Progress towards therapies for disease modification in Parkinson's disease

The development of interventions to slow or halt the progression of Parkinson's disease remains a priority for patients and researchers alike. To date, no agents have been shown to have unequivocal evidence of disease-modifying effects in Parkinson's disease. The absence of disease-modifying treatments might relate not only to inadequate approaches for the selection of therapeutic candidates but also to insufficient attention to detail in clinical trial design. Better understanding of Parkinson's disease pathogenesis associated with advances in laboratory models, the use of objective biomarkers of disease progression and target engagement, and a focus on agents known to be safe for human use, alongside the use of precision medicine approaches, should together greatly increase the likelihood for successful identification of disease-modifying treatments for Parkinson's disease

Pioglitazone in early Parkinson\u27s disease: a phase 2, multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial

Background A systematic assessment of potential disease-modifying compounds for Parkinson\u27s disease concluded that pioglitazone could hold promise for the treatment of patients with this disease. We assessed the effect of pioglitazone on the progression of Parkinson\u27s disease in a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, futility clinical trial. Methods Participants with the diagnosis of early Parkinson\u27s disease on a stable regimen of 1 mg/day rasagiline or 10 mg/day selegiline were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 15 mg/day pioglitazone, 45 mg/day pioglitazone, or placebo. Investigators were masked to the treatment assignment. Only the statistical centre and the central pharmacy knew the treatment name associated with the randomisation number. The primary outcome was the change in the total Unified Parkinson\u27s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score between the baseline and 44 weeks, analysed by intention to treat. The primary null hypothesis for each dose group was that the mean change in UPDRS was 3 points less than the mean change in the placebo group. The alternative hypothesis (of futility) was that pioglitazone is not meaningfully different from placebo. We rejected the null if there was significant evidence of futility at the one-sided alpha level of 0.10. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01280123. Findings 210 patients from 35 sites in the USA were enrolled between May 10, 2011, and July 31, 2013. The primary analysis included 72 patients in the 15 mg group, 67 in the 45 mg group, and 71 in the placebo group. The mean total UPDRS change at 44 weeks was 4.42 (95% CI 2.55-6.28) for 15 mg pioglitazone, 5.13 (95% CI 3.17-7.08) for 45 mg pioglitazone, and 6.25 (95% CI 4.35-8.15) for placebo (higher change scores are worse). The mean difference between the 15 mg and placebo groups was -1.83 (80% CI -3.56 to -0.10) and the null hypothesis could not be rejected (p=0.19). The mean difference between the 45 mg and placebo groups was -1.12 (80% CI -2.93 to 0.69)and the null hypothesis was rejected in favour of futility (p=0.09). Planned sensitivity analyses of the primary outcome, using last value carried forward (LVCF) to handle missing data and using the completers\u27 only sample, suggested that the 15 mg dose is also futile (p=0.09 for LVCF, p= 0.09 for completers) but failed to reject the null hypothesis for the 45 mg dose (p=0.12 for LVCF, p=0.19 for completers). Six serious adverse events occurred in the 15 mg group, nine in the 45 mg group, and three in the placebo group; none were thought to be definitely or probably related to the study interventions. Interpretation These findings suggest that pioglitazone at the doses studied here is unlikely to modify progression in early Parkinson\u27s disease. Further study of pioglitazone in a larger trial in patients with Parkinson\u27s disease is not recommended

Sustained effect of prasinezumab on Parkinson’s disease motor progression in the open-label extension of the PASADENA trial

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024.The Phase II trial of Anti-alpha-Synuclein Antibody in Early Parkinson’s Disease (PASADENA) is an ongoing double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of prasinezumab in early-stage Parkinson’s disease (PD). During the double-blind period, prasinezumab-treated individuals showed less progression of motor signs (Movement Disorders Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS–UPDRS) Part III) than placebo-treated individuals. We evaluated whether the effect of prasinezumab on motor progression, assessed as a change in MDS–UPDRS Part III score in the OFF and ON states, and MDS–UPDRS Part II score, was sustained for 4 years from the start of the trial. We compared participants enrolled in the PASADENA open-label extension study with those enrolled in an external comparator arm derived from the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative observational study. The PASADENA delayed-start (n = 94) and early-start (n = 177) groups showed a slower decline (a smaller increase in score) in MDS–UPDRS Part III scores in the OFF state (delayed start, −51%; early start, −65%), ON state (delayed start, −94%; early start, −118%) and MDS–UPDRS Part II (delayed start, −48%; early start, −40%) than did the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative external comparator (n = 303). This exploratory analysis, which requires confirmation in future studies, suggested that the effect of prasinezumab in slowing motor progression in PD may be sustained long term. PASADENA ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT03100149

