Validation and clinical value of the MANAGE-PD tool: A clinician-reported tool to identify Parkinson's disease patients inadequately controlled on oral medications

Gender disparity in access to advanced therapies for patients with Parkinson's disease: a retrospective real-word study

Background

Gender differences in the access to advanced therapies for Parkinson's disease (PD) are poorly investigated.

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate the presence of any gender disparity in the access to advanced therapies for PD.

Design

Retrospective study.

Methods

Data from patients with consistent access to the Parkinson's and Movement Disorder Center of L'Aquila over the last 10-year period were screened. Patients selected for advanced therapies were included.

Results

Out of 1,252 patients, 200 (mean age ± SD 71.02 ± 9.70; 72% males; median Hoen Yahr level: 3, minimum 1 maximum 5) were selected for advanced therapies: 133 for Magnetic Resonance guided Focused Ultrasound (MRgFUS) thalamotomy (mean age ± SD 70.0 ± 8.9; 77% males), 49 for Levodopa/Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG) infusion (mean age ± SD 74.3 ± 11.4; 59% males), 12 for Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) (mean age ± SD 71.2 ± 6.3; 75% males), and 7 for Continuous Subcutaneous Apomorphine Infusion (CSAI) (mean age ± SD 69.7 ± 5.5; 43% males). No sex differences were found in relation to age (MRgFUS group: males vs. females 70.2 ± 8.9 vs. 70.8 ± 8.9, p-value = 0.809; LCIG group: males vs. females 73.5 ± 13.0 vs. 75.5 ± 8.5, p-value = 0.557; DBS group: males vs. females 77.2 ± 8.1 vs. 67.3 ± 8.6, p-value = 0.843; CSAI group: males vs. females 73.3 ± 4.0 vs. 67.0 ± 5.2, p-value = 0.144) and disease duration (MRgFUS group: males vs. females 8.3 ± 4.4 vs. 9.6 ± 6.7, p-value = 0.419; LCIG group: males vs. females 14.5 ± 5.81 vs. 17.3 ± 5.5; p-value = 0.205; DBS group: males vs. females 15.0 ± 9.6 vs. 15.5 ± 7.7, p-value = 0.796; CSAI group: males vs. females 11.7 ± 3.7 vs. 10.3 ± 3.7, p-value = 0.505).

Conclusion

The predominance of males is higher than that expected based on the higher prevalence of PD in men. Women are less confident in selecting advanced therapies during the natural progression of their disease. Factors accounting for this discrepancy deserve further investigation.

Response to letter to the editor regarding "Does the 5-2-1 criteria identify patients with advanced Parkinson's disease? Real-world screening accuracy and burden of 5-2-1-positive patients in 7 countries"

The 5-2-1 criteria was developed to facilitate the identification and referral of patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) inadequately controlled by oral medications. The criterion was not developed to screen patients with PD for device-aided therapy eligibility. The robust design and validation of the 5-2-1 criteria minimizes over or inappropriate referrals, and supports physicians in the timely identification of patients with PD who may warrant further evaluation for treatment optimization. This response letter clarifies concerns raised by Moes et al.

Grasping the big picture: impact analysis of screening tools for timely referral for device-aided therapies

Several screening tools are available to assist general neurologists in the timely identification of patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) who may be eligible for referral for a device-aided therapy (DAT). However, it should be noted that not all of these clinical decision rules have been developed and validated in a thorough and consistent manner. Furthermore, only a limited number of head-to-head comparisons have been performed. Available studies suggest that D-DATS has a higher positive predictive value and higher specificity than the 5-2-1 criteria, while the sensitivity of both screening tools is similar. However, unanswered questions remain regarding the validity of the decision rules, such as whether the diagnostic performance measures from validation studies are generalizable to other populations. Ultimately, the question is whether a screening tool will effectively and efficiently improve the quality of life of patients with PD. To address this key question, an impact analysis should be performed. The authors intend to set up a multinational cluster randomised controlled trial to compare the D-DATS and 5-2-1 criteria on the downstream consequences of implementing these screening tools, with a particular focus on the impact on disability and quality of life.

