BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Parkinson's disease (PD), which severely affects patient functioning and quality of life and increases the risk for nursing home admission. Unfortunately, current treatment options for PDD are limited and have only marginal therapeutic effects. As novel treatments are developed, there will be a need to assess their efficacy in well-designed randomized controlled trials. However, there is no consensus on the optimal outcome measures for use in PDD clinical trials. METHODS: A systematic review of PDD clinical trials and empiric studies of outcome measures used in PDD was performed. Outcome measures were divided into five categories: 1) cognitive; 2) behavioral and mood; 3) activities of daily living and quality of life; 4) global; and 5) caregiver burden. FINDINGS: A total of 20 PDD pharmacologic clinical trials were identified. These trials incorporated a broad array of outcome measures, which were used inconsistently across trials. We summarize the psychometric properties and other relevant data on outcome measures used, including their diagnostic utility, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, responsiveness, clinically meaningful change, and availability of alternate forms. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified the best-evidenced PDD outcome measures in each domain. Further research is needed to assess the validity, reliability, and clinically meaningful change of these measures in PDD to inform the design of future clinical trials and enhance the ability of clinicians, researchers and policy-makers to interpret study results. In addition, the development of outcome measures specific to PDD may be warranted.
BACKGROUND:Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Parkinson's disease (PD), which severely affects patient functioning and quality of life and increases the risk for nursing home admission. Unfortunately, current treatment options for PDD are limited and have only marginal therapeutic effects. As novel treatments are developed, there will be a need to assess their efficacy in well-designed randomized controlled trials. However, there is no consensus on the optimal outcome measures for use in PDD clinical trials. METHODS: A systematic review of PDD clinical trials and empiric studies of outcome measures used in PDD was performed. Outcome measures were divided into five categories: 1) cognitive; 2) behavioral and mood; 3) activities of daily living and quality of life; 4) global; and 5) caregiver burden. FINDINGS: A total of 20 PDD pharmacologic clinical trials were identified. These trials incorporated a broad array of outcome measures, which were used inconsistently across trials. We summarize the psychometric properties and other relevant data on outcome measures used, including their diagnostic utility, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, responsiveness, clinically meaningful change, and availability of alternate forms. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified the best-evidenced PDD outcome measures in each domain. Further research is needed to assess the validity, reliability, and clinically meaningful change of these measures in PDD to inform the design of future clinical trials and enhance the ability of clinicians, researchers and policy-makers to interpret study results. In addition, the development of outcome measures specific to PDD may be warranted.
Authors: Sotirios A Parashos; Sheng Luo; Kevin M Biglan; Ivan Bodis-Wollner; Bo He; Grace S Liang; G Webster Ross; Barbara C Tilley; Lisa M Shulman Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Madaline B Harrison; Scott A Wylie; Robert C Frysinger; James T Patrie; Diane S Huss; Lillian J Currie; G Frederick Wooten Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2009-01-30 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Alan Breier; Virginia K Sutton; Peter D Feldman; Deborah L Kadam; Iris Ferchland; Padraig Wright; Joseph H Friedman Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2002-09-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Florindo Stella; Orestes Vicente Forlenza; Jerson Laks; Larissa Pires de Andrade; Michelle A Ljubetic Avendaño; Elisandra Villela Gasparetto Sé; João de Castilho Cação; Constantine G Lyketsos; Kate de Medeiros Journal: Int Psychogeriatr Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 3.878
Authors: Heather G Allore; Keith S Goldfeld; Roee Gutman; Fan Li; Joan K Monin; Monica Taljaard; Thomas G Travison Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Achinoam Faust-Socher; Sarah Duff-Canning; Arthur Grabovsky; Melissa J Armstrong; Brandon Rothberg; Paul J Eslinger; Christopher A Meaney; Ruth B Schneider; David F Tang-Wai; Susan H Fox; Cindy Zadikoff; Nancy Kennedy; Kelvin L Chou; Carol Persad; Irene Litvan; Benjamin T Mast; Adam T Gerstenecker; Sandra Weintraub; William Reginold; Connie Marras Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 2.959
Authors: Samantha K Holden; Luis D Medina; Brian Hoyt; Stefan H Sillau; Brian D Berman; Jennifer G Goldman; Daniel Weintraub; Benzi M Kluger Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Samantha K Holden; Claire E Koljack; Lindsay P Prizer; Stefan H Sillau; Janis M Miyasaki; Benzi M Kluger Journal: Parkinsonism Relat Disord Date: 2019-06-23 Impact factor: 4.891
Authors: Darrell T H Li; Edward S Hui; Queenie Chan; N Yao; S E Chua; Gráinne M McAlonan; Shirley Y Y Pang; S L Ho; Henry K F Mak Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2018-07-27 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Jadwiga Attier-Zmudka; Jean-Marie Sérot; Jeremy Valluy; Mo Saffarini; Youcef Douadi; Krzysztof Piotr Malinowski; Olivier Balédent Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2020-01-10 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Federico Rodriguez-Porcel; Kathryn A Wyman-Chick; Carla Abdelnour Ruiz; Jon B Toledo; Daniel Ferreira; Prabitha Urwyler; Rimona S Weil; Joseph Kane; Andrea Pilotto; Arvid Rongve; Bradley Boeve; John-Paul Taylor; Ian McKeith; Dag Aarsland; Simon J G Lewis Journal: Transl Neurodegener Date: 2022-05-02 Impact factor: 9.883