1
|
Chen C, Novakovic A, Jamsen K, Vong C, Arshad U. Sparse item testing of clinical scales in neurology trials to alleviate burden to patients. J Neurol 2024:10.1007/s00415-024-12650-4. [PMID: 39212742 DOI: 10.1007/s00415-024-12650-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2024] [Revised: 08/16/2024] [Accepted: 08/17/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neurology trials typically rely on composite scales for measuring symptom severity. Completing all items in a long scale can be burdensome for patients, caregivers, and trial personnel. OBJECTIVES To test the hypothesis that sparse item testing, aided by item-response modelling, can preserve the power for detecting treatment effect in a controlled trial. METHODS UPDRS (Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale) Part III (motor examinations) data from a placebo-controlled trial (N = 391) of ropinirole were analysed with a longitudinal item-response model. Symptom severity was estimated directly from item scores as a latent variable, without needing the total score. This enabled sparse item testing. With the symptom severity as a clinical endpoint, the potential power loss for detecting treatment effect due to the sparse testing was assessed by simulation. RESULTS When each patient took 18 of all 27 tests in UPDRS Part III at each study visit, there was no appreciable power loss. Reducing four visits to three also had negligible effects on power. A threefold reduction of the total tests that each patient needed to do throughout the trial, from 108 to 27, only compromised power slightly, e.g., from 92 to 87% at N = 160. CONCLUSIONS These findings show that using the symptom severity derived from item scores as the endpoint allows sparse testing to drastically reduce trial burden without incurring major power loss. This benefit would multiply for indications like Alzheimer's disease where modern trials often require patients to be tested on multiple scales at several times.
Collapse
|
2
|
Hopfner F, Buhmann C, Classen J, Holtbernd F, Klebe S, Koschel J, Kohl Z, Paus S, Pedrosa DJ. Tips and tricks in tremor treatment. J Neural Transm (Vienna) 2024:10.1007/s00702-024-02806-x. [PMID: 39043978 DOI: 10.1007/s00702-024-02806-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2024] [Accepted: 07/04/2024] [Indexed: 07/25/2024]
Abstract
Tremor, whether arising from neurological diseases, other conditions, or medication side effects, significantly impacts patients' lives. Treatment complexities necessitate clear algorithms and strategies. Levodopa remains pivotal for Parkinson's tremor, though response variability exists. Some dopamine agonists offer notable tremor reduction targeting D2 receptors. Propranolol effectively manages essential tremor and essential tremor plus (ET/ET +), sometimes with primidone for added benefits, albeit dose-dependent side effects. As reserve medications anticholinergics and clozapine are used for treatment of parkinsonian tremor, 1-Octanol and certain anticonvulsant drugs for tremor of other orign, especially ET. Therapies such as invasive deep brain stimulation and lesional focused ultrasound serve for resistant cases. A medication review is crucial for all forms of tremor, but it is particularly important if medication may have triggered the tremor. Sensor-based detection and non-drug interventions like wristbands and physical therapy broaden diagnostic and therapeutic horizons, promising future tremor care enhancements. Understanding treatment nuances is a key for tailored tremor management respecting patient needs and tolerability. Successful strategies integrate pharmacological, non-invasive, and technological modalities, aiming for optimal symptom control and improved quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Franziska Hopfner
- Department of Neurology, Neurologische Klinik und Poliklinik mit Friedrich Baur Institut, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Campus Großhadern, Marchioninistraße 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
| | - Carsten Buhmann
- Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Joseph Classen
- Department of Neurology, Leipzig University Medical Center, Liebigstraße 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Florian Holtbernd
- Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstraße 30, Aachen, Germany
- JARA-BRAIN Institute Molecular Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, Juelich Research Center GmbH and RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