Utilization of MANAGE-PD Tool in a Real-World Setting in Germany: A Cross-Sectional Study

MANAGE-PD is a validated, web-based tool to assist physicians in identifying patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) whose symptoms are inadequately controlled by oral medication. Also, a modified patient version of MANAGE-PD (Parkinson Check) is available in Germany. However, prospective research into the clinical utility of MANAGE-PD is lacking. This non-interventional study aimed to assess the real-world clinical utility of the MANAGE-PD and Parkinson Check in PD patients attending a single visit at specialist clinics and neurologist practices in Germany in 2022. Participants' disease control was rated by the physicians using their own judgment, and by completing the MANAGE-PD, and by the patients completing the Parkinson Check. Concordance was calculated between the unassisted physician's assessment and the outcome of MANAGE-PD, as well as the Parkinson Check. A total of 278 patients from 19 sites were included in the analyses, of whom 160 patients (57.6%) were assigned to the same category of disease control by physicians' judgment and the MANAGE-PD. Concordance was higher in patients treated in specialist clinics (63.9%) than in neurologist practices (43.7%). Concordance between physicians' and patients' responses was high (>80%) for each question in the Parkinson Check. MANAGE-PD proved to be especially valuable for general neurologists in identifying patients who should be referred to specialist clinics. The Parkinson Check self-assessment generated promising outcomes that merit its more widespread use.

Advanced therapies in Parkinson's disease: an individualized approach to their indication

Device aided therapies (DAT) comprising the intrajejunal administration of levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) and levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone intestinal gel (LECIG), the continuous subcutaneous application of foslevodopa/foscarbidopa or apomorphine infusion (CSAI) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are used to treat Parkinson's disease with insufficient symptom alleviation under intensified pharmacotherapy. These DAT significantly differ in their efficacy profiles, indication, invasiveness, contraindications, and potential side effects. Usually, the evaluation of all these procedures is conducted simultaneously at the same point in time. However, as disease progression and symptom burden is extremely heterogeneous, clinical experience shows that patients reach the individual milestones for a certain therapy at different points in their disease course. Therefore, advocating for an individualized therapy evaluation for each DAT, requiring an ongoing evaluation. This necessitates that, during each consultation, the current symptomatology should be analyzed, and the potential suitability for a DAT be assessed. This work represents a critical interdisciplinary appraisal of these therapies in terms of their individual profiles and compares these DAT regarding contraindications, periprocedural considerations as well as their efficacy regarding motor- and non-motor deficits, supporting a personalized approach.

Correlation between the MNCD classification-based staging of Parkinson's disease and quality of life: a cross-sectional study

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a highly heterogeneous neurodegenerative disorder with varying clinical subtypes. Recently, a novel classification called MNCD (Motor/Non-motor/Cognition/Dependency) has been proposed, which can also include staging based on disease severity. We aim to investigate which staging, the MNCD classification and staging or Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) staging, exhibits a stronger correlation with the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39). In a cross-sectional study conducted at our single center, 357 PD patients were recruited. Data encompassed scores from various assessments such as the Movement Disorder Society of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Parts I, II, III and IV, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), PDQ-39, and the H&Y scale. The mean age of these patients was 66.4 ± 9.1 years old, and the majority (54.6%) were male. MNCD stages: stage 1 (N = 3, 0.8%), stage 2 (N = 62, 17.4%), stage 3 (N = 187, 52.4%), stage 4 (N = 86, 24.1%), and stage 5 (N = 19, 5.3%). The top 5 most frequent PD-related clinical symptoms were sleep disturbances (89.6%), fatigue (69.7%), mild cognitive impairment (68.9%), constipation (65.8%), and postural instability (65.5%). The PDQ-39 demonstrated a positive correlation with both MNCD staging and H&Y staging. Moreover, the MNCD staging exhibited a stronger correlation with PDQ-39 compared to H&Y staging. The correlation between the MNCD classification and staging with the quality of life in PD patients is more statistically significant compared to the H&Y staging.

Quality of life assessment when considering the introduction of device-assisted therapies in advanced Parkinson's disease: A retrospective observational cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Device-aided therapy (DAT) is an established treatment for improving the quality of life (QOL) in individuals with advanced Parkinson's disease (APD). Criteria for starting DAT, including motor and non-motor symptoms, have been proposed. However, it remains unclear whether QOL differences among patients with APD influence DAT introduction. Therefore, we aimed to investigate QOL differences between patients with and without DAT introduction.

METHODS

This retrospective observational cross-sectional study included 245 patients with PD who were followed up between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022. We defined cases that underwent DAT introduction after evaluation as "planned-DAT" and those that did not as "not-planned-DAT." We performed between-group comparisons of the PD questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) summary index (SI) in patients with APD who met the 5-2-1 criteria (≥5 times the oral levodopa dose/day, ≥2 h of "off" symptoms/day, and ≥ 1 h of troublesome dyskinesia/day).

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients met the inclusion criteria for APD (median age: 68 [61.0-73.0] years; 62.8% [N = 52] women). The PDQ-39 SI scores were higher in the planned-DAT group (N = 12) than in the not-planned-DAT group (N = 67) (29.2 [22.1-33.6] vs. 19.0 [10.3-49.6] points, P < 0.05). After propensity-score matching according to age and sex, the PDQ-39 SI scores remained higher in the planned-DAT (N = 9) than in the not-planned-DAT group (N = 18) (40.0 [25.4-60.0] vs. 18.5 [7.9-46.8] points, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that QOL assessment using PDQ-39 can be used to identify patients eligible for DAT.

