Search

Background Caring for a partner or family member with Parkinson’s disease (PD) negatively affects the caregiver’s own physical and emotional well-being, especially those caring for people with advanced PD (APD). This study was designed to examine the impact of APD on caregiver perceived burden, quality of life (QoL), and health status. Methods Dyads of people with PD and their primary caregivers were identified from the Adelphi Parkinson’s Disease Specific Program (DSP™) using real-world data from the United States, Japan and five European countries. Questionnaires were used to capture measures of clinical burden (people with PD) and caregiver burden (caregivers). Results Data from 721 patient-caregiver dyads in seven countries were captured. Caregivers had a mean age 62.6 years, 71.6% were female, and 70.4% were a spouse. Caregivers for people with APD had a greater perceived burden, were more likely to take medication and had lower caregiver treatment satisfaction than those caring for people with early or intermediate PD; similar findings were observed for caregivers of people with intermediate versus early PD. Caregivers for people with intermediate PD were also less likely to be employed than those with early PD (25.3% vs 42.4%) and spent more time caring (6.6 vs 3.2 h/day). Conclusions This real-world study demonstrates that caregivers of people with APD experience a greater burden than those caring for people with early PD. This highlights the importance of including caregiver-centric measures in future studies, and emphasizes the need for implementing treatments that reduce caregiver burden in APD. Trial registration: N/A.

A clinical trial in advanced Parkinson's disease (APD) has established the superiority of carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (CLES) in reducing total patient "off" time (OFF) and increasing total "on" time without troublesome dyskinesia (ON-woTD) over orally administered immediate-release carbidopa/levodopa tablets (IR-CL). However, temporal patterns of these improvements throughout the waking day have not been examined. In this analysis, time to ON-woTD after waking and patterns of motor-symptom control throughout the waking day were compared between CLES and IR-CL.Post hoc analyses of APD patient-diary data from the phase 3 randomized controlled trial were used to compare changes in time to ON-woTD after waking, motor-symptom control throughout the waking day, occurrence of extreme fluctuations between OFF and "on" with troublesome dyskinesia, and motor-state transitions with CLES versus IR-CL from baseline to week 12.The sample included 33 CLES-treated and 30 IR-CL-treated patients. Among the CLES group, the percentage of patient days achieving ON-woTD within 30 min of waking was three times higher at week 12 versus baseline (33% vs. 11%, p = 0.0043); no significant change occurred with IR-CL. When the waking day was divided into four 4-h periods, CLES versus IR-CL treatment produced significantly greater reductions in OFF during three periods, and two periods had increased ON-woTD. Fewer CLES-treated patients had extreme fluctuations at week 12 (3% vs. 23%, p = 0.0224) compared to IR-CL-treated patients. From baseline to week 12, CLES-treated patients had greater reductions in the average number of motor-state transitions compared to IR-CL-treated patients (- 1.6, p = 0.0295).CLES-treated patients experienced a more rapid onset of ON-woTD after waking and greater consistency of ON-woTD throughout their waking day than IR-CL-treated patients.In advanced Parkinson’s disease, patients’ motor-symptom states (such as “on” time without troublesome dyskinesia [good “on” time] and “off” time), and the timing at which they occur, can impact patients’ quality of life and ability to complete activities of daily living. Carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension is administered continuously into the jejunum, potentially reducing some of the motor-state variation that is common with orally administered carbidopa/levodopa, including delayed “on” time after waking and transitions between “off” and “on” throughout the day. In post hoc analyses of clinical trial data, patterns of motor-states across the waking day were compared between carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension and orally administered immediate-release carbidopa/levodopa at week 12. Outcomes included time to good “on” after waking; occurrence of extreme fluctuations between “off” time and “on” time with troublesome dyskinesia; time in each motor-state during 4-h intervals across the day; and frequency of motor-state transitions. Three times as many carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension-treated patients achieved good “on” within 30 min of waking after 12 weeks versus baseline, whereas no significant change was observed for the orally administered immediate-release carbidopa/levodopa group. Compared to orally administered immediate-release carbidopa/levodopa-treated patients, fewer carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension-treated patients experienced extreme fluctuations, had greater reductions in motor-state transitions, and greater reductions in duration of “off” during three of the four intervals in the day. These findings provide a first look at the impact of carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension on motor-state patterns throughout the day, and suggest that carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension provides more consistent motor-symptom control and predictable benefit throughout the day than orally administered carbidopa/levodopa.