| | - Stephan Klebe
- Department of Neurology, Essen University Hospital, 45147, Essen, Germany
- Department of Neurology, Knappschaftskrankenhaus Recklinghausen, Recklinghausen, Germany
| | - Jiri Koschel
- Parkinson-Klinik Ortenau, GmbH & Co KG, Kreuzbergstraße 12-16, 77709, Wolfach, Germany
| | - Zacharias Kohl
- Department of Neurology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Paus
- Department of Neurology, GFO Clinics Troisdorf, Troisdorf, Germany
| | - David J Pedrosa
- Department of Neurology, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
- Centre for Mind, Brain and Behaviour, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ghilardi MF, Quartarone A, Di Rocco A, Calabrò RS, Luo S, Liu H, Norcini M, Canesi M, Cian V, Zarucchi M, Ortelli P, Volpe D, Bakdounes L, Castelli D, Di Fonzo A, Franco G, Frattini E, Avanzino L, Pelosin E, Ogliastro C, Ceravolo R, Palermo G, Tommasini L, Frosini D, Parnetti L, Tambasco N, Nigro P, Simoni S, Schmidt P. Supplementing Best Care with Specialized Rehabilitation Treatment in Parkinson's Disease: A Retrospective Study by Different Expert Centers. J Clin Med 2024; 13:2999. [PMID: 38792540 PMCID: PMC11122594 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13102999] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2024] [Revised: 04/26/2024] [Accepted: 05/01/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: This is a retrospective longitudinal study comparing 374 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) who were treated in centers offering a specialized program of enhanced rehabilitation therapy in addition to expert outpatient care to 387 patients with PD, who only received expert outpatient care at movement disorders centers in Italy. Methods: The data are from subjects recruited in the Parkinson's Outcome Project (POP) at six Italian centers that are part of a multicenter collaboration for care quality improvement (the Fresco Network). The effects were measured with a baseline and a follow-up clinical evaluation of the Timed-Up-and-Go test (TUG), Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), and Multidimensional Caregiver Strain Index (MCSI), the number of falls and hospitalizations for any cause. We used a generalized linear mixed model with the dependent variables being the response variable, which included the covariates demographics, evaluation, and treatment variables. Results: We found that the subjects who underwent specialized enhanced rehabilitation had a better motor outcome over time than those who were managed by expert neurologists but had participated in community programs for exercise and other allied health interventions. The greatest effects were seen in patients in the early stages of the disease with a high amount of vigorous exercise per week in the last six months. Similar effects were seen for PDQ39, MCSI, the number of falls, and hospitalization. Conclusions: Long-term benefits to motor function and the quality of life in patients with PD and burden reduction in their caregivers can be achieved through a systematic program of specialized enhanced rehabilitation interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Felice Ghilardi
- Cellular & Biomedical Sciences Department, CUNY School of Medicine, Molecular, New York, NY 10031, USA;
- The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, NY 10016, USA
| | - Angelo Quartarone
- IRCCS Centro Neurolesi “Bonino-Pulejo” Messina, 98124 Messina, Italy;
| | | | | | - Sheng Luo
- Department of Population Health, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (S.L.); (H.L.)
| | - Hongliang Liu
- Department of Population Health, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA; (S.L.); (H.L.)
| | - Monica Norcini
- NYU Langone Health, Department of Neurology, New York, NY 10016, USA
| | - Margherita Canesi
- The Gravedona e Riuniti Ospedale, 22015 Gravedona, Italy; (M.C.); (V.C.); (M.Z.); (P.O.)
| | - Veronica Cian
- The Gravedona e Riuniti Ospedale, 22015 Gravedona, Italy; (M.C.); (V.C.); (M.Z.); (P.O.)
| | - Marianna Zarucchi
- The Gravedona e Riuniti Ospedale, 22015 Gravedona, Italy; (M.C.); (V.C.); (M.Z.); (P.O.)
| | - Paola Ortelli
- The Gravedona e Riuniti Ospedale, 22015 Gravedona, Italy; (M.C.); (V.C.); (M.Z.); (P.O.)
| | - Daniele Volpe
- Villa Margherita—S. Stefano Riabilitazione, 36057 Vicenza, Italy; (D.V.); (L.B.); (D.C.)
