search
Back to results

Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Probabilistic STN Targeting Under General Anaesthesia Without Micro-electrode Recordings vs Current Targeting Procedure (PARKEO2)

Primary Purpose

Parkinson Disease

Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
France
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Surgery under general anesthesia with experimental targeting
Usual Surgery
Sponsored by
University Hospital, Bordeaux
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Parkinson Disease focused on measuring Deep brain stimulation, Sub-thalamic nucleus, Parkinson Disease, Micro-electrode recordings, DBS targeting

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 70 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with a diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson's disease at the stage of motor fluctuations despite optimal medical treatment
  • L-DOPA sensitivity defined by motor improvement above 50% on the UPDRS-3 scale after a dose of 150% of the usual early morning treatment
  • Indication for STN-DBS approved by the local multidisciplinary movement disorders committee.
  • Patients between 18 and 70 years of age
  • Patients covered by a health insurance scheme
  • Signed informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Significant cognitive decline defined as a score < 22 on the MoCA scale
  • Mood disorders defined by a score > 20 on the Beck Depression Inventory
  • Significant cortical atrophy or leukoencephalopathy visualised by brain MRI
  • Contraindication to anaesthesia and MRI
  • Lack of contraceptive treatment for women with ability to procreate
  • Pregnant or breast-feeding woman
  • Unstoppable anticoagulant or antiaggregant treatment
  • Persons under legal protection (Persons deprived of liberty or incapable of giving consent or under curatorship or tutorship…)
  • Patient with severe psychiatric disorders (on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV)
  • Inability to follow the patient until the end of study

Sites / Locations

  • CHU AmiensRecruiting
  • CHU de BordeauxRecruiting
  • CHU Grenoble
  • Hospices Civils de Lyon
  • CHU MarseilleRecruiting
  • CHRU de NancyRecruiting
  • CHU de NiceRecruiting
  • CHU de RouenRecruiting
  • CHU de StrasbourgRecruiting
  • CHU de ToulouseRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

PARKEO 2 targeting with asleep deep brain stimulation procedure

Usual DBS procedure

Arm Description

Participant with parkeo 2 targeting procedure

Participant with usual targeting and surgery

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Stimulation efficacy
The primary endpoint is the efficacy of the stimulation on motor symptoms assessed by the change in UPDRS-3 scores between OFF and ON stimulation evaluations at one year after surgery without any medical treatment (OFF medication). Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening

Secondary Outcome Measures

Quality of life assessment
Quality of life on the Parkinson Disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ39) scale assessed by the change in PDQ39 scores. PDQ 39 questionnaire : 0 to 156 points, with the highest score indicating worsening condition
Stereotactic accuracy
Stereotactic accuracy as measured by the Euclidian distance between active contact location and intra-operative defined target in each group
Operative characteristics (1)
Operative characteristic : procedure length
Operative characteristics (2)
Operative characteristic : radiation dose
Operative characteristics (3)
Operative characteristic : pneumocephalus
Operative characteristics (4)
Operative characteristic : and length of hospital stay (in days).
Distance between active contact location and preoperative target
Distance between active contact location and preoperative defined target in each group
Improvement of UPDRS3
The percentage of improvement of UPDRS3 calculated between the preoperative OFF and the post-operative ON stimulation scores at one year and compared between the two groups. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
Efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms (1)
The efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms assessed by the change in UPDRS-3 scores between OFF and ON stimulation evaluations at one year after surgery without any medical treatment (OFF medication). The change will be calculated as a difference between the OFF and ON stimulation scores at one year. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
Efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms (2)
The efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms compared to the efficacy of L-DOPA by the change in UPDRS-3 scores between OFF and ON stimulation evaluations at one year after surgery without any medical treatment (OFF medication). The change will be calculated as a ratio between the effect of stimulation alone versus medication alone at one year. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
reduction in the levodopa equivalent daily doses (LEDD)
The reduction in the levodopa equivalent daily doses (LEDD) from the baseline and one year (a 100-mg daily dose of standard levodopa is equivalent to the following doses of other medications: 133 mg of controlled-release levodopa; 75 mg of levodopa plus entacapone; 1 mg of pergolide, pramipexole lisuride, or cabergoline; 5 mg of ropinirole; 10 mg of bromocriptine or apomorphine; and 20 mg of dihydroergocryptine) will be evaluated
Post-operative cognitive
Post-operative cognitive will be assess by the difference from the baseline and one year using MDRS. Mattis Dementia Rating Scale: 0 to 144 points, with the most important score indicating improvement in condition
Post-operative mood
Post-operative mood will be assess by the difference from the baseline and one year using BDI scale. Beck Depression Inventory (BDI): 0 to 63 points, with the most important score indicating worsening condition
Intra and post-operative surgical complications
Intra and post-operative surgical complications (haemorrhage, infection, neuromodulation-related side effects) will be prospectively collected and assessed
Total cost of each procedure (PARKEO-2 targeting compared to targeting procedure using intraoperative MER)
A cost analysis will be performed to assess all hospital resources
Cost-effectiveness ratio, expressed in terms of cost per Qaly gained at 1 year
This ratio will provide useful information about the costs (avoided or additional) required to gain a Qaly, one year after surgery, from the French healthcare system point of view

