L M Chahine1, L Uribe2, P Hogarth3, J McNames4, A Siderowf5, K Marek6, D Jennings7. 1. Department of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: lchahine2018@gmail.com. 2. Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. 3. Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA; Department of Neurology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA. 4. Biomedical Signal Processing Laboratory, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 6. The Institute for Neurodegenerative Disorders, New Haven, CT, USA. 7. Eli Lilly and Company, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Objective, portable measures of motor function for out-of-office assessments are needed in Parkinson's Disease (PD). This study had 3 objectives. First, to examine change in objective motor measurements in PD (as assessed with the Objective PD Measurement (OPDM) system). Second, to correlate objective measures with clinical features and putative PD cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and dopaminergic imaging biomarkers. Third, to assess participant compliance with and perceptions of serial in-home motor assessments. METHODS: De novo PD subjects participating in this pilot study of the Parkinson Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) completed OPDM assessments at home weekly for 3 months and in the clinic at baseline and 3-, 6-, and 12-months. Tasks included (i)digitography (ii)a repetitive hand tapping task and (iii)timed pegboard task. A global objective motor score (OMS) was derived from the latter three. MDS-UPDRS-III score was obtained at each time point, and CSF and dopamine transporter (DAT) SPECT at baseline. RESULTS: 27 participants, mean age 62.6 years, 19 male were included. A mean of 10.5 in-home assessments were completed. There was no significant change in in-home OMS over 12 weeks (p = 0.48). There was strong correlation between mean baseline OMS and MDS-UPDRS-III scores (spearman's rho = 0.60, p=<0.0001). Baseline OMS predicted 6-month MDS-UPDRS-III (β = 0.80, p = 0.0002) but not change in MDS-UPDRS-III score, DAT SPECT, or putative CSF biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that administration of in-home motor tasks as part of a large multi-center study is feasible and scores derived from these assessments may serve as surrogates of in-person clinician-assessed motor score.
INTRODUCTION: Objective, portable measures of motor function for out-of-office assessments are needed in Parkinson's Disease (PD). This study had 3 objectives. First, to examine change in objective motor measurements in PD (as assessed with the Objective PD Measurement (OPDM) system). Second, to correlate objective measures with clinical features and putative PD cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and dopaminergic imaging biomarkers. Third, to assess participant compliance with and perceptions of serial in-home motor assessments. METHODS: De novo PD subjects participating in this pilot study of the Parkinson Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) completed OPDM assessments at home weekly for 3 months and in the clinic at baseline and 3-, 6-, and 12-months. Tasks included (i)digitography (ii)a repetitive hand tapping task and (iii)timed pegboard task. A global objective motor score (OMS) was derived from the latter three. MDS-UPDRS-III score was obtained at each time point, and CSF and dopamine transporter (DAT) SPECT at baseline. RESULTS: 27 participants, mean age 62.6 years, 19 male were included. A mean of 10.5 in-home assessments were completed. There was no significant change in in-home OMS over 12 weeks (p = 0.48). There was strong correlation between mean baseline OMS and MDS-UPDRS-III scores (spearman's rho = 0.60, p=<0.0001). Baseline OMS predicted 6-month MDS-UPDRS-III (β = 0.80, p = 0.0002) but not change in MDS-UPDRS-III score, DAT SPECT, or putative CSF biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that administration of in-home motor tasks as part of a large multi-center study is feasible and scores derived from these assessments may serve as surrogates of in-person clinician-assessed motor score.
Authors: Florian Lipsmeier; Kirsten I Taylor; Timothy Kilchenmann; Detlef Wolf; Alf Scotland; Jens Schjodt-Eriksen; Wei-Yi Cheng; Ignacio Fernandez-Garcia; Juliane Siebourg-Polster; Liping Jin; Jay Soto; Lynne Verselis; Frank Boess; Martin Koller; Michael Grundman; Andreas U Monsch; Ronald B Postuma; Anirvan Ghosh; Thomas Kremer; Christian Czech; Christian Gossens; Michael Lindemann Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 10.338