Safinamide as an Adjunct to Levodopa in Asian and Caucasian Patients With Parkinson’s Disease and Motor Fluctuations: A Post Hoc Analysis of the SETTLE Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Safinamide is a selective, reversible monoamine oxidase B inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy and tolerability in placebo-controlled studies and is clinically useful for patients with motor fluctuations. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of safinamide as a levodopa adjunct therapy in Asian patients with Parkinson's disease. METHODS: Data from 173 Asian and 371 Caucasian patients from the international Phase III SETTLE study were included in this post hoc analysis. The safinamide dose was increased from 50 mg/day to 100 mg/day if no tolerability issues occurred at week 2. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to week 24 in daily ON-time without troublesome dyskinesia (i.e., ON-time). Key secondary outcomes included changes in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores. RESULTS: Safinamide significantly increased daily ON-time relative to placebo in both groups (least-squares mean: 0.83 hours, p = 0.011 [Asians]; 1.05 hours, p < 0.0001 [Caucasians]). Motor function relative to placebo (UPDRS Part III) improved significantly in Asians (-2.65 points, p = 0.012) but not Caucasians (-1.44 points, p = 0.0576). Safinamide did not worsen Dyskinesia Rating Scale scores in either subgroup, regardless of the presence or absence of dyskinesia at baseline. Dyskinesia was largely mild for Asians and moderate for Caucasians. None of the Asian patients experienced adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Safinamide as a levodopa adjunct is well tolerated and effective in reducing motor fluctuations in both Asian and Caucasian patients. Further studies to investigate the real-world effectiveness and safety of safinamide in Asia are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".