Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38978326›Full record

Trial reportClinical and translational science2024

The interactive walkway provides fit-for-purpose fall-risk biomarkers in the elderly: Comparison of zolpidem and suvorexant.

Ingrid Koopmans, Daphne Geerse, Lara de Ridder, Melvyn Roerdink, Maria Joanna Juachon, Clemens Muehlan, Jasper Dingemanse, Joop van Gerven, Geert Jan Groeneveld, Rob Zuiker

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. 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

10 authors.

Ingrid KoopmansCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4199-9781
Daphne GeerseLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5277-6607
Lara de RidderCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Melvyn RoerdinkDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8534-1124
Maria Joanna JuachonCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Clemens MuehlanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Allschwil, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0788-3788
Jasper DingemanseDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Allschwil, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4083-5817
Joop van GervenCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1444-7415
Geert Jan GroeneveldCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4655-6667
Rob ZuikerCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5604-0157

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dynamic balance assessments such as walking adaptability may yield a more realistic prediction of drug-induced falls compared with postural stability measurements, as falls often result from limited gait adjustments when walking. The Interactive Walkway (IWW) measures walking adaptability but sensitivity to medication effects is unknown. If proven sensitive and specific, IWW could serve as a biomarker for targeted fall-risk assessments in early clinical drug development. In this three-way crossover study, 18 healthy elderly (age: 65-80 years) subjects received 5 mg zolpidem, 10 mg suvorexant, or placebo in the morning. Assessments were performed pre-dose and approximately hourly until 9 h post-dose. IWW assessments included an 8-meter walking test, goal-directed stepping, obstacle-avoidance, and tandem-walking. Other pharmacodynamic measurements were the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) test at a comfortable and fast pace, adaptive tracking, and body sway. A decline in performance was observed for zolpidem compared with placebo for 3 h post-dose in IWW walking adaptability outcome measures, TUG, adaptive tracking, and body sway. For the IWW tasks, a decrease in walking speed (among others) was observed. IWW parameters were not affected by suvorexant compared with placebo at any timepoint. However, an increase of 9.8% (95%CI: 1.8%, 18.5%) in body sway was observed for suvorexant compared with placebo up to 3 h post-dose. The IWW successfully quantified drug effects of two hypnotic drugs and distinguished between zolpidem and suvorexant regarding their effects on walking. As a biomarker, the IWW demonstrated sensitivity in assessing dynamic balance and potential fall risk in early phase clinical drug development.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsAzepinesCross-Over StudiesPostural BalanceTriazolesWalkingZolpidemAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMalePyridinesRisk AssessmentAzepinesBiomarkersPyridinessuvorexantTriazolesZolpidem

Identifiers

PMID38978326
PMCPMC11231031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.