A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease

David J M McGhee, Pamela L Royle, Paul A Thompson, David E Wright, John P Zajicek, Carl E Counsell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Using surrogate biomarkers for disease progression as endpoints in neuroprotective clinical trials may help differentiate symptomatic effects of potential neuroprotective agents from true disease-modifying effects. A systematic review was undertaken to determine what biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson’s disease (PD) exist.
Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE (1950–2010) were searched using five search strategies. Abstracts were assessed to identify papers meriting review in full. Studies of participants with idiopathic PD diagnosed by formal criteria or clearly described clinical means were included. We made no restriction on age, disease duration, drug treatment, or study design. We included studies which attempted to draw associations between any tests used to investigate disease progression and any clinical measures of disease progression. The electronic search was validated by hand-searching the two journals from which most included articles came.
Results: 183 studies were included: 163 (89%) cross-sectional, 20 (11%) longitudinal. The electronic search strategy had a sensitivity of 71.4% (95% CI 51.1-86.0) and a specificity of 97.1% (95% CI 96.5-97.7). In longitudinal studies
median follow-up was 2.0 years (IQR 1.1-3.5). Included studies were generally poor quality - cross-sectional with small numbers of participants, applying excessive inclusion/exclusion criteria, with flawed methodologies and simplistic statistical analyses.
Conclusion: We found insufficient evidence to recommend the use of any biomarker for disease progression in PD clinical trials, which may simply reflect the poor quality of research in this area. We therefore present a provisional ‘roadmap’ for conducting future disease progression biomarker studies, and recommend new quality criteria by which future studies may be judged.
Original languageEnglish
Article number35
Number of pages13
JournalBMC Neurology
Volume13
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Apr 2013

Fingerprint

Parkinson Disease
Disease Progression
Biomarkers
Clinical Trials
Neuroprotective Agents
MEDLINE
Research
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Parkinson disease
  • biomarkers
  • disease progression
  • clinical trials
  • neuroprotective agents

Cite this

McGhee, D. J. M., Royle, P. L., Thompson, P. A., Wright, D. E., Zajicek, J. P., & Counsell, C. E. (2013). A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease. BMC Neurology, 13, [35]. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-13-35

A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease. / McGhee, David J M; Royle, Pamela L; Thompson, Paul A; Wright, David E; Zajicek, John P; Counsell, Carl E.

In: BMC Neurology, Vol. 13, 35, 12.04.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

McGhee, David J M ; Royle, Pamela L ; Thompson, Paul A ; Wright, David E ; Zajicek, John P ; Counsell, Carl E. / A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease. In: BMC Neurology. 2013 ; Vol. 13.
@article{8c54abc23add4873a24dab7de1b14b37,
title = "A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease",
abstract = "Background: Using surrogate biomarkers for disease progression as endpoints in neuroprotective clinical trials may help differentiate symptomatic effects of potential neuroprotective agents from true disease-modifying effects. A systematic review was undertaken to determine what biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson’s disease (PD) exist. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE (1950–2010) were searched using five search strategies. Abstracts were assessed to identify papers meriting review in full. Studies of participants with idiopathic PD diagnosed by formal criteria or clearly described clinical means were included. We made no restriction on age, disease duration, drug treatment, or study design. We included studies which attempted to draw associations between any tests used to investigate disease progression and any clinical measures of disease progression. The electronic search was validated by hand-searching the two journals from which most included articles came. Results: 183 studies were included: 163 (89{\%}) cross-sectional, 20 (11{\%}) longitudinal. The electronic search strategy had a sensitivity of 71.4{\%} (95{\%} CI 51.1-86.0) and a specificity of 97.1{\%} (95{\%} CI 96.5-97.7). In longitudinal studies median follow-up was 2.0 years (IQR 1.1-3.5). Included studies were generally poor quality - cross-sectional with small numbers of participants, applying excessive inclusion/exclusion criteria, with flawed methodologies and simplistic statistical analyses. Conclusion: We found insufficient evidence to recommend the use of any biomarker for disease progression in PD clinical trials, which may simply reflect the poor quality of research in this area. We therefore present a provisional ‘roadmap’ for conducting future disease progression biomarker studies, and recommend new quality criteria by which future studies may be judged.",
keywords = "Parkinson disease, biomarkers, disease progression, clinical trials, neuroprotective agents",
author = "McGhee, {David J M} and Royle, {Pamela L} and Thompson, {Paul A} and Wright, {David E} and Zajicek, {John P} and Counsell, {Carl E}",
year = "2013",
month = "4",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2377-13-35",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
journal = "BMC Neurology",
issn = "1471-2377",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review of biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson's disease