Background: Increasing doses of oral antiparkinson medications are indicated in advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD), but little is known about sustainment of high-dose regimens. Objective: To investigate sustainment of high-dose oral medication regimens in Medicare beneficiaries with incident advanced PD. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized 100%fee-for-service Medicare claims from 2011–2013. We identified advanced PD using a pharmacy claims-based proxy and selected patients who initiated a new high-dose oral medication regimen (daily levodopa equivalent dose [LED] >1000 mg/day for ≥30 days) in 2012. In the following 12 months, we examined: 1) annual proportion of days covered (PDC)≥0.80 and 2) presence of a ≥ 90 day continuous gap at varying dosage thresholds: the initial >1000 mg/day, >800 mg/day, >500 mg/day, or >0 mg/day. Results: We identified 9,405 patients with advanced PD (mean age 77.4 [SD 6.8] years; 53%men). Only 5%maintained a regimen of >1000 mg/day at PDC ≥0.80; 75% had a ≥ 90-day gap in that dosage level. At a dosage threshold of >800 mg/day, 20% had a PDC ≥0.80 and 53% had a ≥ 90-day gap; at >500 mg/day, 56% had a PDC ≥0.80 and 19%had a ≥ 90-day gap; and at >0 mg/day (any dose), 76% had a PDC ≥0.80 and only 10%had a≥90-day gap. Conclusion: Few patients with advanced PD sustained a high-dose oral medication regimen in the year following initiation, but most sustained a substantially lower-dose regimen. Strategies to improve advanced PD treatment are needed.

Parkinson's disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disease, which significantly impacts patients' quality of life and is associated with high treatment and direct healthcare costs. In England, levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) is indicated for the treatment of levodopa-responsive advanced Parkinson's disease with troublesome motor fluctuations when available combinations of medicinal products are unsatisfactory.We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of LCIG compared to the standard of care for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease in England, using real-world data.A Markov model was adapted from previous published studies, using the perspective of the English National Health System and Personal and Social Services to evaluate the cost effectiveness of LCIG compared to standard of care in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease over a 20-year time horizon. The model comprised 25 health states, defined by a combination of the Hoehn and Yahr scale, and waking time spent in OFF-time. The base case considered an initial cohort of patients with an Hoehn and Yahr score of ≥ 3, and 4 h OFF-time. Standard of care comprised standard oral therapies, and a proportion of patients were assumed to be treated with subcutaneous apomorphine infusion or injection in addition to oral therapies. Efficacy inputs were based on LCIG clinical trials where possible. Resource use and utility values were based on results of a large-scale observational study, and costs were derived from the latest published UK data, valued at 2017 prices. The EuroQol five-dimensions-3-level (EQ-5D-3L) instrument was used to measure utilities. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were discounted at 3.5%. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.Total costs and quality-adjusted life-years gained for LCIG vs standard of care were £586,832 vs £554,022, and 2.82 vs 1.43, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for LCIG compared to standard of care was £23,649/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were sensitive to the healthcare resource utilisation based on real-world data, and long-term efficacy of LCIG.The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated to be within the acceptable thresholds for cost effectiveness considered for England.

In advanced Parkinson's disease (PD), a high pill burden is associated with poor compliance, reduced control of symptoms, and decreased quality of life. We assessed the impact of carbidopa-levodopa enteral suspension (CLES) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) on PD-related pill burden.A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted in the IBM MarketScan and Medicare Supplemental databases. Patients with advanced PD, taking only PD medications, and initiating CLES or DBS between 9 January 2015 and 31 July 2019 were identified. CLES patients were matched to DBS patients in a 1:3 ratio based on a propensity score to balance patient characteristics. Pill burden was measured as a 30-day average number of PD-related pills per day and was captured monthly. Pill-free status was evaluated as the percentage of patients receiving CLES or DBS monotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used to compare pill counts and assess the proportion of patients on monotherapy at 6 and 12 months after initiating CLES or DBS.The cohorts included 34 CLES patients matched to 97 DBS patients. A significant reduction in PD-related pill burden was observed at 6 months after initiation of CLES or DBS (∆CLES: -5.62, p 0.0001; ∆DBS: -1.48, p = 0.0022). PD-related pill burden reduction in CLES patients was significantly greater than in matched DBS patients at 6 months (∆: -4.14, p 0.0001), which was sustained at 12 months after initiation. At 12 months, nearly three times more CLES patients were pill free than DBS patients (29.41% and 10.31%, respectively, p = 0.0123).Device-aided therapies such as CLES and DBS are effective in significantly reducing PD-related pill burden. Patients treated with CLES were more likely to achieve pill-free status than patients receiving DBS.

