INfusion VErsus STimulation in Parkinson's Disease (INVEST)

Description

Rationale: Both Continuous intrajejunal Levodopa Infusion (CLI) and Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) are accepted therapies for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). As directly comparative studies are lacking, it is unknown whether one of the therapies is more effective. Besides, CLI seems to be more expensive. To determine the optimal treatment in advanced PD, a comparative study of CLI and DBS is warranted.

Hypothesis: We hypothesize that CLI is a more expensive therapy in advanced PD than DBS and that the surplus in costs is not cost-effective with regard to benefits for the patient and caregivers in quality of life, PD symptoms and adverse events.

Objective: To realize a cost-effective treatment strategy in advanced PD. Study design: Prospective, randomized, open label multicentre trial, with two additional patient preference treatment arms ("patient preference randomized trial").

Study population: Patients with PD who, despite optimal pharmacological treatment, have severe response fluctuations, dyskinesias, painful dystonia, or bradykinesia. A total of 66 patients will be randomized, at least 120 patients will be included in the patient preference arms.

Intervention: Patients will be randomized to DBS or CLI. For DBS treatment, 2 electrodes will be implanted in the brain. The electrodes are connected to an implanted pulse generator, which will be placed subcutaneously in the subclavian area. For CLI treatment, a tube will be placed in the jejunum via a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). This tube is connected to an external pump that delivers the levodopa-gel.

Main study parameters: There are 8 specified assessment visits: at baseline, and 1 week, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months after start of the study treatment. The primary health economic outcomes are the costs per changed unit on the PDQ-39 (and the costs per changed QALY for the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, respectively. The EQ-5D will be applied as the utility measure. Change in quality of life (expressed in the between group difference in change from baseline to 12 months on the PDQ-39 summary index score) is the main clinical outcome. Among the secondary outcomes are functional health, complications and adverse effects, use of care and perceptions of patients and neurologists regarding both treatments.

Details