Dongni Johansson1, Ilias Thomas2, Anders Ericsson3, Anders Johansson4, Alexander Medvedev5, Mevludin Memedi6, Dag Nyholm7, Fredrik Ohlsson3, Marina Senek7, Jack Spira8, Jerker Westin2, Filip Bergquist9. 1. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. Electronic address: dongni.johansson@gu.se. 2. Department of Micro-data Analysis, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden. 3. RISE Acreo, Gothenburg, Sweden. 4. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Neurology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 6. Informatics, School of Business, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden. 7. Department of Neuroscience, Neurology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 8. Sensidose AB, Sollentuna, Sweden. 9. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A treatment response objective index (TRIS) was previously developed based on sensor data from pronation-supination tests. This study aimed to examine the performance of TRIS for medication effects in a new population sample with Parkinson's disease (PD) and its usefulness for constructing individual dose-response models. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with PD performed a series of tasks throughout a levodopa challenge while wearing sensors. TRIS was used to determine motor changes in pronation-supination tests following a single levodopa dose, and was compared to clinical ratings including the Treatment Response Scale (TRS) and six sub-items of the UPDRS part III. RESULTS: As expected, correlations between TRIS and clinical ratings were lower in the new population than in the initial study. TRIS was still significantly correlated to TRS (rs = 0.23, P < 0.001) with a root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.33. For the patients (n = 17) with a good levodopa response and clear motor fluctuations, a stronger correlation was found (rs = 0.38, RMSE = 1.29, P < 0.001). The mean TRIS increased significantly when patients went from the practically defined off to their best on state (P = 0.024). Individual dose-response models could be fitted for more participants when TRIS was used for modelling than when TRS ratings were used. CONCLUSION: The objective sensor index shows promise for constructing individual dose-response models, but further evaluations and retraining of the TRIS algorithm are desirable to improve its performance and to ensure its clinical effectiveness.
INTRODUCTION: A treatment response objective index (TRIS) was previously developed based on sensor data from pronation-supination tests. This study aimed to examine the performance of TRIS for medication effects in a new population sample with Parkinson's disease (PD) and its usefulness for constructing individual dose-response models. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with PD performed a series of tasks throughout a levodopa challenge while wearing sensors. TRIS was used to determine motor changes in pronation-supination tests following a single levodopa dose, and was compared to clinical ratings including the Treatment Response Scale (TRS) and six sub-items of the UPDRS part III. RESULTS: As expected, correlations between TRIS and clinical ratings were lower in the new population than in the initial study. TRIS was still significantly correlated to TRS (rs = 0.23, P < 0.001) with a root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.33. For the patients (n = 17) with a good levodopa response and clear motor fluctuations, a stronger correlation was found (rs = 0.38, RMSE = 1.29, P < 0.001). The mean TRIS increased significantly when patients went from the practically defined off to their best on state (P = 0.024). Individual dose-response models could be fitted for more participants when TRIS was used for modelling than when TRS ratings were used. CONCLUSION: The objective sensor index shows promise for constructing individual dose-response models, but further evaluations and retraining of the TRIS algorithm are desirable to improve its performance and to ensure its clinical effectiveness.