What is a clinically important change in the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale in Parkinson's disease?

INTRODUCTION Dyskinesia remain a significant problem in Parkinson Disease (PD). The translation process of novel drug targets for dyskinesia has proven difficult with several failures at phase III level. Determining the 'clinically important change' (CIC) for dyskinesia rating scales in phase II clinical trials may assist in optimizing drug development of new anti-dyskinetic treatments. We used a standard phase IIa acute levodopa infusion paradigm to determine for the first time the CIC for dyskinesia using the new UDysRS. METHODS We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study with eleven PD patients with stable bothersome dyskinesia. We used the following patient-reported clinically important events as CIC anchors: onset, maximum intensity, remission of dyskinesia. Objective dyskinesia scores using the UDysRS part III Impairment were determined at these same events by blinded video-rating. The CIC was determined using the 'within-patient' score change and a sensitivity- and specificity-based approach. RESULTS Patients were most aware of 'onset of dyskinesia', followed by 'remission of dyskinesia'. An 11.1-point median change (UDysRS Part III Impairment, p < 0.0001) was the CIC for patient-reported remission of dyskinesia from a practically defined-OFF state. A 2.32-point change (UDysRS Part III Impairment) had the best specificity and sensitivity to distinguish between patient-reported remission and perception of dyskinesia. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we provide the first report of a CIC for the UDysRS Part III Impairment. Early knowledge of a CIC may help inform the decision to advance into phase III trials and contribute for a higher yield of success in finding new anti-dyskinetic treatments.

[1]  R. Hauser,et al.  Determination of minimal clinically important change in early and advanced Parkinson's disease , 2011, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[2]  Richard A. C. Hughes,et al.  European Handbook of Neurological Management , 2011 .

[3]  C. Mehta,et al.  The future of drug development: advancing clinical trial design , 2009, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[4]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, BMC medicine.

[5]  M. Hallett,et al.  Practice Parameter: Treatment of Parkinson disease with motor fluctuations and dyskinesia (an evidence-based review): Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology , 2006, Neurology.

[6]  Klaus Seppi,et al.  Which dyskinesia scale best detects treatment response? , 2013, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[7]  Regina Katzenschlager,et al.  The Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease , 2011, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[8]  Alfredo Berardelli,et al.  Late (Complicated) Parkinson's Disease , 2010 .

[9]  C. Moore,et al.  Recommendations for Planning Pilot Studies in Clinical and Translational Research , 2011, Clinical and translational science.

[10]  A. Lang,et al.  A comparison of the mini mental state exam to the montreal cognitive assessment in identifying cognitive deficits in Parkinson's disease , 2008, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[11]  Werner Poewe,et al.  Ten‐year follow‐up of Parkinson's disease patients randomized to initial therapy with ropinirole or levodopa , 2007, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[12]  J. Nutt,et al.  The Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale: Presentation and clinimetric profile , 2008, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[13]  J. Nutt,et al.  Evolution of the response to levodopa during the first 4 years of therapy , 2002, Annals of neurology.

[14]  Laurent Gerbaud,et al.  Impact of the motor complications of Parkinson's disease on the quality of life , 2005, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[15]  J. Hughes,et al.  Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson's disease: a clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. , 1992, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[16]  W. Poewe,et al.  The Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the non‐motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease , 2011, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[17]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. , 1989, Controlled clinical trials.

[18]  Famotidine, a Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonist, Does Not Reduce Levodopa‐Induced Dyskinesia in Parkinson's Disease: A Proof‐of‐Concept Study , 2014, Movement disorders clinical practice.