View Single Post
Old 11-13-2014, 02:03 PM
Tupelo3 Tupelo3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 832
10 yr Member
Tupelo3 Tupelo3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 832
10 yr Member
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by girija View Post
We need to speed up the clinical trial process. So, improved trial design is to be welcomed.
John
I agree with your comments on Placebo effect. We need methods of analyses that incorporate the benefits of placebo effect . Too many clinical trials have "failed" due to placebo effect. In my opinion, the research community failed to see the difference between animal experimentation and human clinical trials when designing the protocols. This webimar is one of the few that is trying to do something different and thats why I thought it would be interestingd. Increasing the frequency of testing would be good, provided we have good biochemical (bio) markers to monitor the progression of PD. I am not sure current UPDRS scores would tell us anything meaningful with increasing frequency of testing.
I couldn't possibly agree more. The need for good biomarkers as a test for progression is huge. UPDRS scores are almost worthless for testing progression unless the time periods are relatively extensive. That's why the Isradipine STEADY-PD study is 3 years. Short-term UPDRS changes are subjective, often influenced by outside factors, and essentially meaningless.
Tupelo3 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote