SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Dopamine Transporter Neuroimaging as an Enrichment Biomarker in Early Parkinson's Disease Clinical Trials: A Disease Progression Modeling Analysis.

Clin Transl Sci · 2017-07-27

DOI: 10.1111/cts.12492PMID: 28749580

Open accessResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Evaluation Study; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Given the recognition that disease-modifying therapies should focus on earlier Parkinson's disease stages, trial enrollment based purely on clinical criteria poses significant challenges. The goal herein was to determine the utility of dopamine transporter neuroimaging as an enrichment biomarker in early motor Parkinson's disease clinical trials. Patient-level longitudinal data of 672 subjects with early-stage Parkinson's disease in the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) observational study and the Parkinson Research Examination of CEP-1347 Trial (PRECEPT) clinical trial were utilized in a linear mixed-effects model analysis. The rate of worsening in the motor scores between subjects with or without a scan without evidence of dopamine transporter deficit was different both statistically and clinically. The average difference in the change from baseline of motor scores at 24 months between biomarker statuses was -3.16 (90% confidence interval [CI] = -0.96 to -5.42) points. Dopamine transporter imaging could identify subjects with a steeper worsening of the motor scores, allowing trial enrichment and 24% reduction of sample size.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.