SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Outcome Measures for Disease-Modifying Trials in Parkinson's Disease: Consensus Paper by the EJS ACT-PD Multi-Arm Multi-Stage Trial Initiative.

J Parkinsons Dis · 2023-01-01

DOI: 10.3233/jpd-230051PMID: 37545260

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Consensus Statement; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundMulti-arm, multi-stage (MAMS) platform trials can accelerate the identification of disease-modifying treatments for Parkinson's disease (PD) but there is no current consensus on the optimal outcome measures (OM) for this approach.ObjectiveTo provide an up-to-date inventory of OM for disease-modifying PD trials, and a framework for future selection of OM for such trials.MethodsAs part of the Edmond J Safra Accelerating Clinical Trials in Parkinson Disease (EJS ACT-PD) initiative, an expert group with Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) representatives' input reviewed and evaluated available evidence on OM for potential use in trials to delay progression of PD. Each OM was ranked based on aspects such as validity, sensitivity to change, participant burden and practicality for a multi-site trial. Review of evidence and expert opinion led to the present inventory.ResultsAn extensive inventory of OM was created, divided into: general, motor and non-motor scales, diaries and fluctuation questionnaires, cognitive, disability and health-related quality of life, capability, quantitative motor, wearable and digital, combined, resource use, imaging and wet biomarkers, and milestone-based. A framework for evaluation of OM is presented to update the inventory in the future. PPIE input highlighted the need for OM which reflect their experience of disease progression and are applicable to diverse populations and disease stages.ConclusionWe present a range of OM, classified according to a transparent framework, to aid selection of OM for disease-modifying PD trials, whilst allowing for inclusion or re-classification of relevant OM as new evidence emerges.

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.