Nonergot dopamine-receptor agonists for treating Parkinson's disease – a network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kristian Thorlund,1,2,4 Ping Wu,3,4 Eric Druyts,3,4 Shawn Eapen,3,4 Edward J Mills2–4 1Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 2Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; 3Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; 4Redwood Outcomes, Vancouver, BC, Canada Objective: To compare the efficacy of the three nonergot dopamine-receptor agonists (DAs) pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine for the treatment of early and advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). Materials and methods: Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed separately for early and advanced PD, and at time points 11–16 and 24–28 weeks. Outcomes for early PD included improvement on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) activities in daily life (UPDRS-II), motor function (UPDRS-III), and their subtotal (UPDRS-II + III). Outcomes for advanced PD also included daily “off time” (hours), but not UPDRS-II + III. Results: Totals of 23 and 24 trials informed early and advanced PD analyses. For early PD UPDRS-II at 11–16 weeks, pramipexole and rotigotine were statistically significantly superior to placebo, but ropinirole was not. For UPDRS-III and UPDRS-II + III, all DAs were statistically significantly better than placebo and exhibited similar improvements. At 24–28 weeks, results were also statistically significant for all DAs versus placebo, and the magnitudes of improvements were similar for pramipexole, ropinirole and rotigotine. Advanced PD improvements on UPDRS-II, UPRDS-III, and off time were statistically significant for pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine versus placebo. At 11–16 weeks, rotigotine yielded slightly smaller effects than ropinirole and pramipexole, but credible intervals on differences were wide. For off time, results were near identical. At 24–28 weeks, results were similar for all three outcomes. Ropinirole yielded a slightly higher improvement on UPDRS-III, but a slightly smaller improvement in off time. Conclusion: Our analyses suggest that pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine exhibit similar efficacy in the treatment of early and advanced PD. Keywords: Parkinson's disease, dopamine-receptor agonists, network meta-analysis
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 | 0.019 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".