Standardized and validated criteria to define advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) or identify patient eligibility for device-aided therapy are needed. This study assessed the psychometric properties of clinical indicators of advanced PD and eligibility for device-aided therapy in a large population.This retrospective analysis of the Adelphi Parkinson's Disease Specific Programme collected data from device-aided therapy-naïve people with PD in G7 countries. We assessed the presence of 15 clinical indicators of advancing PD and seven indicators of eligibility for device-aided therapy in patients classified with advanced PD or as eligible for device-aided therapy by the treating physician. Accuracy was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) and multivariable logistic regression models. Construct validity was examined via known-group comparisons of disease severity and burden among patients with and without each clinical indicator.Of 4714 PD patients, 14.9% were classified with advanced PD and 17.5% as eligible for device-aided therapy by physician judgment. The presence of each clinical indicator was 1.9- to 7.3-fold more likely in patients classified with advanced PD. Similarly, the presence of device-aided therapy eligibility indicators was 1.8- to 5.5-fold more likely in patients considered eligible for device-aided therapy. All indicators demonstrated high clinical screening accuracy for identifying advanced PD (AUC range 0.84-0.89) and patients eligible for device-aided therapy (AUC range 0.73-0.80). The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score, cognitive function, quality of life, and caregiver burden were significantly worse in indicator-positive patients.Specific clinical indicators of advanced PD and eligibility for device-aided therapy demonstrated excellent psychometric properties in a large sample, and thus may provide an objective and reliable approach for patient identification and treatment optimization.Advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD) refers to the stage of disease when motor complications are difficult to manage with standard therapy. Patients reaching this stage of the disease may benefit from a treatment change from pills to the so-called device-aided therapies. However, there is currently no unanimous definition of advanced PD, which makes it challenging to identify suitable candidates for device-aided therapies. There is urgent need to define specific features (or ‘clinical indicators’) to support healthcare professionals and patients in the identification of advanced PD as well as to define suitability for device-aided therapy. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of 15 clinical indicators and seven device-aided therapy eligibility criteria using information from a large database of 4714 patients in G7 countries. Physicians classified 14.9% of patients as having advanced PD and 17.5% were judged to be eligible for device-aided therapy. Each clinical indicator or device-aided therapy eligibility indicator was detected more frequently in patients classified as having advanced PD and in patients considered eligible for device-aided therapy, respectively. All indicators had high accuracy for identifying advanced PD and device-aided therapy-eligibility. These previously identified clinical indicators of advanced PD and device-aided therapy eligibility may provide an objective and reliable approach for patient screening and treatment optimization.

Importance COVID-19 is causing high mortality worldwide. Developing models to quantify the risk of poor outcomes in infected patients could help develop strategies to shield the most vulnerable during de-confinement. Objective To develop and externally validate COVID-19 Estimated Risk (COVER) scores that quantify a patient9s risk of hospital admission (COVER-H), requiring intensive services (COVER-I), or fatality (COVER-F) in the 30-days following COVID-19 diagnosis. Design Multinational, distributed network cohorts. Setting We analyzed a federated network of electronic medical records and administrative claims data from 13 data sources and 6 countries, mapped to a common data model. Participants Model development used a patient population consisting of >2 million patients with a general practice (GP), emergency room (ER), or outpatient (OP) visit with diagnosed influenza or flu-like symptoms any time prior to 2020. The model was validated on patients with a GP, ER, or OP visit in 2020 with a confirmed or suspected COVID-19 diagnosis across four databases from South Korea, Spain and the United States. Outcomes Age, sex, historical conditions, and drug use prior to index date were considered as candidate predictors. Outcomes included i) hospitalization with pneumonia, ii) hospitalization with pneumonia requiring intensive services or death, and iii) death in the 30 days after index date. Results Overall, 43,061 COVID-19 patients were included for model validation, after initial model development and validation using 6,869,127 patients with influenza or flu-like symptoms. We identified 7 predictors (history of cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and kidney disease) which combined with age and sex could discriminate which patients would experience any of our three outcomes. The models achieved high performance in influenza. When transported to COVID-19 cohorts, the AUC ranges were, COVER-H: 0.73-0.81, COVER-I: 0.73-0.91, and COVER-F: 0.82-0.90. Calibration was overall acceptable, with overestimated risk in the most elderly and highest risk strata. Conclusions and relevance A 9-predictor model performs well for COVID-19 patients for predicting hospitalization, intensive services and death. The models could aid in providing reassurance for low risk patients and shield high risk patients from COVID-19 during de-confinement to reduce the virus9 impact on morbidity and mortality.

