4.7 Article

Impact of sustained deprenyl (selegiline) in levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease: A randomized placebo-controlled extension of the deprenyl and tocopherol antioxidative therapy of parkinsonism trial

期刊

ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY
卷 51, 期 5, 页码 604-612

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ana.10191

关键词

-

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [NS 24778] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Deprenyl (selegiline) delays the need for levodopa therapy in patients with early Parkinson's disease, but the long-term benefits of this treatment remain unclear. During 1987 to 1988, 800 patients with early Parkinson's disease were randomized in the Deprenyl and Tocopherol Antioxidative Therapy of Parkinsonism trial to receive deprenyl, tocopherol, combined treatments, or a placebo and were then placed on active deprenyl (10mg/day). A second, independent randomization was carried out in early 1993 for 368 subjects who by that time had required levodopa and who had consented to continuing the deprenyl treatment (D subjects) or changing to a matching placebo (P subjects) under double-blind conditions. The first development of wearing off, dyskinesias, or on-off motor fluctuations was the prespecified primary outcome measure. During the average 2-year follow-up, there were no differences between the treatment groups with respect to the primary outcome measure (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.63, 1.19; P = 0.38), withdrawal from the study, death, or adverse events. Although 34% of D subjects developed dyskinesias and only 19% of P subjects did (p = 0.006), only 16% of D subjects developed freezing of gait but 29% of P subjects did (P = 0.0003). Decline in motor performance was less in D subjects than P subjects. Levodopa-treated Parkinson's disease patients who had been treated with deprenyl for up to 7 years, compared with patients who were changed to a placebo after about 5 years, experienced slower motor decline and were more likely to develop dyskinesias but less likely to develop freezing of gait.

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

4.7
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