Towards improved access to device-aided therapies in advanced PD: the importance of cooperation of different disciplines

Managing the many issues in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) requires education, continuous support, and specialized outpatient care involving a variety of allied healthcare professionals. It would be greatly appreciated if general neurologists and professionals from various disciplines who work with people diagnosed with Parkinson's disease (PwP) could remain knowledgeable about the existing therapies and their respective roles within the treatment continuum. The movement disorders specialist and the PD nurse are key actors in the coordination of a targeted and patient-empowering multidisciplinary approach for advanced PD. Affordable and timely access to these therapies for the PwP who may need them is presently a challenge for health systems. Education, training, and support for all the involved stakeholders in the process of PD care may improve quality of life both for PwP and caregivers, and reduce inadequate, expensive, time-consuming, and unsuccessful prolongation of standard medical therapies.

Tools and criteria to select patients with advanced Parkinson's disease for device-aided therapies: a narrative review

This article provides an overview of the various screening and selection tools which have been developed over the past 25 years to identify patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) possibly eligible for device-aided therapies (DATs). For the available screening tools, we describe the target therapies (subtypes of DAT), development methods, validation data, and their use in clinical practice. In addition, the historical background and potential utility of these screening tools are discussed. The challenges in developing and validating these tools are also addressed, taking into account the differences in population, the local health care organization, and resource availability.

Healthcare resource utilization and device-aided therapy discussions with eligible patients across the Parkinson's disease continuum: Revelations from the MANAGE-PD validation cohort

INTRODUCTION

Device-aided therapy may improve the quality of life (QoL) for people with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) and poorly controlled symptoms with oral therapy. MANAGE-PD is a validated tool classifying patients based on symptom control and advanced treatment eligibility. This study focused on patient/caregiver reported outcomes and healthcare resource utilization among patients grouped by MANAGE-PD categories.

METHODS

Device-aided therapy-naïve patients receiving oral treatments were identified from the Adelphi Parkinson's Disease Programme. Patients were categorized (category 1 to 3) using MANAGE-PD. PD-specific QoL (PDQ-39), care partner burden (ZBI), satisfaction with current treatment, healthcare resource utilization, associated healthcare costs, and future treatment discussion with providers were measured. Categories were compared using ANOVA, t-test, chi square and adjusted regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of the analytical sample (n = 2709), 18.9% were inadequately controlled on current therapy and potentially eligible for device-aided therapies (category 3). As expected, they had worse patient/caregiver reported outcomes versus patients in categories 1 or 2. However, the degree of difference in healthcare resource utilization, including: greater number of hospitalizations, emergency room (ER) visits and consultations, higher likelihood of being recipients of respite care, and greater PD treatment burden, was unexpected. Importantly, of patients in category 3 and their care partners, >40% did not report discussions with providers about device-aided therapies.

CONCLUSION

MANAGE-PD category 3 patients had significantly higher burden on healthcare resources versus patients well-controlled with oral treatment or requiring only oral medication adjustments; yet almost half had no discussion on device-aided therapies with providers. Device-aided therapies may be considered in these patients.

Should continuous dopaminergic stimulation be a standard of care in advanced Parkinson's disease?

The standard of care is a term that refers to the level of care, skill, and treatment that a healthcare provider should offer to a patient based on the current scientific evidence and the level of medical knowledge available in the field. For Parkinson's disease (PD), the standard care is mostly considered to be oral treatment with dopaminergic drugs, particularly levodopa which remains the 'gold standard'. However, effective management with levodopa during the later stages of the disease becomes increasingly challenging due to the ongoing neurodegenerative process, the consequences of its pulsatile dopaminergic stimulation, and the gastrointestinal barriers to effective drug absorption. As a result, the concept of applying continuous dopaminergic stimulation has emerged with infusion therapies (continuous subcutaneous apomorphine, levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel, and levodopa-entacapone-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion). These therapies seek to provide continuous stimulation of striatal dopamine receptors that is efficient not only in alleviating clinical symptoms, but also in delaying, reducing, and possibly preventing the onset of levodopa-related motor (fluctuations, dyskinesia) and non-motor complications; and they are also associated with clinically relevant side effects. Clinical studies and real-life experience support the notion that infusion therapies should be accepted as part of the standard of care for patients with advanced PD who have refractory, severe, and disabling motor complications that affect their quality of life. However, they should be considered based on the needs of individualized patients and the access to these advanced therapies needs to be made more accessible to the general PD population.

