SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Duration of "Good On" time per dose: Immediate-release carbidopa-levodopa vs. extended-release carbidopa-levodopa (IPX203, CREXONT®).

Parkinsonism Relat Disord · 2024-12-15

DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2024.107239PMID: 39733558

Check source for accessComparative Study; Randomized Controlled Trial; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundFor Parkinson's disease patients with motor fluctuations, the duration of benefit per levodopa dose is a key metric that reflects a patient's clinical response.ObjectiveDetermine the difference in mean durations of "Good On" time per dose of subjects randomized to extended-release carbidopa-levodopa (ER CD-LD; IPX203; CREXONT®) vs. immediate-release (IR) CD-LD in the RISE-PD trial.Methods"Good On" time per dose was assessed at the end of the IR CD-LD dose adjustment phase (Visit 2/Week 3) and compared to End of Study (Visit 7/EOS) between IPX203 and IR CD-LD groups. In addition, to understand if "Good On" time per dose for IR CD-LD before conversion to IPX203 could impact the magnitude of change in "Good On" time per dose of IPX203 vs. IR CD-LD after conversion, subjects were rank-ordered and divided into quartiles based on their initial "Good On" time per dose optimized IR CD-LD values. Changes in "Good On" time per dose between IPX203 and IR CD-LD groups were then compared for each quartile from Visit 2 to EOS.ResultsIPX203 increased "Good On" time per dose compared to IR CD-LD by a mean of 1.6 h (p ConclusionIPX203 significantly increased "Good On" time per dose regardless of the duration of "Good On" time per dose observed with IR CD-LD.

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.