Anticipating Tomorrow: Tailoring Parkinson's Symptomatic Therapy Using Predictors of Outcome

Background: Although research into Parkinson's disease (PD) subtypes and outcome predictions has continued to advance, recommendations for using outcome prediction to guide current treatment decisions remain sparse. Objectives: To provide expert opinion‐based recommendations for individually tailored PD symptomatic treatment based on knowledge of risk prediction and subtypes. Methods: Using a modified Delphi approach, members of the Movement Disorders Society (MDS) Task Force on PD subtypes generated a series of general recommendations around the question: “Using what you know about genetic/biological/clinical subtypes (or any individual‐level predictors of outcome), what advice would you give for selecting symptomatic treatments for an individual patient now, based on what their subtype or individual characteristics predict about their future disease course?” After four iterations and revisions, those recommendations with over 75% endorsement were adopted. Results: A total of 19 recommendations were endorsed by a group of 13 panelists. The recommendations primarily centered around two themes: (1) incorporating future risk of cognitive impairment into current treatment plans; and (2) identifying future symptom clusters that might be forestalled with a single medication. Conclusions: These recommendations provide clinicians with a framework for integrating future outcomes into patient‐specific treatment choices. They are not prescriptive guidelines, but adaptable suggestions, which should be tailored to each individual. They are to be considered as a first step of a process that will continue to evolve as additional stakeholders provide new insights and as new information becomes available. As individualized risk prediction advances, the path to better tailored treatment regimens will become clearer

A Phase 2b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous prasinezumab in early-stage Parkinson\u27s disease (PADOVA): Rationale, design, and baseline data

\ua9 2025 The AuthorsIntroduction: Prasinezumab was shown to potentially delay motor progression in individuals with early-stage Parkinson\u27s disease (PD) who were either treatment-na\uefve or on monoamine oxidase type B inhibitor (MAO-Bi) therapy in the PASADENA study. We report the rationale, design, and baseline patient characteristics of the PADOVA study, designed to evaluate prasinezumab in an early-stage PD population receiving standard-of-care (SOC) symptomatic medications. Methods: PADOVA (NCT04777331) is a Phase 2b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, in which individuals with early-stage PD on SOC stable symptomatic monotherapy (levodopa or MAO-Bi) receive intravenous prasinezumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint is time to confirmed motor progression, defined as ≥5 points increase from baseline on the Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson\u27s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part III in practically defined OFF-medication state. Results: 586 participants were enrolled between May 5th, 2021 and March 22nd, 2023. At baseline, 74.2 % and 25.8 % of participants were receiving levodopa and MAO-Bi, respectively. Mean age was 64.2 years and 63.5 % were male. Mean time from diagnosis was 18.6 months, 85 % of participants were in Hoehn & Yahr (H&Y) Stage 2, and mean MDS-UPDRS Part III score was 24.5. Compared with the PASADENA population, PADOVA participants were older (∼5 years), with longer disease duration (∼8 months), and slightly more advanced based on H&Y stage (10 % more in Stage 2) and MDS-UPDRS Part III (∼3 points more). Conclusions: PADOVA has successfully recruited an early-stage PD population to test the effect of prasinezumab when added to background SOC

Prasinezumab slows motor progression in rapidly progressing early-stage Parkinson\u27s disease

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024. Prasinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds aggregated α-synuclein, is being investigated as a potential disease-modifying therapy in early-stage Parkinson’s disease. Although in the PASADENA phase 2 study, the primary endpoint (Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) sum of Parts I + II + III) was not met, prasinezumab-treated individuals exhibited slower progression of motor signs than placebo-treated participants (MDS-UPDRS Part III). We report here an exploratory analysis assessing whether prasinezumab showed greater benefits on motor signs progression in prespecified subgroups with faster motor progression. Prasinezumab’s potential effects on disease progression were assessed in four prespecified and six exploratory subpopulations of PASADENA: use of monoamine oxidase B inhibitors at baseline (yes versus no); Hoehn and Yahr stage (2 versus 1); rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (yes versus no); data-driven subphenotypes (diffuse malignant versus nondiffuse malignant); age at baseline (≥60 years versus <60 years); sex (male versus female); disease duration (>12 months versus <12 months); age at diagnosis (≥60 years versus <60 years); motor subphenotypes (akinetic–rigid versus tremor-dominant); and motor subphenotypes (postural instability gait dysfunction versus tremor-dominant). In these subpopulations, the effect of prasinezumab on slowing motor signs progression (MDS-UPDRS Part III) was greater in the rapidly progressing subpopulations (for example, participants who were diffuse malignant or taking monoamine oxidase B inhibitors at baseline). This exploratory analysis suggests that, in a trial of 1-year duration, prasinezumab might reduce motor progression to a greater extent in individuals with more rapidly progressing Parkinson’s disease. However, because this was a post hoc analysis, additional randomized clinical trials are needed to validate these findings

