Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35048423›Full record

Trial reportMovement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society2022

A Randomized Trial Assessing the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy During Morning Off of AZ-009.

Eva Thijssen, Jonas den Heijer, David Puibert, Laurence Moss, Mingzu Lei, David Hasegawa, Kyo Keum, Ken Mochel, Mohammed Ezzeldin Sharaf, Tom Alfredson and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Research progress on intranasal treatment for Parkinson's disease.Neuroprotection (Chichester, England) · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Eva ThijssenCentre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3907-072X
Jonas den HeijerCentre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2272-7978
David PuibertFerrer, Barcelona, Spain.
Laurence MossCentre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Leiden, the Netherlands.
Mingzu LeiAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
David HasegawaAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
Kyo KeumAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
Ken MochelAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
Mohammed Ezzeldin SharafFerrer, Barcelona, Spain.
Tom AlfredsonAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
Wenxiang ZengAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
Emilie van BrummelenCentre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Leiden, the Netherlands.
Tatjana NarandaAlexza Pharmaceuticals, Mountain View, California, USA.
Geert Jan GroeneveldCentre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4655-6667
Alexza Pharmaceuticals (United States) · USLeiden University Medical Center · NLFerrer Grupo (Spain) · ESCentre for Human Drug Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInhalation of apomorphine could be a faster-acting and more user-friendly alternative to subcutaneous injection for treating off periods in Parkinson's disease (PD).

objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the safety and pharmacokinetics of inhaled apomorphine (AZ-009) with subcutaneous apomorphine (APO-go PEN) in healthy volunteers (HVs) and to examine the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of AZ-009 in patients with PD.

methodsIn part A of this study, eight HVs received 1 mg AZ-009 and 2 mg subcutaneous apomorphine in a randomized crossover manner. In the subsequent single ascending dose parts in HVs (part B, n = 16) and patients with PD (part C, n = 25), participants were randomized to placebo or AZ-009 up to 4 mg. In patients, after medication withdrawal, Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III and on/off states were assessed predose and postdose.

resultsAZ-009 was rapidly absorbed with peak plasma concentrations at 2 minutes, as compared to 30 minutes for subcutaneous apomorphine. Adverse events for AZ-009 were comparable to subcutaneous apomorphine, except for mild and transient throat irritation. Adverse events limited AZ-009 dose escalation in HVs to 3 mg. Patients tolerated up to 4 mg. In patients with PD, 2, 3, and 4 mg AZ-009 reduced mean Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III score (standard deviation) by 10.7 (13.6), 12.8 (7.9), and 10.3 (3.7) points, respectively, compared to 4.8 (4.9) after placebo at 10 minutes postdose. The percentage of patients achieving full on within 45 minutes postdose increased dose dependently: 0% (placebo), 17% (2 mg), 50% (3 mg), and 83% (4 mg).

conclusionsAZ-009 appears to be a rapid-acting and reasonably well-tolerated formulation for treating off periods. © 2022 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Indexed as

ApomorphineParkinson DiseaseAdministration, InhalationAntiparkinson AgentsCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodHumansMental Status and Dementia TestsAntiparkinson AgentsApomorphineapomorphineAZ-009inhalationoffParkinson's diseaserandomized clinical trial

Identifiers

PMID35048423
PMCPMC9306836
OpenAlexW4205691408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.