| | - Leila Bakdounes
- Villa Margherita—S. Stefano Riabilitazione, 36057 Vicenza, Italy; (D.V.); (L.B.); (D.C.)
| | - Davide Castelli
- Villa Margherita—S. Stefano Riabilitazione, 36057 Vicenza, Italy; (D.V.); (L.B.); (D.C.)
| | - Alessio Di Fonzo
- Department of Neurology, IRCSS Fondazione Ca’ Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico di Milano, 20122 Milano, Italy; (A.D.F.); (G.F.); (E.F.)
| | - Giulia Franco
- Department of Neurology, IRCSS Fondazione Ca’ Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico di Milano, 20122 Milano, Italy; (A.D.F.); (G.F.); (E.F.)
| | - Emanuele Frattini
- Department of Neurology, IRCSS Fondazione Ca’ Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico di Milano, 20122 Milano, Italy; (A.D.F.); (G.F.); (E.F.)
| | - Laura Avanzino
- Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, IRCSS Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genoa, Italy; (L.A.); (E.P.); (C.O.)
- Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Human Physiology (LA), University of Genoa, 16126 Genoa, Italy
| | - Elisa Pelosin
- Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, IRCSS Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genoa, Italy; (L.A.); (E.P.); (C.O.)
- Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Human Physiology (LA), University of Genoa, 16126 Genoa, Italy
| | - Carla Ogliastro
- Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, IRCSS Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genoa, Italy; (L.A.); (E.P.); (C.O.)
- Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Human Physiology (LA), University of Genoa, 16126 Genoa, Italy
| | - Roberto Ceravolo
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases-Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy; (R.C.); (G.P.); (L.T.); (D.F.)
| | - Giovanni Palermo
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases-Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy; (R.C.); (G.P.); (L.T.); (D.F.)
| | - Luca Tommasini
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases-Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy; (R.C.); (G.P.); (L.T.); (D.F.)
| | - Daniela Frosini
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases-Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy; (R.C.); (G.P.); (L.T.); (D.F.)
| | - Lucilla Parnetti
- Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 06156 Perugia, Italy; (L.P.); (N.T.); (P.N.); (S.S.)
| | - Nicola Tambasco
- Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 06156 Perugia, Italy; (L.P.); (N.T.); (P.N.); (S.S.)
| | - Pasquale Nigro
- Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 06156 Perugia, Italy; (L.P.); (N.T.); (P.N.); (S.S.)
| | - Simone Simoni
- Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 06156 Perugia, Italy; (L.P.); (N.T.); (P.N.); (S.S.)
| | - Peter Schmidt
- NYU Langone Health, Department of Neurology, New York, NY 10016, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hendrickx N, Mentré F, Traschütz A, Gagnon C, Schüle R, Synofzik M, Comets E. Prediction of Individual Disease Progression Including Parameter Uncertainty in Rare Neurodegenerative Diseases: The Example of Autosomal-Recessive Spastic Ataxia Charlevoix Saguenay (ARSACS). AAPS J 2024; 26:57. [PMID: 38689016 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-024-00925-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2024] [Accepted: 04/16/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop a model to predict individual subject disease trajectories including parameter uncertainty and accounting for missing data in rare neurological diseases, showcased by the ultra-rare disease Autosomal-Recessive Spastic Ataxia Charlevoix Saguenay (ARSACS). We modelled the change in SARA (Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia) score versus Time Since Onset of symptoms using non-linear mixed effect models for a population of 173 patients with ARSACS included in the prospective real-world multicenter Autosomal Recessive Cerebellar Ataxia (ARCA) registry. We used the Multivariate Imputation Chained Equation (MICE) algorithm to impute missing covariates, and a covariate selection procedure with a pooled p-value to account for the multiply imputed data sets. We then investigated the impact of covariates and population parameter uncertainty on the prediction of the individual trajectories up to 5 years after their last visit. A four-parameter logistic function was selected. Men were estimated to have a 25% lower SARA score at disease onset and a moderately higher maximum SARA score, and time to progression (T50) was estimated to be 35% lower in patients with age of onset over 15 years. The population disease progression rate started slowly at 0.1 points per year peaking to a maximum of 0.8 points per year (at 36.8 years since onset of symptoms). The prediction intervals for SARA scores 5 years after the last visit were large (median 7.4 points, Q1-Q3: 6.4-8.5); their size was mostly driven by individual parameter uncertainty and individual disease progression rate at that time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niels Hendrickx
- Université Paris Cité, IAME, Inserm, F-75018, Paris, France.