Full Information

First Posted
April 27, 2021
Last Updated
August 2, 2023
Sponsor
University Hospital, Bordeaux
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04884412
Brief Title
Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Probabilistic STN Targeting Under General Anaesthesia Without Micro-electrode Recordings vs Current Targeting Procedure
Acronym
PARKEO2
Official Title
Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Probabilistic STN Targeting Under General Anaesthesia Without Micro-electrode Recordings (MER) vs Current Targeting Procedure
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
August 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
November 10, 2021 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
November 2024 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
November 2024 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
University Hospital, Bordeaux

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the sub-thalamic nucleus (STN) has evolved over the past decades as a mainstream therapy for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). The classical procedure consists in STN indirect targeting based on stereotactic atlases or statistical coordinates in AC-PC (Anterior Commissure - Posterior Commissure) referential along with target control and correction by micro-electrode recordings (MER) and awake clinical testing. To avoid potential complications and patient discomfort related to current procedure, asleep surgery without this control process has become more and more performed, essentially thanks to the progress of neuroimaging allowing to STN visualization. However, it has been reported a relative inaccuracy between the "radiological" STN delimitated on several types of MRI sequences (T2, T2*, SWI) and the per-operative electrophysiological findings. As a result, there are currently many types of STN-DBS procedures, and the lack of standardization between techniques complicates the interpretation of postoperative results on anatomical, electrophysiological and clinical points of view. Furthermore, to date, it has not been proven that asleep surgery without MER and clinical controls is as effective as the standard procedure in a prospective controlled randomized clinical trial. Investigators hypothesize that the clinical-based 18 landmarks STN target will be precise enough to allow to perform surgery under general anesthesia without MER correction, and accurate enough to achieve non inferior clinical results compared to what is usually done in each centre. The main objective is to compare at one year, the % of motor improvement after PARKEO 2-targeting asleep DBS without intraoperative MER versus the targeting procedure using intraoperative MER by the UPRDRS 3 (Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale 3).

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Parkinson Disease
Keywords
Deep brain stimulation, Sub-thalamic nucleus, Parkinson Disease, Micro-electrode recordings, DBS targeting

