Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundThe 5-2-1 criteria (≥5 levodopa doses/day, ≥2 h OFF/day, and ≥ 1-hour dyskinesia/day) propose to identify people with Parkinson's disease (PD) who are poorly controlled on oral therapies and who may therefore benefit from device-aided therapies. Amantadine-DR/ER is the only medication FDA-approved for both dyskinesia and OFF episodes in levodopa-treated patients. In this post-hoc analysis of phase 3 clinical trials, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of amantadine-DR/ER in patients meeting 5-2-1 criteria.MethodsWeek-12 treatment differences (Amantadine-DR/ER - placebo) in the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS) and PD motor states (patient diaries) were evaluated in pooled, phase-3, double-blind trial participants meeting 5-2-1 criteria at baseline. This 5-2-1 cohort was followed into a 2-year open-label trial, where Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rate Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part IV scores were assessed relative to double-blind baseline.ResultsOf 198 enrolled participants in the phase 3 trials, 65 (33%; n = 29 placebo; n = 36 amantadine-DR/ER) comprised the 5-2-1 cohort. At Week-12 endpoint, amantadine-DR/ER significantly improved UDysRS scores (treatment difference of 9.57 ± 3.15 points, p = 0.004) and ON time without troublesome dyskinesia ('good ON', treatment difference of 2.9 ± 0.90 h/day, p = 0.002). Improvements in good ON time resulted from significant reductions in both troublesome dyskinesia and OFF time. Treatment benefit on MDS-UPDRS-Part IV was sustained through open-label, follow-up. The most common adverse events in patients who met 5-2-1 criteria and were treated with amantadine-DR/ER included falls and peripheral edema.ConclusionsFindings suggest Amantadine-DR/ER should be considered as an option for people with PD who meet 5-2-1 criteria.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.