Access to device-aided therapies in advanced Parkinson's disease: navigating clinician biases, patient preference, and prognostic uncertainty

Device-aided therapies (DAT), which include deep brain stimulation and pump-based continuous dopaminergic stimulation with either levodopa or apomorphine, are among the major advances in the clinical management of Parkinson's disease (PD). Although DAT are being increasingly offered earlier in the disease course, their classical indication remains advanced PD. Theoretically, every patient should be offered transition to DAT when faced with refractory motor and nonmotor fluctuations and functional decline. Worldwide clinical reality is far from these ideal, and, therefore, question the "real-world" equal opportunity of access to DAT for PD patients with advanced PD-even within a single health care system. Differences in access to care, referral pattern (timing and frequency), as well as physician biases (unconscious/implicit or conscious/explicit bias), and patients' preferences or health-seeking behaviour are to be considered. Compared to DBS, little information is available concerning infusion therapies, as well as neurologists' and patients' attitudes towards them. This viewpoint aims to be thought-provoking and to assist clinicians in moving through the process of DAT selection, by including in their decision algorithm their own biases, patient perspective, ethical concerns as well as the current unknowns surrounding PD prognosis and DAT-related long-term side effects for a given patient.

Are Parkinson's disease patients referred too late for device-aided therapies and how can better informed and earlier referrals be encouraged?

In the advanced Parkinson's disease, motor and non-motor symptoms become more severe and more difficult to treat. Oral therapy may become insufficient in controlling a patient´s motor complications, which results in a substantial deterioration of the patient's quality of life, ability to work and self-reliance. This is when device-aided treatments should be considered and offered, if suitable for a given patient. They include subcutaneous and intestinal infusion therapies, deep brain stimulation and, more recently, MRI-guided focussed ultrasound. Device-aided treatments should be offered in accordance with guidelines and treatment standardization. Also there is a need to ensure availability of treatment and education of patients and physicians.

Holter STAT-ON™ against other tools for detecting MF in advanced Parkinson's disease: an observational study

Background

Different screening tools to identify advanced Parkinson's disease (APD) have emerged in recent years. Among them, wearable medical devices, such as STAT-ON™, have been proposed to help to objectively detect APD.

Objectives

To analyze the correlation between STAT-ON™ reports and other assessment tools to identify APD and to assess the accuracy of screening tools in APD patients, using the STAT-ON™ as the gold standard.

Methods

In this retrospective, observational study, data from the University Hospital Complex of Pontevedra database on 44 patients with potential APD who wore STAT-ON™ were extracted. Data were collected according to different sources of tools for identifying APD: (1) STAT-ON™, (2) information provided by the patient, (3) questionnaire for advanced Parkinson's disease (CDEPA), (4) 5-2-1 Criteria, and (5) Making Informed Decisions to Aid Timely Management of Parkinson's Disease (MANAGE-PD). Considering STAT-ON™ recordings as a reference, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for each tool were calculated. The kappa index assessed the degree of agreement between the gold standard and the other instruments.

Results

Although no statistically significant association was found between STAT-ON™ recordings and any screening methods evaluated, the CDEPA questionnaire demonstrated the highest sensitivity and VPN values to detect patients with APD candidates for second-line therapy (SLT). According to the correlation analyses, MANAGE-PD demonstrated the highest degree of concordance with STAT-ON™ recordings to identify the SLT indication and to predict the SLT decision.

Conclusion

STAT-ON™ device may be a helpful tool to detect APD and to guide treatment decisions.

Objective measurement versus clinician-based assessment for Parkinson's disease

INTRODUCTION

Although clinician-based assessment through standardized clinical rating scales is currently the gold standard for quantifying motor impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD), it is not without limitations, including intra- and inter-rater variability and a degree of approximation. There is increasing evidence supporting the use of objective motion analyses to complement clinician-based assessment. Objective measurement tools hold significant potential for improving the accuracy of clinical and research-based evaluations of patients.

AREAS COVERED

The authors provide several examples from the literature demonstrating how different motion measurement tools, including optoelectronics, contactless and wearable systems allow for both the objective quantification and monitoring of key motor symptoms (such as bradykinesia, rigidity, tremor, and gait disturbances), and the identification of motor fluctuations in PD patients. Furthermore, they discuss how, from a clinician's perspective, objective measurements can help in various stages of PD management.

EXPERT OPINION

In our opinion, sufficient evidence supports the assertion that objective monitoring systems enable accurate evaluation of motor symptoms and complications in PD. A range of devices can be utilized not only to support diagnosis but also to monitor motor symptom during the disease progression and can become relevant in the therapeutic decision-making process.