| | - France Mentré
- Université Paris Cité, IAME, Inserm, F-75018, Paris, France
| | - Andreas Traschütz
- Division Translational Genomics of Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research (HIH), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Tübingen, Germany
| | - Cynthia Gagnon
- Centre de Recherche du CHUS Et du Centre de Santé Et Des Services Sociaux du Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
| | - Rebecca Schüle
- Division Translational Genomics of Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research (HIH), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Tübingen, Germany
| | - Matthis Synofzik
- Division Translational Genomics of Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research (HIH), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Tübingen, Germany
| | - Emmanuelle Comets
- Université Paris Cité, IAME, Inserm, F-75018, Paris, France
- Univ Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, Irset - UMR_S 1085, 35000, Rennes, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zhou X, Zou H, Lutz MW, Arbeev K, Akushevich I, Yashin A, Welsh-Bohmer KA, Luo S. Assessing tilavonemab efficacy in early Alzheimer's disease via longitudinal item response theory modeling. ALZHEIMER'S & DEMENTIA (NEW YORK, N. Y.) 2024; 10:e12471. [PMID: 38835820 PMCID: PMC11148533 DOI: 10.1002/trc2.12471] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2023] [Revised: 03/28/2024] [Accepted: 03/30/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by declines in cognitive and functional severities. This research utilized the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) to assess the influence of tilavonemab on these deteriorations. METHODS Longitudinal Item Response Theory (IRT) models were employed to analyze CDR domains in early-stage AD patients. Both unidimensional and multidimensional models were contrasted to elucidate the trajectories of cognitive and functional severities. RESULTS We observed significant temporal increases in both cognitive and functional severities, with the cognitive severity deteriorating at a quicker rate. Tilavonemab did not demonstrate a statistically significant effect on the progression in either severity. Furthermore, a significant positive association was identified between the baselines and progression rates of both severities. DISCUSSION While tilavonemab failed to mitigate impairment progression, our multidimensional IRT analysis illuminated the interconnected progression of cognitive and functional declines in AD, suggesting a comprehensive perspective on disease trajectories. Highlights Utilized longitudinal Item Response Theory (IRT) models to analyze the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) domains in early-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, comparing unidimensional and multidimensional models.Observed significant temporal increases in both cognitive and functional severities, with cognitive severity deteriorating at a faster rate, while tilavonemab showed no statistically significant effect on either domain's progression.Found a significant positive association between the baseline severities and their progression rates, indicating interconnected progression patterns of cognitive and functional declines in AD.Introduced the application of multidimensional longitudinal IRT models to provide a comprehensive perspective on the trajectories of cognitive and functional severities in early AD, suggesting new avenues for future research including the inclusion of time-dependent random effects and data-driven IRT models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaoxiao Zhou
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Haotian Zou
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Michael W Lutz
- Division of Translational Brain Sciences Department of Neurology Duke University Medical Center Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Konstantin Arbeev
- Social Science Research Institute Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Igor Akushevich
- Social Science Research Institute Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Anatoli Yashin
- Social Science Research Institute Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Kathleen A Welsh-Bohmer
- Department of Psychiatry Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
- Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI) Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| | - Sheng Luo
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics Duke University Durham North Carolina USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Woitalla D, Buhmann C, Hilker-Roggendorf R, Höglinger G, Koschel J, Müller T, Weise D. Role of dopamine agonists in Parkinson's disease therapy. J Neural Transm (Vienna) 2023; 130:863-873. [PMID: 37165120 DOI: 10.1007/s00702-023-02647-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