AU - McGhee, David J M

AU - Royle, Pamela L

AU - Thompson, Paul A

AU - Wright, David E

AU - Zajicek, John P

AU - Counsell, Carl E

PY - 2013/4/12

Y1 - 2013/4/12

N2 - Background: Using surrogate biomarkers for disease progression as endpoints in neuroprotective clinical trials may help differentiate symptomatic effects of potential neuroprotective agents from true disease-modifying effects. A systematic review was undertaken to determine what biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson’s disease (PD) exist. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE (1950–2010) were searched using five search strategies. Abstracts were assessed to identify papers meriting review in full. Studies of participants with idiopathic PD diagnosed by formal criteria or clearly described clinical means were included. We made no restriction on age, disease duration, drug treatment, or study design. We included studies which attempted to draw associations between any tests used to investigate disease progression and any clinical measures of disease progression. The electronic search was validated by hand-searching the two journals from which most included articles came. Results: 183 studies were included: 163 (89%) cross-sectional, 20 (11%) longitudinal. The electronic search strategy had a sensitivity of 71.4% (95% CI 51.1-86.0) and a specificity of 97.1% (95% CI 96.5-97.7). In longitudinal studies median follow-up was 2.0 years (IQR 1.1-3.5). Included studies were generally poor quality - cross-sectional with small numbers of participants, applying excessive inclusion/exclusion criteria, with flawed methodologies and simplistic statistical analyses. Conclusion: We found insufficient evidence to recommend the use of any biomarker for disease progression in PD clinical trials, which may simply reflect the poor quality of research in this area. We therefore present a provisional ‘roadmap’ for conducting future disease progression biomarker studies, and recommend new quality criteria by which future studies may be judged.

AB - Background: Using surrogate biomarkers for disease progression as endpoints in neuroprotective clinical trials may help differentiate symptomatic effects of potential neuroprotective agents from true disease-modifying effects. A systematic review was undertaken to determine what biomarkers for disease progression in Parkinson’s disease (PD) exist. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE (1950–2010) were searched using five search strategies. Abstracts were assessed to identify papers meriting review in full. Studies of participants with idiopathic PD diagnosed by formal criteria or clearly described clinical means were included. We made no restriction on age, disease duration, drug treatment, or study design. We included studies which attempted to draw associations between any tests used to investigate disease progression and any clinical measures of disease progression. The electronic search was validated by hand-searching the two journals from which most included articles came. Results: 183 studies were included: 163 (89%) cross-sectional, 20 (11%) longitudinal. The electronic search strategy had a sensitivity of 71.4% (95% CI 51.1-86.0) and a specificity of 97.1% (95% CI 96.5-97.7). In longitudinal studies median follow-up was 2.0 years (IQR 1.1-3.5). Included studies were generally poor quality - cross-sectional with small numbers of participants, applying excessive inclusion/exclusion criteria, with flawed methodologies and simplistic statistical analyses. Conclusion: We found insufficient evidence to recommend the use of any biomarker for disease progression in PD clinical trials, which may simply reflect the poor quality of research in this area. We therefore present a provisional ‘roadmap’ for conducting future disease progression biomarker studies, and recommend new quality criteria by which future studies may be judged.

KW - Parkinson disease

KW - biomarkers

KW - disease progression

KW - clinical trials

KW - neuroprotective agents

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2377-13-35

DO - 10.1186/1471-2377-13-35

M3 - Article

VL - 13

JO - BMC Neurology

JF - BMC Neurology

SN - 1471-2377

M1 - 35

ER -