Toward objective monitoring of Parkinson's disease motor symptoms using a wearable device: wearability and performance evaluation of PDMonitor®

Parkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by a variety of motor and non-motor symptoms. As disease progresses, fluctuations in the response to levodopa treatment may develop, along with emergence of freezing of gait (FoG) and levodopa induced dyskinesia (LiD). The optimal management of the motor symptoms and their complications, depends, principally, on the consistent detection of their course, leading to improved treatment decisions. During the last few years, wearable devices have started to be used in the clinical practice for monitoring patients' PD-related motor symptoms, during their daily activities. This work describes the results of 2 multi-site clinical studies (PDNST001 and PDNST002) designed to validate the performance and the wearability of a new wearable monitoring device, the PDMonitor^®, in the detection of PD-related motor symptoms. For the studies, 65 patients with Parkinson's disease and 28 healthy individuals (controls) were recruited. Specifically, during the Phase I of the first study, participants used the monitoring device for 2-6 h in a clinic while neurologists assessed the exhibited parkinsonian symptoms every half hour using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III, as well as the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) for dyskinesia severity assessment. The goal of Phase I was data gathering. On the other hand, during the Phase II of the first study, as well as during the second study (PDNST002), day-to-day variability was evaluated, with patients in the former and with control subjects in the latter. In both cases, the device was used for a number of days, with the subjects being unsupervised and free to perform any kind of daily activities. The monitoring device produced estimations of the severity of the majority of PD-related motor symptoms and their fluctuations. Statistical analysis demonstrated that the accuracy in the detection of symptoms and the correlation between their severity and the expert evaluations were high. As a result, the studies confirmed the effectiveness of the system as a continuous telemonitoring solution, easy to be used to facilitate decision-making for the treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease.

Device-Aided Therapies in Parkinson's Disease-Results from the German Care4PD Study

Data on the use of device-aided therapies (DATs) in people with Parkinson's disease (PwP) are scarce. Analyzing data from the Care4PD patient survey, we (1) evaluated application frequency and type of DAT in a larger, nationwide, cross-sectoral PwP sample in Germany; (2) analyzed the frequency of symptoms indicative for advanced PD (aPD) and need for DAT amongst the remaining patients and (3) compared the most bothersome symptoms and need for professional long-term care (LTC) of patients with and without suspected aPD. Data from 1269 PwP were analyzed. In total, 153 PwP (12%) received DAT, mainly deep brain stimulation (DBS). Of the remaining 1116 PwP without DAT, >50% fulfilled at least one aPD criterion. Akinesia/rigidity and autonomic problems were most bothersome for PwP with and without suspected aPD, with more tremor in the non-aPD and more motor fluctuations and falls in the aPD group. To recapitulate, the German DAT application rate is rather low, although a large proportion of PwP fulfills aPD criteria indicating a need for intensified treatment strategies. Many reported bothersome symptoms could be overcome with DAT with benefits even for LTC patients. Thus, precise and early identification of aPD symptoms (and therapy-resistant tremor) should be implemented in future DAT preselection tools and educational trainings.

A scoping review of neurodegenerative manifestations in explainable digital phenotyping

Neurologists nowadays no longer view neurodegenerative diseases, like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, as single entities, but rather as a spectrum of multifaceted symptoms with heterogeneous progression courses and treatment responses. The definition of the naturalistic behavioral repertoire of early neurodegenerative manifestations is still elusive, impeding early diagnosis and intervention. Central to this view is the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in reinforcing the depth of phenotypic information, thereby supporting the paradigm shift to precision medicine and personalized healthcare. This suggestion advocates the definition of disease subtypes in a new biomarker-supported nosology framework, yet without empirical consensus on standardization, reliability and interpretability. Although the well-defined neurodegenerative processes, linked to a triad of motor and non-motor preclinical symptoms, are detected by clinical intuition, we undertake an unbiased data-driven approach to identify different patterns of neuropathology distribution based on the naturalistic behavior data inherent to populations in-the-wild. We appraise the role of remote technologies in the definition of digital phenotyping specific to brain-, body- and social-level neurodegenerative subtle symptoms, emphasizing inter- and intra-patient variability powered by deep learning. As such, the present review endeavors to exploit digital technologies and AI to create disease-specific phenotypic explanations, facilitating the understanding of neurodegenerative diseases as "bio-psycho-social" conditions. Not only does this translational effort within explainable digital phenotyping foster the understanding of disease-induced traits, but it also enhances diagnostic and, eventually, treatment personalization.