Dopamine agonists are an important component of Parkinson's therapy. When weighing up the various therapy options, therapy with levodopa has recently been increasingly preferred due to its stronger efficacy and the ostensibly lower rate of side effects. The advantage of the lower incidence of motor complications during therapy with dopamine agonists was neglected. The occurrence of side effects can be explained by the different receptor affinity to the individual dopaminergic and non-dopaminergic receptors of the individual dopamine agonists. However, the different affinity to individual receptors also explains the different effect on individual Parkinson symptoms and can, therefore, contribute to a targeted use of the different dopamine agonists. Since comparative studies on the differential effect of dopamine agonists have only been conducted for individual substances, empirical knowledge of the differential effect is of great importance. Therefore, the guidelines for the treatment of Parkinson's disease do not consider the differential effect of the dopamine agonists. The historical consideration of dopamine agonists within Parkinson's therapy deserves special attention to be able to classify the current discussion about the significance of dopamine agonists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Woitalla
- Department of Neurology, Katholische Kliniken Der Ruhrhalbinsel, Essen, Germany.
| | - C Buhmann
- Department of Neurology, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - G Höglinger
- Department of Neurology, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - J Koschel
- Department of Neurology Parkinson-Klinik Ortenau, Wolfach, Germany
| | - T Müller
- Department of Neurology, Alexianer St. Joseph Krankenhaus, Berlin, Germany
| | - D Weise
- Department of Neurology, Asklepios Fachklinikum Stadtroda, Stadtroda, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Guo Y, Goetz CG, Stebbins GT, Mestre TA, Luo S. Using Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Parts 2 and 3 Simultaneously: Combining the Patient Voice with Clinician Ratings. Mov Disord 2023; 38:453-463. [PMID: 36621935 PMCID: PMC10033355 DOI: 10.1002/mds.29308] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2022] [Revised: 12/12/2022] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Regulatory recommendations favor outcomes combining objective and patient input. The Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), the most commonly used scale in Parkinson's disease (PD), includes patient and investigator ratings in distinct parts, but original clinimetric analyses failed to confirm the validity of combining parts by simple summing. OBJECTIVES The aim was to develop clinimetrically valid constructs for combining patient-reported Part 2 and investigator-rated Part 3 MDS-UPDRS scores. METHODS Using 7888 MDS-UPDRS scores, we assessed construct validity of combined Part 2 and Part 3 items using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and graded item response theory (IRT) with threshold criteria: comparative fit index ≥0.9 (EFA) and discrimination parameters ≥0.65 (IRT). RESULTS The direct sum of Parts 2 + 3 failed to meet the threshold for a valid outcome of PD severity (comparative fit index, CFI = 0.855). However, a two-domain construct combining item scores for tremor and non-tremor domains from Parts 2 and 3 confirmed validity, meeting both EFA and IRT criteria as distinct but correlated indices of disease severity (CFI = 0.923; discrimination mean 2.197 ± 0.480 [tremor] and 1.737 ± 0.344 [non-tremor] domains). CONCLUSIONS The sum of Parts 2 + 3 is not clinimetrically sound. However, considering tremor and non-tremor items of both Parts 2 and 3 as two outcomes results in a valid summary of PD motor severity that leverages simultaneous patient- and investigator-derived measures. This analytic application addresses regulatory prioritizations and retains the well-validated MDS-UPDRS items. In future interventional trials, we suggest that tremor and non-tremor components of PD motor severity from Parts 2 + 3 be monitored and analyzed to accurately detect objective changes that integrate the patient's voice. © 2023 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuanyuan Guo
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Christopher G Goetz
- Department of Neurological Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Glenn T Stebbins
- Department of Neurological Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Tiago A Mestre
- Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa Brain and Mind Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sheng Luo
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|