Araştırma özeti
Aşağıdaki metin kaynak makalenin lisansı doğrulanmış orijinal özetidir. cc by
IntroductionLevodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel therapy (LCIG) and foslevodopa-foscarbidopa continuous subcutaneous infusion therapy (FOCS) are device-aided therapies for advanced Parkinson's disease. Comparative real-world pharmacokinetic (PK) data remain limited. This study aimed to compare overall plasma levodopa exposure between LCIG and FOCS.MethodsPatients who initiated LCIG or FOCS, completed dose optimization, and underwent a standardized levodopa challenge were evaluated. Plasma levodopa concentrations and motor states were assessed repeatedly over 420 min. Overall concentrations were compared using a linear mixed-effects model. Steady-state concentration (SSConc; 300-420 min) and its relationship with body-surface-area-adjusted infusion rate were examined. Time to On and the plasma concentration at On transition (On-Conc) were analyzed.ResultsMean plasma levodopa concentrations tended to be higher with FOCS, although the group effect was not significant (geometric mean ratio: 1.38; p = 0.060). SSConc was higher with FOCS (12.85 ± 2.78 vs. 9.23 ± 1.61 nmol/mL). Both therapies showed linear SSConc-dose relationships, with a steeper slope for FOCS. LCIG produced a faster transition to the On state (median 45 vs. 150 min), whereas On-Conc was similar between groups (approximately 10 nmol/mL). In the FOCS group, baseline Off occurred only when nighttime infusion rates were ≤74 % of daytime rates.ConclusionLCIG and FOCS show distinct PK profiles despite similar overall concentrations. LCIG provides a rapid rise in levodopa levels and earlier On onset, whereas FOCS yields higher SSConc values and greater dose-concentration efficiency, informing titration approaches, nighttime infusion settings, and individualized selection of continuous infusion-based dopaminergic therapy.
Bilimsel değerlendirme
Araştırma sorusu
Sorunun kapsamı orijinal çalışma üzerinden değerlendirilir.
Yöntem ve örneklem
Çalışma tasarımı ve örneklem için kaynak makaleyi kontrol edin.
Temel bulgular
Bu kayıt için editoryal olarak onaylanmış bulgu özeti henüz yayımlanmadı.
Sınırlılıklar
Sonuçların genellenebilirliği, yanlılık ve klinik anlamı ayrıca incelenmelidir.
Bibliyografik veriden yöntem, örneklem veya klinik sonuç çıkarımı yapılmaz.