Timely referral for device-aided therapy in Parkinson's disease. Development of a screening tool

BACKGROUND

Timely referral of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients to specialized centers for treatment with device-aided therapies (DAT) is suboptimal.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a screening tool for timely referral for DAT in PD and to compare the tool with the published 5-2-1 criteria.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, observational study was performed in 8 hospitals in the catchment area of a specialized movement disorder center in the Northern part of the Netherlands. The target population comprised PD patients not yet on DAT visiting the outpatient clinic of participating hospitals. The primary outcome was apparent eligibility for referral for DAT based on consensus by a panel of 5 experts in the field of DAT. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to develop a screening tool for eligibility for referral for DAT. Potential predictors were patient and disease characteristics as observed by attending neurologists.

RESULTS

In total, 259 consecutive PD patients were included, of whom 17 were deemed eligible for referral for DAT (point prevalence: 6.6%). Presence of response fluctuations and troublesome dyskinesias were the strongest independent predictors of being considered eligible. Both variables were included in the final model, as well as levodopa equivalent daily dose. Decision curve analysis revealed the new model outperforms the 5-2-1 criteria. A simple chart was constructed to provide guidance for referral. Discrimination of this simplified scoring system proved excellent (AUC after bootstrapping: 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Awaiting external validation, the developed screening tool already appears promising for timely referral and subsequent treatment with DAT in patients with PD.

Infusion Therapies in the Treatment of Parkinson's Disease

Oral levodopa is the gold-standard therapy for treating Parkinson's disease (PD) but after a few years of treatment the therapeutic window narrows, and patients often experience various treatment-related complications. Patients in this advanced PD stage may benefit from alternative therapy, such as continuous intrajejunal delivery of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG; or carbidopa-levodopa enteral suspension), continuous intrajejunal delivery of levodopa-carbidopa-entacapone intestinal gel, or continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion. Consideration and initiation of infusion therapies in advanced PD are suggested before the onset of major disability. The present review summarizes clinical evidence for infusion therapy in advanced PD management, discusses available screening tools for advanced PD, and provides considerations around optimal use of infusion therapy.

Levodopa–entacapone–carbidopa intestinal gel infusion in advanced Parkinson’s disease: real-world experience and practical guidance

As Parkinson’s disease (PD) progresses, treatment needs to be adapted to maintain symptom control. Once patients develop advanced PD, an optimised regimen of oral and transdermal medications may no longer provide adequate relief of OFF periods and motor complications can emerge. At this point, patients may wish to consider a device-aided therapy (DAT) that provides continuous dopaminergic stimulation to help overcome these issues. Levodopa–entacapone–carbidopa intestinal gel (LECIG) infusion is a recently developed DAT option. The aim of this article is twofold: (1) to give an overview of the pharmacokinetics of LECIG infusion and clinical experience to date of its use in patients with advanced PD, including real-world data and patient-reported outcomes from a cohort of patients treated in Sweden, the first country where it was introduced, and (2) based on that information to provide practical guidance for healthcare teams starting patients on LECIG infusion, whether they are transitioning from oral medications or from other DATs, including recommendations for stepwise dosing calculation and titration. In terms of clinical efficacy, LECIG infusion has been shown to have a similar effect on motor function to standard levodopa–carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) infusion but, due to the presence of entacapone in LECIG, the bioavailability of levodopa is increased such that lower overall levodopa doses can be given to achieve therapeutically effective plasma concentrations. From a practical standpoint, LECIG infusion is delivered using a smaller cartridge and pump system than LCIG infusion. In addition, for patients previously treated with LCIG infusion who have an existing percutaneous endoscopic transgastric jejunostomy (PEG-J) system, this is compatible with the LECIG infusion system. As it is a relatively new product, the long-term efficacy and safety of LECIG infusion remain to be established; however, real-world data will continue to be collected and analysed to provide this information and help inform future clinical decisions.

Intercountry comparisons of advanced Parkinson's disease symptoms and management: Analysis from the OBSERVE-PD observational study

Objectives

In the absence of widely accepted criteria, determining when a patient with Parkinson's disease (PD) may benefit from more advanced treatments such as device‐aided therapy (DAT) so far remains a matter of physician judgment. This analysis investigates how classification of PD varies across countries relative to measures of disease severity.

Materials and Methods

The OBSERVational, cross‐sEctional PD (OBSERVE‐PD) study included consecutive patients with PD at centers that offer DATs in 18 countries. In this subgroup analysis, we explore intercountry differences in identification of advanced versus non‐advanced PD based on physician's clinical judgment, symptoms assessed using Delphi consensus criteria, use of DAT, motor and non‐motor symptoms, and caregiver support. Demographic and clinical characteristics were obtained through review of medical records.

