SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Safinamide in Clinical Practice: A Spanish Multicenter Cohort Study.

Brain Sci · 2019-10-11

DOI: 10.3390/brainsci9100272PMID: 31614574

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

Background: Safinamide is an approved drug for the treatment of motor fluctuations of Parkinson's Disease (PD) patients with a potential benefit on non-motor symptoms (NMS). Methods: A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted, in which the clinical effect of safinamide on both motor and NMS was assessed by the Clinical Global Impression of Change scale. Furthermore, we assessed the appearance of adverse events (AEs) and its effect on dyskinesia, that were also recorded in non-fluctuating PD patients and in those previously treated with rasagiline. Results: We included 213 PD patients who received safinamide in addition to their regular levodopa therapy. Thirty-five withdrew prematurely from safinamide, mainly because of AEs. Out of 178, clinical improvement on motor and NMS was found in 76.4% and 26.2%, respectively. A total of 44 reported AEs of mild intensity. We did not find a difference concerning the clinical benefit or AEs when comparing either patients who had or had not been taking Monoamine Oxidase B Inhibitor (MAOB-I) previously or between patients with and without motor complications. Conclusions: Safinamide is an effective and safe add-on to levodopa drug for PD patients. Moreover, safinamide could elicit an additional clinical improvement in PD patients previously treated with other MAOB-I and in non- fluctuating patients with suboptimal motor control.

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.