STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the interaction between therapeutic dosages of ropinirole and L-dopa plus a decarboxylase inhibitor administered at steady state in patients with Parkinson's disease. DESIGN. Open, 6-week, overlap trial with random allocation. PATIENTS: Thirty patients with Parkinson's disease not previously treated with dopamine agonists, of whom 28 produced evaluable pharmacokinetic data for ropinirole and 23 for L-dopa. INTERVENTION: Group A (14 patients) received L-dopa for weeks 1-5 and ropinirole in increasing increments for weeks 2-6; group B (16) received ropinirole for weeks 1-5 and L-dopa for weeks 5 and 6. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary end points were AUC0-8 and Cmax for ropinirole, and AUC0-8, AUC0-infinity and Cmax for L-dopa. Secondary end points were Tmax for ropinirole, and Tmax and half-life for L-dopa. Coadministration with L-dopa at steady state did not affect rate or extent of availability of ropinirole: point estimates of the geometric mean ratio for ropinirole plus L-dopa compared with ropinirole alone for both Cmax and AUC0-8 approximated to unity. The small (16%) increase in peak concentrations of L-dopa on administration with ropinirole is unlikely to be of clinical consequence, as peak concentrations of L-dopa are typically highly variable. CONCLUSION: There are no pharmacokinetic grounds for adjusting dosages of either ropinirole or L-dopa when given in combination.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the interaction between therapeutic dosages of ropinirole and L-dopa plus a decarboxylase inhibitor administered at steady state in patients with Parkinson's disease. DESIGN. Open, 6-week, overlap trial with random allocation. PATIENTS: Thirty patients with Parkinson's disease not previously treated with dopamine agonists, of whom 28 produced evaluable pharmacokinetic data for ropinirole and 23 for L-dopa. INTERVENTION: Group A (14 patients) received L-dopa for weeks 1-5 and ropinirole in increasing increments for weeks 2-6; group B (16) received ropinirole for weeks 1-5 and L-dopa for weeks 5 and 6. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary end points were AUC0-8 and Cmax for ropinirole, and AUC0-8, AUC0-infinity and Cmax for L-dopa. Secondary end points were Tmax for ropinirole, and Tmax and half-life for L-dopa. Coadministration with L-dopa at steady state did not affect rate or extent of availability of ropinirole: point estimates of the geometric mean ratio for ropinirole plus L-dopa compared with ropinirole alone for both Cmax and AUC0-8 approximated to unity. The small (16%) increase in peak concentrations of L-dopa on administration with ropinirole is unlikely to be of clinical consequence, as peak concentrations of L-dopa are typically highly variable. CONCLUSION: There are no pharmacokinetic grounds for adjusting dosages of either ropinirole or L-dopa when given in combination.