Hypoxic conditioning in Parkinson’s disease: randomized controlled multiple N-of-1 trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Preclinical evidence suggests positive symptomatic and neuroprotective effects of hypoxic conditioning in Parkinson’s disease (PD). This study (NCT05214287) investigated the safety, feasibility, short-term symptomatic and downstream effects of hypoxic conditioning in individuals with PD. 20 individuals with PD (mean age 62, 10 women, Hoehn-Yahr 1.5-3) completed randomized controlled double-blinded multiple N-of-1 trials. Each participant underwent five different 45-minute hypoxia interventions in duplicate: continuous hypoxia at FiO 2 0.163 and 0.127, intermittent (five-minute intervals interspersed with normoxia) at FiO 2 0.163 and 0.127, and placebo. Primary outcomes were safety and feasibility as measured by adverse events, vital parameter disturbances, participant-rated discomfort and feasibility questionnaires. Secondary outcomes were short-term participant-rated and assessor-rated symptom scores. Exploratory indicators of target engagement were serum erythropoietin, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), neurofilament light-chain (NfL), platelet-derived growth factor-receptor-β (PDGFRβ) and cortisol. Secondary outcomes were evaluated using frequentist and Bayesian analysis. 20 participants completed the protocol. The trial met its primary endpoints for safety and feasibility. 95 adverse events occurred, including one moderate and three serious events. Adverse events were not dose-dependent and occurred at comparable incidence following hypoxia and placebo. Hypoxic conditioning was well-tolerated. Low-F I O 2 protocols caused significant oxygen desaturations in two participants. Participants considered longer-term application feasible. Intermittent hypoxia at F I O 2 0.163 modestly improved most participant-rated symptoms for several hours compared to placebo, but not assessor-rated scales. One hour after intervention, serum markers did not differ between interventions. Hypoxic conditioning is safe and feasible in individuals with PD, and specific protocols may be associated with short-term symptom improvement. These findings inform and support follow-up studies of longer-term safety and efficacy of hypoxic conditioning.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".