Search

Background: Enhancing the interactions between study participants, clinicians, and investigators is imperative for advancing Parkinson's disease (PD) research. The Canadian Open Parkinson Network (C-OPN) stands as a nationwide endeavor, connecting the PD community with ten accredited universities and movement disorders research centers spanning, at the time of this analysis, British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec. Objective: Our aim is to showcase C-OPN as a paradigm for bolstering national collaboration to accelerate PD research and to provide an initial overview of already collected data sets. Methods: The C-OPN database comprises de-identified data concerning demographics, symptoms and signs, treatment approaches, and standardized assessments. Additionally, it collects venous blood-derived biomaterials, such as for analyses of DNA, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), and serum. Accessible to researchers, C-OPN resources are available through web-based data management systems for multi-center studies, including REDCap. Results: As of November 2023, the C-OPN had enrolled 1,505 PD participants. The male-to-female ratio was 1.77:1, with 83% (n = 1098) residing in urban areas and 82% (n = 1084) having pursued post-secondary education. The average age at diagnosis was 60.2±10.3 years. Herein, our analysis of the C-OPN PD cohort encompasses environmental factors, motor and non-motor symptoms, disease management, and regional differences among provinces. As of April 2024, 32 research projects have utilized C-OPN resources. Conclusions: C-OPN represents a national platform promoting multidisciplinary and multisite research that focuses on PD to promote innovation, exploration of care models, and collaboration among Canadian scientists. Plain Language Summary: Teamwork and communication between people living with Parkinson's disease (PD), physicians, health professionals, and research scientists is important for improving the lives of those living with this condition. The Canadian Open Parkinson Network (C-OPN) is a Canada-wide initiative, connecting the PD community with ten accredited universities and movement disorders research centers located in – at the time of this analysis–British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec. The aim of this paper is to showcase C-OPN as a useful resource for physician and research scientists studying PD in Canada and around the world, and to provide snapshot of already collected data. The C-OPN database comprises de-identified (meaning removal of any identifying information, such as name or date of birth) data concerning lifestyle, disease symptoms, treatments, and results from standardized tests. It also collects blood samples for further analysis. As of November 2023, C-OPN had enrolled 1,505 PD participants across Canada. Most of the participants were male (64%), living in urban areas (83%), and completed post-secondary education (82%). The average age at diagnosis was 60.2±10.3 years. In this paper, we look at environmental factors, motor and non-motor symptoms, different disease management strategies, and regional differences between provinces. In conclusion, C-OPN represents a national platform that encourages multidisciplinary and multisite research focusing on PD to promote innovation and collaboration among Canadian scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ImportanceCoenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), an antioxidant that supports mitochondrial function, has been shown in preclinical Parkinson disease (PD) models to reduce the loss of dopamine neurons, and was safe and well tolerated in early-phase human studies. A previous phase II study suggested possible clinical benefit.ObjectiveTo examine whether CoQ10 could slow disease progression in early PD.Design, setting, and participantsA phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial at 67 North American sites consisting of participants 30 years of age or older who received a diagnosis of PD within 5 years and who had the following inclusion criteria: the presence of a rest tremor, bradykinesia, and rigidity; a modified Hoehn and Yahr stage of 2.5 or less; and no anticipated need for dopaminergic therapy within 3 months. Exclusion criteria included the use of any PD medication within 60 days, the use of any symptomatic PD medication for more than 90 days, atypical or drug-induced parkinsonism, a Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) rest tremor score of 3 or greater for any limb, a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 25 or less, a history of stroke, the use of certain supplements, and substantial recent exposure to CoQ10. Of 696 participants screened, 78 were found to be ineligible, and 18 declined participation.InterventionsThe remaining 600 participants were randomly assigned to receive placebo, 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, or 2400 mg/d of CoQ10; all participants received 1200 IU/d of vitamin E.Main outcomes and measuresParticipants were observed for 16 months or until a disability requiring dopaminergic treatment. The prospectively defined primary outcome measure was the change in total UPDRS score (Parts I-III) from baseline to final visit. The study was powered to detect a 3-point difference between an active treatment and placebo.ResultsThe baseline characteristics of the participants were well balanced, the mean age was 62.5 years, 66% of participants were male, and the mean baseline total UPDRS score was 22.7. A total of 267 participants required treatment (94 received placebo, 87 received 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, and 86 received 2400 mg/d of CoQ10), and 65 participants (29 who received placebo, 19 who received 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, and 17 who received 2400 mg/d of CoQ10) withdrew prematurely. Treatments were well tolerated with no safety concerns. The study was terminated after a prespecified futility criterion was reached. At study termination, both active treatment groups showed slight adverse trends relative to placebo. Adjusted mean changes (worsening) in total UPDRS scores from baseline to final visit were 6.9 points (placebo), 7.5 points (1200 mg/d of CoQ10; P = .49 relative to placebo), and 8.0 points (2400 mg/d of CoQ10; P = .21 relative to placebo).Conclusions and relevanceCoenzyme Q10 was safe and well tolerated in this population, but showed no evidence of clinical benefit.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00740714.

ImportanceCoenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), an antioxidant that supports mitochondrial function, has been shown in preclinical Parkinson disease (PD) models to reduce the loss of dopamine neurons, and was safe and well tolerated in early-phase human studies. A previous phase II study suggested possible clinical benefit.ObjectiveTo examine whether CoQ10 could slow disease progression in early PD.Design, setting, and participantsA phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial at 67 North American sites consisting of participants 30 years of age or older who received a diagnosis of PD within 5 years and who had the following inclusion criteria: the presence of a rest tremor, bradykinesia, and rigidity; a modified Hoehn and Yahr stage of 2.5 or less; and no anticipated need for dopaminergic therapy within 3 months. Exclusion criteria included the use of any PD medication within 60 days, the use of any symptomatic PD medication for more than 90 days, atypical or drug-induced parkinsonism, a Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) rest tremor score of 3 or greater for any limb, a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 25 or less, a history of stroke, the use of certain supplements, and substantial recent exposure to CoQ10. Of 696 participants screened, 78 were found to be ineligible, and 18 declined participation.InterventionsThe remaining 600 participants were randomly assigned to receive placebo, 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, or 2400 mg/d of CoQ10; all participants received 1200 IU/d of vitamin E.Main outcomes and measuresParticipants were observed for 16 months or until a disability requiring dopaminergic treatment. The prospectively defined primary outcome measure was the change in total UPDRS score (Parts I-III) from baseline to final visit. The study was powered to detect a 3-point difference between an active treatment and placebo.ResultsThe baseline characteristics of the participants were well balanced, the mean age was 62.5 years, 66% of participants were male, and the mean baseline total UPDRS score was 22.7. A total of 267 participants required treatment (94 received placebo, 87 received 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, and 86 received 2400 mg/d of CoQ10), and 65 participants (29 who received placebo, 19 who received 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, and 17 who received 2400 mg/d of CoQ10) withdrew prematurely. Treatments were well tolerated with no safety concerns. The study was terminated after a prespecified futility criterion was reached. At study termination, both active treatment groups showed slight adverse trends relative to placebo. Adjusted mean changes (worsening) in total UPDRS scores from baseline to final visit were 6.9 points (placebo), 7.5 points (1200 mg/d of CoQ10; P = .49 relative to placebo), and 8.0 points (2400 mg/d of CoQ10; P = .21 relative to placebo).Conclusions and relevanceCoenzyme Q10 was safe and well tolerated in this population, but showed no evidence of clinical benefit.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00740714.

Exposure to nonionizing radiation used in wireless communication remains a contentious topic in the public mind--while the overwhelming scientific evidence to date suggests that microwave and radio frequencies used in modern communications are safe, public apprehension remains considerable. A recent article in "Child Development" has caused concern by alleging a causative connection between nonionizing radiation and a host of conditions, including autism and cancer. This commentary outlines why these claims are devoid of merit, and why they should not have been given a scientific veneer of legitimacy. The commentary also outlines some hallmarks of potentially dubious science, with the hope that authors, reviewers, and editors might be better able to avoid suspect scientific claims.

BackgroundHealth care providers often tell women to wait until the next menses to begin hormonal contraception. The intent is to avoid contraceptive use during an undetected pregnancy. An alternative is to start hormonal contraception immediately with back-up birth control for the first seven days. Immediate initiation was introduced with combined oral contraceptives (COCs), and has expanded to other hormonal contraceptives. At the time of the initial review, how immediate start compared to conventional menses-dependent start was unclear regarding effectiveness, continuation, and acceptability. The immediate-start approach may improve women's access to, and continuation of, hormonal contraception.ObjectivesThis review examined randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of immediate-start hormonal contraception for differences in effectiveness, continuation, and acceptability.Search methodsIn August 2012, we searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP for trials of immediate-start hormonal contraceptives. We contacted researchers to find other studies. Earlier searches also included EMBASE.Selection criteriaWe included RCTs that compared immediate start to conventional start of hormonal contraception. Also included were trials that compared immediate start of different hormonal contraceptive methods with each other.Data collection and analysisData were abstracted by two authors and entered into RevMan. The Peto odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated.Main resultsFive studies were included. No new eligible studies have been found since the review was initially conducted. Method discontinuation was similar between groups in all trials. Bleeding patterns and side effects were similar in trials that compared immediate with conventional start. In a study of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), immediate start of DMPA showed fewer pregnancies than a 'bridge' method before DMPA (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.84). Further, more women in the immediate-DMPA group were very satisfied versus those with a 'bridge' method (OR 1.99; 95% CI 1.05 to 3.77). A trial of two immediate-start methods showed the vaginal ring group had less prolonged bleeding (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.89) and less frequent bleeding (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.03) than COC users. The ring group also reported fewer side effects. Also, more immediate ring users were very satisfied than immediate COC users (OR 2.88; 95% CI 1.59 to 5.22).Authors' conclusionsWe found limited evidence that immediate start of hormonal contraception reduces unintended pregnancies or increases method continuation. However, the pregnancy rate was lower with immediate start of DMPA versus another method. Some differences were associated with contraceptive type rather than initiation method, i.e., immediate ring versus immediate COC. More studies are needed of immediate versus conventional start of the same hormonal contraceptive.

The article presents the discussion on examining the detrimental role some doctors play in spreading misinformation and disinformation about vaccines. Topics include impact of anti-vaccine rhetoric on social media, the influence of medical professionals on public vaccination intentions, and the challenge of addressing vaccine misinformation within the medical community.