4.6 Article

Levetiracetam for the Management of Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesias in Parkinson's Disease

期刊

MOVEMENT DISORDERS
卷 26, 期 2, 页码 264-270

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mds.23355

关键词

levodopa-induced dyskinesias; Parkinson's disease; levetiracetam

资金

  1. UCB pharmaceutical company-Belgium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The efficacy and safety of levetiracetam (LEV), administered for management of levodopa-induced dyskinesias (LID) in Parkinson's disease (PD), was examined using a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel groups, crossover trial. Because of having a period effect, data after crossover point was excluded from analysis. Levodopa-treated PD participants with LID (n = 38) received LEV 500 mg/day, were assessed, titrated to 1,000 mg/day and reassessed, before and after crossover. The placebo group followed the same routine. Primary efficacy was defined from percent change in On with LID time from patient diaries. Secondary efficacy assessment used On without LID, Off time, unified PD rating scale (UPDRS), clinical global impression (CGI), and Goetz dyskinesia scale after levodopa challenge. Safety measures were also performed. On with LID time decreased 37 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59, 7.15; P = 0.02) at 500 mg/day, 7.85% 75 minutes (95% CI 3.3, 12.4; P = 0.002) at 1,000 mg/day. On without LID time increased by 46 minutes (95% CI -1.55, -0.03; P = 0.04) at 500 mg/day and 55 minutes (95% CI -10.39, -1.14; P = 0.018) at 1,000 mg/day. UPDRS 32 showed decreased dyskinesia duration mean change 0.35 (95% CI 0.09, 0.5; P = 0.009) at 1,000 mg/day. CGI showed LID decreased by 0.7 (95% CI 0.21, 1.18; P = 0.006) at 1,000 mg/day. Patient diaries and UPDRS show no increase in Off time. This exploratory trial provides evidence that LEV in 1,000 mg/day, slowly titrated, could be useful in improving LID as was assessed with patient diaries, UPDRS, and CGI scales, safely, with minimal side effects. (C) 2010 Movement Disorder Society

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据