SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Effect of Levodopa-carbidopa Intestinal Gel on Non-motor Symptoms in Patients with Advanced Parkinson's Disease.

Mov Disord Clin Pract · 2017-09-20

DOI: 10.1002/mdc3.12526PMID: 29242809

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundLevodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG; carbidopa-levodopa enteral suspension in the United States), delivered via percutaneous gastrojejunostomy (PEG-J) and titrated in the inpatient setting, is an established treatment option for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with motor fluctuations. However, long-term prospective data on the efficacy of LCIG on non-motor symptoms and the safety of outpatient titration are limited.MethodsIn this 60-week, open-label phase 3b study, LCIG titration was initiated in an outpatient setting following PEG-J placement in PD patients. The efficacy of LCIG on motor and non-motor symptoms, quality of life, and safety was assessed.ResultsThirty-nine patients were enrolled in the study and 28 patients completed the treatment. A majority of patients (54%) completed outpatient titration within the first week of LCIG infusion. LCIG led to significant reductions from baseline in Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS) total score (least squares mean ± SE = -17.6 ± 3.6, P P P ConclusionsLCIG treatment led to reductions in non-motor symptom burden and motor fluctuations in advanced PD patients. The safety profile was consistent with previous studies that used inpatient titration and outpatient titration did not appear to pose additional risk.

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.