Results

Overall, 1342 of 2615 patients (51.3%) were assessed by physicians as having advanced PD. The proportion of patients in different countries identified as having advanced PD (24.4–82.2%) varied. In 15 of 18 countries, a greater proportion of patients with advanced PD, according to select Delphi criteria, were identified by physicians as having advanced PD than with non‐advanced PD. There was a wide variability across countries in the proportion of patients with no dyskinesia, disabling dyskinesia, dyskinesia pain, and non‐motor symptoms who were identified by physicians as having advanced versus non‐advanced PD.

Conclusions

The proportion of patients identified with advanced PD symptoms varies widely across countries, despite differences on the patients' profiles, indicating a need for objective diagnostic criteria to help identify patients who may benefit from DAT.

Advanced‐Stage Parkinson's disease: From Identification to Characterization Using a Nationwide Database

Background

As Parkinson's disease (PD) progresses, response to oral medications decreases and motor complications appear. Timely intervention has been demonstrated as effective in reducing symptoms. However, current instruments for the identification of these patients are often complicated and inadequate. It has been suggested that anti-PD intensified therapy (IT) can serve as a proxy for increased burden of disease.

Objective

To explore whether IT aligns with events reflecting advanced PD (APD) burden.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of PD beneficiaries in the second-largest healthcare provider in Israel. Patients with PD diagnosed between January 2000 and June 2018 and treated with levodopa (l-dopa) ≥5 times/day and/or ≥1000 mg l-dopa equivalent daily dose were defined as the IT cohort (n = 2037). Treated patients with PD not fulfilling this criterion were defined as the nonintensified therapy (NIT) cohort (n = 3402). Point prevalence and 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence of IT were assessed. Baseline demographic and comorbidities, 1-year healthcare resource use, health costs, and time to clinical events were assessed and compared between cohorts.

Results

IT was associated with significantly (P < 0.05) higher healthcare resource use compared with NIT. In turn, IT patients incurred higher healthcare costs (P < 0.001) and were at greater risk for mortality, hospitalization, disability, and device-aided therapy use (P < 0.001, for all comparisons).

Conclusions

Treatment intensity can serve as an objective and robust indicator of more APD. This readily extractable marker can be easily integrated into electronic medical record alerts to actively target more advanced patients and to guide risk-appropriate care.

Letter to the editor, "Validation and clinical value of the MANAGE-PD tool: A clinician-reported tool to identify Parkinson's disease patients inadequately controlled on oral medications"

The MANAGE-PD tool may help general neurologists in deciding whether a patient with advanced Parkinson's disease should be referred for an advanced therapy. Although the development and clinical validation of MANAGE-PD would appear to serve an important need, we urge the reader to be aware of several methodological concerns.

Psychometric Properties of Clinical Indicators for Identification and Management of Advanced Parkinson's Disease: Real-World Evidence From G7 Countries

INTRODUCTION

Standardized and validated criteria to define advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) or identify patient eligibility for device-aided therapy are needed. This study assessed the psychometric properties of clinical indicators of advanced PD and eligibility for device-aided therapy in a large population.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis of the Adelphi Parkinson's Disease Specific Programme collected data from device-aided therapy-naïve people with PD in G7 countries. We assessed the presence of 15 clinical indicators of advancing PD and seven indicators of eligibility for device-aided therapy in patients classified with advanced PD or as eligible for device-aided therapy by the treating physician. Accuracy was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) and multivariable logistic regression models. Construct validity was examined via known-group comparisons of disease severity and burden among patients with and without each clinical indicator.

RESULTS

Of 4714 PD patients, 14.9% were classified with advanced PD and 17.5% as eligible for device-aided therapy by physician judgment. The presence of each clinical indicator was 1.9- to 7.3-fold more likely in patients classified with advanced PD. Similarly, the presence of device-aided therapy eligibility indicators was 1.8- to 5.5-fold more likely in patients considered eligible for device-aided therapy. All indicators demonstrated high clinical screening accuracy for identifying advanced PD (AUC range 0.84-0.89) and patients eligible for device-aided therapy (AUC range 0.73-0.80). The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score, cognitive function, quality of life, and caregiver burden were significantly worse in indicator-positive patients.

CONCLUSION

Specific clinical indicators of advanced PD and eligibility for device-aided therapy demonstrated excellent psychometric properties in a large sample, and thus may provide an objective and reliable approach for patient identification and treatment optimization.

