MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599156055 · doi:10.1002/mds.26976

Trial of dextromethorphan/quinidine to treat levodopa‐induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease

2017· article· en· W2599156055 on OpenAlexaff
Susan H. Fox, Leonard Verhagen Metman, John G. Nutt, Matthew Brodsky, Stewart A. Factor, Anthony E. Lang, Laura E. Pope, Nadine Knowles, João Siffert

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and Effects
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
FundersAvanir Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsDextromethorphanQuinidineDyskinesiaLevodopaMedicineParkinson's diseaseDegenerative diseaseAnesthesiaCentral nervous system diseaseDiseasePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nondopaminergic pathways represent potential targets to treat levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease (PD). This pilot-study (NCT01767129) examined the safety/efficacy of the sigma-1 receptor-agonist and glutamatergic/monoaminergic modulator, dextromethorphan plus quinidine (to inhibit rapid dextromethorphan metabolism), for treating levodopa-induced dyskinesia. METHODS: PD patients were randomized to dextromethorphan/quinidine (45 mg/10 mg twice daily)/placebo in two 2-week double-blind, crossover treatment periods, with intervening 2-week washout. After 14 days, a 2-hour intravenous levodopa-infusion was administered. Patient examinations were videotaped before infusion ("off" state) and every 30 minutes during and afterwards until patients returned to "off." The primary endpoint was dyskinesia-severity during infusion measured by Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale part 3 area-under-curve scores (blinded expert rated). Additional endpoints included other dyskinesia/motor assessments, global measures of clinical-change, and adverse-events. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were randomized and completed the study (efficacy-evaluable population). Dyskinesia-severity was nonsignificantly lower with dextromethorphan/quinidine than placebo during infusion (area-under-curve 966.5 vs 1048.8; P = .191 [efficacy-evaluable patients]), and significantly lower in a post-hoc sensitivity analysis of the per-protocol-population (efficacy-evaluable patients with ≥ 80% study-drug-compliance, n = 12) when measured from infusion start to 4-hours post-infusion completion (area-under-curve 1585.0 vs 1911.3; P = .024). Mean peak dyskinesia decreased significantly from infusion-start to return to "off" (13.3 vs 14.9; P = .018 [efficacy-evaluable patients]). A total of 9 patients rated dyskinesia "much/very much improved" on dextromethorphan/quinidine versus 1-patient on placebo. Dextromethorphan/quinidine did not worsen PD-motor scores, was generally well tolerated, and was associated with more frequent adverse events. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence of clinical benefit with dextromethorphan/quinidine for treating levodopa-induced dyskinesia in PD. Larger studies with a longer treatment duration need to corroborate these early findings. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and EffectsFrench-language works237,207