Study protocol of the GRoningen early-PD Ambroxol treatment (GREAT) trial: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single center trial with ambroxol in Parkinson patients with a GBA mutation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background To date, no disease modifying therapies are available for Parkinson’s disease (PD). Since PD is the second most prevalent neurodegenerative disorder, there is a high demand for such therapies. Both environmental and genetic risk factors play an important role in the etiology and progression of PD. The most common genetic risk factor for PD is a mutation in the GBA1(GBA)-gene, encoding the lysosomal enzyme glucocerebrosidase (GCase). The mucolytic ambroxol is a repurposed drug, which has shown the property to upregulate GCase activity in-vitro and in-vivo. Ambroxol therefore has the potency to become a disease modifying therapy in PD, which was the reason to design this randomized controlled trial with ambroxol in PD patients. Methods This trial is a single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, including 80 PD patients with a GBA mutation, receiving either ambroxol 1800 mg/day or placebo for 48 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale motor subscore (part III) of the Movement Disorder Society (MDS-UPDRSIII) in the practically defined off-state at 60 weeks (after a 12-week washout period). Secondary outcomes include a 3,4-dihydroxy-6-18F-fluoro-I-phenylalanine ([18F]FDOPA) PET-scan of the brain, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (with resting state f-MRI and Diffusion Tensor Imaging), GCase activity, both intra- and extracellularly, sphingolipid profiles in plasma, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), quality of life (QoL) measured by the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) and the Non-Motor Symptom Scale (NMSS) questionnaire. Discussion Ambroxol up to 1200 mg/day has shown effects on human cerebrospinal fluid endpoints, which supports at least passage of the blood-brain-barrier. The dose titration in this trial up to 1800 mg/day will reveal if this dose level is safe and also effective in modifying the course of the disease. Trial registration NCT05830396. Registration date: March 20, 2023.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.010 |
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".