Validation of Serum Neurofilament Light Chain as a Biomarker of Parkinson's Disease Progression

Background: The objective of this study was to assess neurofilament light chain as a Parkinson’s disease biomarker. Methods: We quantified neurofilament light chain in 2 independent cohorts: (1) longitudinal cerebrospinal fluid samples from the longitudinal de novo Parkinson’s disease cohort and (2) a large longitudinal cohort with serum samples from Parkinson’s disease, other cognate/neurodegenerative disorders, healthy controls, prodromal conditions, and mutation carriers. Results: In the Parkinson’s Progression Marker Initiative cohort, mean baseline serum neurofilament light chain was higher in Parkinson’s disease patients (13 � 7.2 pg/mL) than in controls (12 � 6.7 pg/mL), P = 0.0336. Serum neurofilament light chain increased longitudinally in Parkinson’s disease patients versus controls (P < 0.01). Motor scores were positively associated with neurofilament light chain, whereas some cognitive scores showed a negative association. Conclusions: Neurofilament light chain in serum samples is increased in Parkinson’s disease patients versus healthy controls, increases over time and with age, and correlates with clinical measures of Parkinson’s disease severity. Although the specificity of neurofilament light chain for Parkinson’s disease is low, it is the first blood-based biomarker candidate that could support disease stratification of Parkinson’s disease versus other cognate/neurodegenerative disorders, track clinical progression, and possibly assess responsiveness to neuroprotective treatments. However, use of neurofilament light chain as a biomarker of response to neuroprotective interventions remains to be assessed

Long-term dementia prevalence in Parkinson Disease: Glass half-full?

Introduction: Dementia occurs in up to 80% of Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients long-term, but studies reporting such high rates were published years ago and had relatively small sample sizes and other limitations. Objective: To determine long-term, cumulative dementia prevalence rates in PD using data from two large, ongoing, prospective observational studies. Design: Analyses of data from the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) and a longstanding PD research clinical core at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn). Setting: PPMI is a multi-site international study, and Penn is a single site study at a tertiary movement disorders center. Participants: PPMI enrolls de novo, untreated PD participants at baseline, and Penn enrolls a convenience cohort from a large clinical center. Methods: For PPMI a cognitive battery and MDS-UPDRS Part I are administered annually, and the site investigator assigns a cognitive diagnosis annually. At Penn a comprehensive cognitive battery is administered either annually or biennially, and a cognitive diagnosis is made by expert consensus. Main Outcomes: Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival curves were fit for time from PD diagnosis to stable dementia diagnosis for each cohort, using assigned cognitive diagnosis of dementia as the primary endpoint (for both PPMI and Penn), and MoCA score <21 and MDS-UPDRS Part I cognition score ≥3 as secondary endpoints (for PPMI). In addition, cumulative dementia prevalence by PD disease duration was tabulated for each study and endpoint. Results: For the PPMI cohort, 417 PD participants were seen at baseline; estimated cumulative probability of dementia at year 10 disease duration were: 7% (site investigator diagnosis), 9% (MoCA) or 7.4% (MDS-UPDRS Part I cognition). For the Penn cohort, 389 PD participants were followed over time, with 184 participants (47% of cohort) eventually diagnosed with dementia. The KM curve for the Penn cohort had median time to dementia diagnosis =15 years (95% CI: 13-15) disease duration; the estimated cumulative probability of dementia was 27% at year 10, 50% at year 15, and 74% at year 20. Conclusions and Relevance: Results from two large, prospective studies suggest that dementia in Parkinson disease occurs less frequently, or later in the disease course, than often-cited previous research studies have reported

Accelerating Parkinson’s Disease drug development with federated learning approaches

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024.Parkinson’s Disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder afflicting almost 12 million people. Increased understanding of its complex and heterogenous disease pathology, etiology and symptom manifestations has resulted in the need to design, capture and interrogate substantial clinical datasets. Herein we advocate how advances in the deployment of artificial intelligence models for Federated Data Analysis and Federated Learning can help spearhead coordinated and sustainable approaches to address this grand challenge