IMPORTANCE: Convergent biological, epidemiological, and clinical data identified urate elevation as a candidate strategy for slowing disability progression in Parkinson disease (PD). OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety, tolerability, and urate-elevating capability of the urate precursor inosine in early PD and to assess its suitability and potential design features for a disease-modification trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Safety of Urate Elevation in PD (SURE-PD) study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial of inosine, enrolled participants from 2009 to 2011 and followed them for up to 25 months at outpatient visits to 17 credentialed clinical study sites of the Parkinson Study Group across the United States. Seventy-five consenting adults (mean age, 62 years; 55% women) with early PD not yet requiring symptomatic treatment and a serum urate concentration less than 6 mg/dL (the approximate population median) were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment arms: placebo or inosine titrated to produce mild (6.1-7.0 mg/dL) or moderate (7.1-8.0 mg/dL) serum urate elevation using 500-mg capsules taken orally up to 2 capsules 3 times per day. They were followed for up to 24 months (median, 18 months) while receiving the study drug plus 1 washout month. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prespecified primary outcomes were absence of unacceptable serious adverse events (safety), continued treatment without adverse event requiring dose reduction (tolerability), and elevation of urate assessed serially in serum and once (at 3 months) in cerebrospinal fluid. RESULTS Serious adverse events (17), including infrequent cardiovascular events, occurred at the same or lower rates in the inosine groups relative to placebo. No participant developed gout and 3 receiving inosine developed symptomatic urolithiasis. Treatment was tolerated by 95% of participants at 6 months, and no participant withdrew because of an adverse event. Serum urate rose by 2.3 and 3.0 mg/dL in the 2 inosine groups (P < .001 for each) vs placebo, and cerebrospinal fluid urate level was greater in both inosine groups (P = .006 and <.001, respectively). Secondary analyses demonstrated nonfutility of inosine treatment for slowing disability. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Inosine was generally safe, tolerable, and effective in raising serum and cerebrospinal fluid urate levels in early PD. The findings support advancing to more definitive development of inosine as a potential disease-modifying therapy for PD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00833690.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: Convergent biological, epidemiological, and clinical data identified urateelevation as a candidate strategy for slowing disability progression in Parkinson disease (PD). OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety, tolerability, and urate-elevating capability of the urate precursor inosine in early PD and to assess its suitability and potential design features for a disease-modification trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Safety of UrateElevation in PD (SURE-PD) study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial of inosine, enrolled participants from 2009 to 2011 and followed them for up to 25 months at outpatient visits to 17 credentialed clinical study sites of the Parkinson Study Group across the United States. Seventy-five consenting adults (mean age, 62 years; 55% women) with early PD not yet requiring symptomatic treatment and a serum urate concentration less than 6 mg/dL (the approximate population median) were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment arms: placebo or inosine titrated to produce mild (6.1-7.0 mg/dL) or moderate (7.1-8.0 mg/dL) serum urateelevation using 500-mg capsules taken orally up to 2 capsules 3 times per day. They were followed for up to 24 months (median, 18 months) while receiving the study drug plus 1 washout month. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prespecified primary outcomes were absence of unacceptable serious adverse events (safety), continued treatment without adverse event requiring dose reduction (tolerability), and elevation of urate assessed serially in serum and once (at 3 months) in cerebrospinal fluid. RESULTS Serious adverse events (17), including infrequent cardiovascular events, occurred at the same or lower rates in the inosine groups relative to placebo. No participant developed gout and 3 receiving inosine developed symptomatic urolithiasis. Treatment was tolerated by 95% of participants at 6 months, and no participant withdrew because of an adverse event. Serum urate rose by 2.3 and 3.0 mg/dL in the 2 inosine groups (P < .001 for each) vs placebo, and cerebrospinal fluid urate level was greater in both inosine groups (P = .006 and <.001, respectively). Secondary analyses demonstrated nonfutility of inosine treatment for slowing disability. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Inosine was generally safe, tolerable, and effective in raising serum and cerebrospinal fluid urate levels in early PD. The findings support advancing to more definitive development of inosine as a potential disease-modifying therapy for PD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00833690.
Authors: Richard E Gonsette; Christian Sindic; Marie B D'hooghe; Peter-Paul De Deyn; Robert Medaer; Alex Michotte; Pierrette Seeldrayers; Daniel Guillaume Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Clyde E Markowitz; Sergei Spitsin; Vanessa Zimmerman; Dina Jacobs; Jayaram K Udupa; D Craig Hooper; Hilary Koprowski Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Michael A Schwarzschild; Steven R Schwid; Kenneth Marek; Arthur Watts; Anthony E Lang; David Oakes; Ira Shoulson; Alberto Ascherio; Christopher Hyson; Emily Gorbold; Alice Rudolph; Karl Kieburtz; Stanley Fahn; Lisa Gauger; Christopher Goetz; John Seibyl; Misser Forrest; John Ondrasik Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2008-04-14
Authors: Alberto Ascherio; Peter A LeWitt; Kui Xu; Shirley Eberly; Arthur Watts; Wayne R Matson; Connie Marras; Karl Kieburtz; Alice Rudolph; Mikhail B Bogdanov; Steven R Schwid; Marsha Tennis; Caroline M Tanner; M Flint Beal; Anthony E Lang; David Oakes; Stanley Fahn; Ira Shoulson; Michael A Schwarzschild Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2009-12
Authors: Sara Cipriani; Cody A Desjardins; Thomas C Burdett; Yuehang Xu; Kui Xu; Michael A Schwarzschild Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-05-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kelly Claire Simon; Shirley Eberly; Xiang Gao; David Oakes; Caroline M Tanner; Ira Shoulson; Stanley Fahn; Michael A Schwarzschild; Alberto Ascherio Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2014-10-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Filipe Marques Gonçalves; Vivian Binder Neis; Débora Kurrle Rieger; Mark William Lopes; Isabella A Heinrich; Ana Paula Costa; Ana Lúcia S Rodrigues; Manuella P Kaster; Rodrigo Bainy Leal Journal: Purinergic Signal Date: 2016-12-13 Impact factor: 3.765
Authors: Dan Lindholm; Johanna Mäkelä; Valentina Di Liberto; Giuseppa Mudò; Natale Belluardo; Ove Eriksson; Mart Saarma Journal: Cell Mol Life Sci Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 9.261
Authors: Michael Benatar; Kevin Boylan; Andreas Jeromin; Seward B Rutkove; James Berry; Nazem Atassi; Lucie Bruijn Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2015-12-29 Impact factor: 3.217