4.7 Article

Randomized controlled trial of intraputamenal glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor infusion in Parkinson disease

Journal

ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 3, Pages 459-466

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ana.20737

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [MC_U120036861] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. Medical Research Council [MC_U120036861] Funding Source: Medline
  3. MRC [MC_U120036861] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) exerts potent trophic influence on midbrain dopaminergic neurons. This randomized controlled clinical trial was designed to confirm initial clinical benefits observed in a small, open-label trial using intraputamenal (Ipu) infusion of recombinant human GDNF (liatermin). Metho Thirty-four PD patients were randomized 1 to 1 to receive bilateral continuous Ipu infusion of liatermin 15 mu g/putamen/day or placebo. The primary end point was the change in Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor score in the practically defined off condition at 6 months. Secondary end points included other UPDRS scores, motor tests, dyskinesia ratings, patient diaries, and F-18-dopa uptake. Results: At 6 months, mean percentage changes in off UPDRS motor score were -10.0% and -4.5% in the liatermin and placebo groups, respectively. This treatment difference was not significant (95% confidence interval, -23.0 to 12.0, p = 0.53). Secondary end point results were similar between the groups. A 32.5% treatment difference favoring liatermin in mean F-18-dopa influx constant (p = 0.019) was observed. Serious, device-related adverse events required surgical repositioning of catheters in two patients and removal of devices in another. Neutralizing antiliatermin antibodies were detected in three patients (one on-study and two in the open-label extension). Interpretation: Liatermin did not confer the predetermined level of clinical benefit to patients with PD despite increased 18 F-dopa uptake. It is uncertain whether technical differences between this trial and positive open-label studies contributed in any way this negative outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available