Background Current understanding of the health care costs of Parkinson's disease (PD) and the incremental burden of advanced disease is incomplete. Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the direct economic burden associated with advanced versus mild/moderate PD in a prevalent national sample of elderly U.S. Medicare beneficiaries with a PD diagnosis. Methods Analyzing 100% fee-for-service Medicare claims from 2013, we defined advanced PD with a medication-based algorithm and calculated all-cause and PD-related costs for the overall sample and by disease severity. We measured primary PD-related costs (based on claims with a primary diagnosis of PD) and any PD-related costs (based on claims with PD in any diagnostic field). Generalized linear models were used to estimate risk-adjusted mean cost differences between the advanced and mild/moderate PD groups for the calendar year. Results The final sample (N = 144,703) had mean observed all-cause, primary PD-related, and any PD-related costs of $23,041 (SD, $34,045), $3429 (SD, $7431), and $9924 (SD, $22,140), respectively. Twenty percent of patients were classified as advanced PD. Costs varied substantially; any PD-related mean costs were $483 for the lowest patient decile (which included 1% of the advanced group) and $48,145 for the highest decile (which included 15% of the advanced group). Incremental risk-adjusted costs of advanced PD were $5818 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $5411-$6225) for all-cause costs, $3644 (95% CI: $3484-$3806) for primary PD-related costs, and $6088 (95% CI: $5779-$6398) for any PD-related costs. Conclusions Elderly Medicare beneficiaries with PD had substantial variation in PD-related costs. Advanced PD was associated with a larger economic burden than mild/moderate PD. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Introduction Lack of a gold standard definition for advanced Parkinson's Disease (APD), coupled with absence of disease severity information in diagnostic codes, hinders use of large administrative databases for conducting population health and comparative effectiveness studies. Methods Using pharmacy claims data, we created an algorithm to identify APD: any 30-day average levodopa equivalent dose (LED) >1000 mg/day. Using 2013 100% U.S. Medicare claims, we applied this algorithm and used multivariate logistic regression to examine associations between assigned APD status and claims-based indicators of PD severity (any deep brain stimulation, fall, hallucinations, walker, wheelchair, specialty bed, dementia diagnosis, skilled nursing facility, hospice), adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics. Levodopa >1000 mg/day, levodopa >800 mg/day and LED >800 mg/day were used in sensitivity analysis. Results In our sample (N = 144,703), 20% were assigned APD status based on the LED >1000 mg/day cut-off. This group had significantly higher odds of having each claims-based indicator, compared with those assigned mild-moderate PD status. Odds ratios were highest for indicators for any DBS (OR: 2.96; 95% CI:2.75–3.19) and specialty bed (OR:2.15, 95% CI: 1.99–2.32) and lowest for fall (OR:1.27; 95% CI:1.20–1.34) and dementia diagnosis (OR:1.21; 95% CI:1.18–1.25). Results based on alternative approaches were similar. Conclusions Medicare patients classified as having APD via a pharmacy claims-based algorithm had higher odds of having claims-based clinical markers of APD, compared with patients categorized as having mild-moderate PD. This proxy strategy could facilitate future claims-based studies and warrants further refinement and validation using medical records or other clinical sources., Highlights • Prescription claims can be used to calculate average daily levodopa-equivalent dose. • An algorithm (LED >1000 mg/day) was used to identify advanced Parkinson's in claims. • 20% of people with Parkinson's disease in a Medicare sample aged 65+ met this definition. • The remaining 80% of the sample was classified as having mild/moderate disease. • The advanced group had higher odds of having clinical markers of advanced disease.