ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Rotigotine transdermal patch in Parkinson's disease: a narrative review of pharmacology, clinical evidence, special-population management, and health economics.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Parkinson's disease (PD) requires lifelong dopaminergic therapy, yet oral routes are frequently compromised by gastrointestinal dysfunction, dysphagia, and perioperative fasting. Abrupt withdrawal of oral dopaminergic drugs may precipitate severe motor deterioration or parkinsonism-hyperpyrexia syndrome. Rotigotine transdermal patch delivers 24-h continuous dopaminergic stimulation (CDS) via a non-ergot dopamine agonist (DA) formulation that bypasses first-pass metabolism and gastrointestinal absorption, and may be particularly useful when oral dopaminergic delivery becomes unreliable or is not possible. Objective: To synthesize published evidence on rotigotine pharmacology, clinical efficacy, management in vulnerable populations, safety, real-world effectiveness, and health economics, with emphasis on the incremental contribution of a scenario-based, Asia/China-inclusive, and pharmacy-oriented narrative relative to prior general reviews. Methods: Narrative review of randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, regulatory documents, pharmacoeconomic models, and prospective observational studies identified through structured literature search and bibliographic screening. Results: Transdermal bioavailability is approximately 37% versus less than 5% for oral rotigotine. Pivotal Chinese trials SP0914 (early PD: UPDRS II + III -4.9 vs. -0.2) and SP1037 (advanced PD: placebo-adjusted off-time reduction -1.20 h/d [95% CI -1.83 to -0.57]; within-group change -2.36 h/d) demonstrated efficacy; meta-analyses support motor and selected non-motor benefits, including sleep, mood, and gastrointestinal tolerability, whereas swallowing-related signals remain preliminary and based mainly on small observational studies. Perioperative fasting, dysphagia, end-stage disease, and hepatorenal impairment represent clinically important scenarios in which non-oral delivery may be considered, although supporting evidence outside pivotal motor trials is often limited. Application-site reactions (ASRs) are the principal local adverse events; structured 14-day site rotation reduced ASR from 50.0% to 20.3% (P = 0.0373). Chinese cost-effectiveness analyses reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,118,617.81 CNY per quality-adjusted life year versus pramipexole immediate-release at market price, with price-sensitivity thresholds of 28.5% and 9.5% reductions. Conclusion: Rotigotine provides CDS for patients with PD when oral delivery is unreliable; individualized patient selection, structured pharmaceutical care, and updated pharmacoeconomic evaluation are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.