Does the 5-2-1 criteria identify patients with advanced Parkinson's disease? Real-world screening accuracy and burden of 5-2-1-positive patients in 7 countries

BACKGROUND

The burden of Parkinson's disease (PD) worsens with disease progression. However, the lack of objective and uniform disease classification challenges our understanding of the incremental burden in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (APD) and suboptimal medication control. The 5-2-1 criteria was proposed by clinical consensus to identify patients with advancing PD. Our objective was to evaluate the screening accuracy and incremental clinical burden, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and humanistic burden in PD patients meeting the 5-2-1 screening criteria.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi Parkinson's Disease Specific Program (DSP™), a multi-country point-in-time survey (2017-2020). People with PD who were naive to device-aided therapy and on oral PD therapy were included. Patients meeting the 5-2-1 screening criteria had one or more of the three clinical indicators of APD: (i) ≥5 doses of oral levodopa/day, OR (ii) "off" symptoms for ≥2 h of waking day, OR (iii) ≥1 h of troublesome dyskinesia. Clinician assessment of PD stage was used as the reference in this study. Clinical screening accuracy of the 5-2-1 criteria was assessed using area under the curve and multivariable logistic regression models. Incremental clinical, HCRU, and humanistic burden were assessed by known-group comparisons between 5 and 2-1-positive and negative patients.

RESULTS

From the analytic sample (n = 4714), 33% of patients met the 5-2-1 screening criteria. Among physician-classified APD patients, 78.6% were 5-2-1 positive. Concordance between clinician judgment and 5-2-1 screening criteria was > 75%. 5-2-1-positive patients were nearly 7-times more likely to be classified as APD by physician judgment. Compared with the 5-2-1-negative group, 5-2-1-positive patients had significantly higher clinical, HCRU, and humanistic burden across all measures. In particular, 5-2-1-positive patients had 3.8-times more falls, 3.6-times higher annual hospitalization rate, and 3.4-times greater dissatisfaction with PD treatment. 5-2-1-positive patients also had significantly lower quality of life and worse caregiver burden.

CONCLUSIONS

5-2-1 criteria demonstrated potential as a screening tool for identifying people with APD with considerable clinical, humanistic, and HCRU burden. The 5-2-1 screening criteria is an objective and reliable tool that may aid the timely identification and treatment optimization of patients inadequately controlled on oral PD medications.

Comparative Effectiveness of Device-Aided Therapies on Quality of Life and Off-Time in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Research comparing levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI) for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) is lacking. This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the comparative effectiveness of LCIG, DBS, CSAI and best medical therapy (BMT) in reducing off-time and improving quality of life (QoL) in patients with advanced PD.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational and interventional studies from January 2003 to September 2019. Data extracted at baseline and 6 months were off-time, as reported by diary or Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part IV item 39, and QoL, as reported by Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39/PDQ-8). Bayesian NMA was performed to estimate pooled treatment effect sizes and to rank treatments in order of effectiveness.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (n = 2063 patients): four RCTs, and 16 single-armed, one 2-armed and one 3-armed prospective studies. Baseline mean age was between 55.5-70.9 years, duration of PD was 9.1-15.3 years, off-time ranged from 5.4 to 8.7 h/day in 9 studies, and PDQ scores ranged from 28.8 to 67.0 in 19 studies. Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel and DBS demonstrated significantly greater improvement in off-time and QoL at 6 months compared with CSAI and BMT (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the effects of LCIG and DBS, but DBS was ranked first for reduction in off-time, and LCIG was ranked first for improvement in QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

This NMA found that LCIG and DBS were associated with superior improvement in off-time and PD-related QoL compared with CSAI and BMT at 6 months after treatment initiation. This comparative effectiveness research may assist providers, patients, and caregivers in the selection of the optimal device-aided therapy.

MNCD: A New Tool for Classifying Parkinson’s Disease in Daily Clinical Practice

Background and objective: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a clinically heterogeneous disorder in which the symptoms and prognosis can be very different among patients. We propose a new simple classification to identify key symptoms and staging in PD. Patients and Methods: Sixteen movement disorders specialists from Spain participated in this project. The classification was consensually approved after a discussion and review process from June to October 2021. The TNM classification and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) were considered as models in the design. Results: The classification was named MNCD and included 4 major axes: (1) motor symptoms; (2) non-motor symptoms; (3) cognition; (4) dependency for activities of daily living (ADL). Motor axis included 4 sub-axes: (1) motor fluctuations; (2) dyskinesia; (3) axial symptoms; (4) tremor. Four other sub-axes were included in the non-motor axis: (1) neuropsychiatric symptoms; (2) autonomic dysfunction; (3) sleep disturbances and fatigue; (4) pain and sensory disorders. According to the MNCD, 5 stages were considered, from stage 1 (no disabling motor or non-motor symptoms with normal cognition and independency for ADL) to 5 (dementia and dependency for basic ADL). Conclusions: A new simple classification of PD is proposed. The MNCD classification includes 4 major axes and 5 stages to identify key symptoms and monitor the evolution of the disease in patients with PD. It is necessary to apply this proof of concept in a properly designed study.