The Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale.

BackgroundThere is currently no undisputed, validated, clinically meaningful measure for deficits in the broad spectrum of PSP phenotypes.ObjectiveTo develop a scale to monitor clinical deficits in patients with PSP across its broad phenotypes.MethodsThe Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale was conceptualized to cover seven clinical domains (Akinesia-rigidity, Bradyphrenia, Communication, Dysphagia, Eye movements, Finger dexterity, and Gait & balance), each scored from 0 to 3 (no, mild, moderate, or severe deficits). User guidelines were developed to standardize its application. Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale scores were collected in patients fulfilling the MDS-PSP diagnostic criteria in two independent, multicenter, observational studies, both cross-sectionally (exploratory DescribePSP cohort; confirmatory ProPSP cohort) and longitudinally (12-months' follow-up, both cohorts).ResultsCognitive pretesting demonstrated easy scale utility. In total, 164 patients were scored (70.4 ± 7.6 years; 62% males, 35% variant phenotypes). Mean Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale completion time was 4 minutes. The Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale total score correlated with existing scales (e.g., Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Rating Scale: R = 0.88; P < 0.001). Individual Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale items correlated well with similar constructs in existing scales. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.75), inter-rater reliability (0.96), and test-retest stability (0.99) were acceptable. The PSP-CDS showed significant 12-month change (baseline, 8.6 ± 3.6; follow-up: 10.8 ± 3.6; annualized difference: 3.4 ± 3.4; n = 49; P < 0.0001). Sample sizes required per arm for a two-arm, 1-year follow-up therapeutic trial to detect 50% change in Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale progression was estimated to be 65 (two-sided, two-sample t test).ConclusionThe Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Clinical Deficits Scale is a rapidly completed, clinimetrically sound scale for clinical care and research involving PSP. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

Power calculations and placebo effect for future clinical trials in progressive supranuclear palsy.

BackgroundTwo recent randomized, placebo-controlled trials of putative disease-modifying agents (davunetide, tideglusib) in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) failed to show efficacy, but generated data relevant for future trials.MethodsWe provide sample size calculations based on data collected in 187 PSP patients assigned to placebo in these trials. A placebo effect was calculated.ResultsThe total PSP-Rating Scale required the least number of patients per group (N = 51) to detect a 50% change in the 1-year progression and 39 when including patients with ≤ 5 years disease duration. The Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living required 70 patients per group and was highly correlated with the PSP-Rating Scale. A placebo effect was not detected in these scales.ConclusionsWe propose the 1-year PSP-Rating Scale score change as the single primary readout in clinical neuroprotective or disease-modifying trials. The Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living could be used as a secondary outcome. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

Power calculations and placebo effect for future clinical trials in progressive supranuclear palsy.

BackgroundTwo recent randomized, placebo-controlled trials of putative disease-modifying agents (davunetide, tideglusib) in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) failed to show efficacy, but generated data relevant for future trials.MethodsWe provide sample size calculations based on data collected in 187 PSP patients assigned to placebo in these trials. A placebo effect was calculated.ResultsThe total PSP-Rating Scale required the least number of patients per group (N = 51) to detect a 50% change in the 1-year progression and 39 when including patients with ≤ 5 years disease duration. The Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living required 70 patients per group and was highly correlated with the PSP-Rating Scale. A placebo effect was not detected in these scales.ConclusionsWe propose the 1-year PSP-Rating Scale score change as the single primary readout in clinical neuroprotective or disease-modifying trials. The Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living could be used as a secondary outcome. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

Genotype–Phenotype Relations for the Atypical Parkinsonism Genes : MDSGene Systematic Review

This Movement Disorder Society Genetic mutation database Systematic Review focuses on monogenic atypical parkinsonism with mutations in the ATP13A2, DCTN1, DNAJC6, FBXO7, SYNJ1, and VPS13C genes. We screened 673 citations and extracted genotypic and phenotypic data for 140 patients (73 families) from 77 publications. In an exploratory fashion, we applied an automated classification procedure via an ensemble of bootstrap-aggregated (“bagged”) decision trees to distinguish these 6 forms of monogenic atypical parkinsonism and found a high accuracy of 86.5% (95%CI, 86.3%–86.7%) based on the following 10 clinical variables: age at onset, spasticity and pyramidal signs, hypoventilation, decreased body weight, minimyoclonus, vertical gaze palsy, autonomic symptoms, other nonmotor symptoms, levodopa response quantification, and cognitive decline. Comparing monogenic atypical with monogenic typical parkinsonism using 2063 data sets from Movement Disorder Society Genetic mutation database on patients with SNCA, LRRK2, VPS35, Parkin, PINK1, and DJ-1 mutations, the age at onset was earlier in monogenic atypical parkinsonism (24 vs 40 years; P = 1.2647 × 10−12) and levodopa response less favorable than in patients with monogenic typical presentations (49% vs 93%). In addition, we compared monogenic to nonmonogenic atypical parkinsonism using data from 362 patients with progressive supranuclear gaze palsy, corticobasal degeneration, multiple system atrophy, or frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Although these conditions share many clinical features with the monogenic atypical forms, they can typically be distinguished based on their later median age at onset (64 years; IQR, 57–70 years). In conclusion, age at onset, presence of specific signs, and degree of levodopa response inform differential diagnostic considerations and genetic testing indications in atypical forms of parkinsonism