysis was conducted for patients with uncontrolled asthma (Asthma Control Test [ACT] less than 20). Additional secondary outcomes included the ACT, the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire by Marks (AQLQ-M) scores, and medication changes. INTERVENTION: Pharmacists provided patients with an asthma self-management plan and education and made pharmacotherapy recommendations to physicians when appropriate. RESULTS: Of 126 patients, the number of emergency department (ED) visits and/or hospitalizations decreased 30% during the intervention (p=0.052) and then returned to preenrollment levels after the intervention was discontinued (p=0.83). Secondary analysis of patients with uncontrolled asthma at baseline (ACT less than 20), showed 37 ED visits and hospitalizations before the intervention, 21 during the intervention, and 33 after the intervention was discontinued (p=0.019). ACT and AQLQ-M scores improved during the intervention (ACT mean absolute increase of 2.11, AQLQ-M mean absolute decrease of 4.86, p<0.0001) and sustained a stable effect after discontinuation of the intervention. Inhaled corticosteroid use increased during the intervention (p=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: The PPCM care model reduced asthma-related ED visits and hospitalizations and improved asthma control and quality of life. However, the primary outcome was not statistically significant for all patients. There was a significant reduction in ED visits and hospitalizations during the intervention for patients with uncontrolled asthma at baseline. Our findings support the need for further studies to investigate asthma outcomes achievable with the PPCM model.

Similar blood pressure values across racial and economic groups: baseline data from a group randomized clinical trial.

This paper examines baseline characteristics from a prospective, cluster-randomized trial in 32 primary care offices. Offices were first stratified by percentage of minorities and level of clinical pharmacy services and then randomized into 1 of 3 study groups. The only differences between randomized arms were for marital status (P=.03) and type of insurance coverage (P<.001). Blood pressures (BPs) were similar in Caucasians and minority patients, primarily blacks, who were hypertensive at baseline. On multivariate analyses, patients who were 65 years and older had higher systolic BP (152.4 ± 14.3 mm Hg), but lower diastolic BP (77.3 ± 11.8 mm Hg) compared with those younger than 65 years (147.4 ± 15.0/88.6 ± 10.6 mm Hg, P<.001 for both systolic and diastolic BP). Other factors significantly associated with higher systolic BP were a longer duration of hypertension (P=.04) and lower basal metabolic index (P=.011). Patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease had a lower systolic BP than those without these conditions (P<.0001). BP was similar across racial and socioeconomic groups for patients with uncontrolled hypertension in primary care, suggesting that patients with uncontrolled hypertension and an established primary care relationship likely have different reasons for poor BP control than other patient populations.