MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021157979 · doi:10.1101/2020.05.11.20093146

Nilotinib in Patients with Advanced Parkinson’s Disease: A Randomized Phase 2A Study (NILO-PD)

2020· preprint· en· W3021157979 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tanya Simuni, Brian Fiske, Kalpana Merchant, Christopher S. Coffey, Elizabeth Klingner, Chelsea Caspell‐Garcia, David-Erick Lafontant, Helen Matthews, Richard Wyse, Patrik Brundin, David K. Simon, Michael A. Schwarzschild, David M. Weiner, Jaime Adams, Charles S. Venuto, Ted M. Dawson, Liana Baker, Melissa Kostrzebski, Tina P. Ward, Gary Rafaloff

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsTolerabilityPlaceboMedicineInternal medicineParkinson's diseaseNilotinibMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAdverse effectDiseaseDementiaTyrosine kinase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Nilotinib, a tyrosine kinase Abelson inhibitor, exhibits neuroprotective effects in preclinical Parkinson disease (PD) models. Methods This Phase 2A double-blind placebo-controlled study in moderate/advanced PD randomized participants 1:1:1 to placebo:150:300 mg nilotinib in matching capsules once daily for 6 months. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability, the latter defined as ability to complete the study on assigned dose. Secondary outcomes included change in PD disability (Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Part 3 OFF/ON). Additional exploratory outcomes included serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, and CSF dopamine metabolites. Findings The study screened 125 and enrolled 76 participants (39% screen failure) between November 2017 and December 2018 at 25 US sites. The last participant completed the study in September 2019. At baseline, mean (standard deviation) age was 64.6 years (7.5), disease duration 9.9 years (4.7), MDS-UPDRS Part 1-3 OFF score 66.4(19.3) and ON score 48.4(16.2), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score 27.1(2.2). Tolerability was 21(84%):19 (76%):20 (77%) in placebo:150:300 mg arm, respectively. Both active doses were safe. The most common reasons for drug suspension were elevations of amylase and/or lipase, which were dose-dependent. The 300 mg group had transitory worsening of MDS-UPDRS-3 ON at 1 month compared to placebo (p<0.01), which resolved by 6 months. There was no difference in the change of MDS-UPDRS-3 OFF from baseline to 6 months between the groups (p=0.17). CSF/serum PK ratio was 0.2-0.3%. There was no evidence of treatment-related elevation of any dopamine metabolites. Interpretation Both doses of nilotinib were safe and tolerable in these participants, who were selected with strict inclusion/exclusion criteria. There was no evidence of any symptomatic benefit of nilotinib. The drug had low CSF exposure and failed to change dopamine metabolites. These findings do not warrant further testing of nilotinib in PD. Funding The study was funded by Funded by Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research / The Cure Parkinson Trust / Van Andel Institute. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03205488

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207