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
National multicentre, prospective, randomised, non-inferiority, open label, comparative clinical trial in 2 parallel groups.
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
128 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
PARKEO 2 targeting with asleep deep brain stimulation procedure
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Participant with parkeo 2 targeting procedure
Arm Title
Usual DBS procedure
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Participant with usual targeting and surgery
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Surgery under general anesthesia with experimental targeting
Intervention Description
Surgery will be performed under general anesthesia. The electrodes will be inserted directly on the targets without MER, with PARKEO_2 targets provided by the Bordeaux University Hospital, based on the machine-learning model developed in Bordeaux.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Usual Surgery
Intervention Description
In the control group, surgery will be performed as usual in each centre under local or general anaesthesia. This group represents the current state of the art of deep brain stimulation in these centres.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Stimulation efficacy
Description
The primary endpoint is the efficacy of the stimulation on motor symptoms assessed by the change in UPDRS-3 scores between OFF and ON stimulation evaluations at one year after surgery without any medical treatment (OFF medication). Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Quality of life assessment
Description
Quality of life on the Parkinson Disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ39) scale assessed by the change in PDQ39 scores. PDQ 39 questionnaire : 0 to 156 points, with the highest score indicating worsening condition
Time Frame
inclusion (Month-1) and 12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
Stereotactic accuracy
Description
Stereotactic accuracy as measured by the Euclidian distance between active contact location and intra-operative defined target in each group
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Operative characteristics (1)
Description
Operative characteristic : procedure length
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Operative characteristics (2)
Description
Operative characteristic : radiation dose
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Operative characteristics (3)
Description
Operative characteristic : pneumocephalus
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Operative characteristics (4)
Description
Operative characteristic : and length of hospital stay (in days).
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Distance between active contact location and preoperative target
Description
Distance between active contact location and preoperative defined target in each group
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Improvement of UPDRS3
Description
The percentage of improvement of UPDRS3 calculated between the preoperative OFF and the post-operative ON stimulation scores at one year and compared between the two groups. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
Efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms (1)
Description
The efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms assessed by the change in UPDRS-3 scores between OFF and ON stimulation evaluations at one year after surgery without any medical treatment (OFF medication). The change will be calculated as a difference between the OFF and ON stimulation scores at one year. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
Efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms (2)
Description
The efficacy of the targeting procedure on motor symptoms compared to the efficacy of L-DOPA by the change in UPDRS-3 scores between OFF and ON stimulation evaluations at one year after surgery without any medical treatment (OFF medication). The change will be calculated as a ratio between the effect of stimulation alone versus medication alone at one year. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 3 (UPDRS 3) questionnaire: 0 to 132 points, with the highest score indicating worsening
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
reduction in the levodopa equivalent daily doses (LEDD)
Description
The reduction in the levodopa equivalent daily doses (LEDD) from the baseline and one year (a 100-mg daily dose of standard levodopa is equivalent to the following doses of other medications: 133 mg of controlled-release levodopa; 75 mg of levodopa plus entacapone; 1 mg of pergolide, pramipexole lisuride, or cabergoline; 5 mg of ropinirole; 10 mg of bromocriptine or apomorphine; and 20 mg of dihydroergocryptine) will be evaluated
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
Post-operative cognitive
Description
Post-operative cognitive will be assess by the difference from the baseline and one year using MDRS. Mattis Dementia Rating Scale: 0 to 144 points, with the most important score indicating improvement in condition
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
Post-operative mood
Description
Post-operative mood will be assess by the difference from the baseline and one year using BDI scale. Beck Depression Inventory (BDI): 0 to 63 points, with the most important score indicating worsening condition
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)
Title
Intra and post-operative surgical complications
Description
Intra and post-operative surgical complications (haemorrhage, infection, neuromodulation-related side effects) will be prospectively collected and assessed
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Total cost of each procedure (PARKEO-2 targeting compared to targeting procedure using intraoperative MER)
Description
A cost analysis will be performed to assess all hospital resources
Time Frame
Surgery intervention (Month 0)
Title
Cost-effectiveness ratio, expressed in terms of cost per Qaly gained at 1 year
Description
This ratio will provide useful information about the costs (avoided or additional) required to gain a Qaly, one year after surgery, from the French healthcare system point of view
Time Frame
12 months after surgery (M12)

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
70 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with a diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson's disease at the stage of motor fluctuations despite optimal medical treatment L-DOPA sensitivity defined by motor improvement above 50% on the UPDRS-3 scale after a dose of 150% of the usual early morning treatment Indication for STN-DBS approved by the local multidisciplinary movement disorders committee. Patients between 18 and 70 years of age Patients covered by a health insurance scheme Signed informed consent. Exclusion Criteria: Significant cognitive decline defined as a score < 22 on the MoCA scale Mood disorders defined by a score > 20 on the Beck Depression Inventory Significant cortical atrophy or leukoencephalopathy visualised by brain MRI Contraindication to anaesthesia and MRI Lack of contraceptive treatment for women with ability to procreate Pregnant or breast-feeding woman Unstoppable anticoagulant or antiaggregant treatment Persons under legal protection (Persons deprived of liberty or incapable of giving consent or under curatorship or tutorship…) Patient with severe psychiatric disorders (on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV) Inability to follow the patient until the end of study
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Emmanuel CUNY, Pr
Phone
05 56 79 55 77
Ext
+33
Email
emmanuel.cuny@chu-bordeaux.fr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Julien ENGELHARDT, Dr
Phone
05 56 79 55 77
Ext
+33
Email
julien.engelhardt@chu-bordeaux.fr
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Julien ENGELHARDT, Dr
Organizational Affiliation
University Hospital, Bordeaux
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Emmanuel CUNY, Pr
Organizational Affiliation
University Hospital, Bordeaux
Official's Role
Study Director
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Antoine BENARD, Dr
Organizational Affiliation
University Hospital, Bordeaux
Official's Role
Study Chair
Facility Information:
Facility Name
CHU Amiens
City
Amiens
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Michel LEFRANC
Facility Name
CHU de Bordeaux
City
Bordeaux
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Julien ENGELHARDT, Dr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Emmanuel CUNY, Pr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Julien ENGELHARDT, Dr
Facility Name
CHU Grenoble
City
Grenoble
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Not yet recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Stephan CHABARDES, Pr
Facility Name
Hospices Civils de Lyon
City
Lyon
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Not yet recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Stéphane THOBOIS, Pr
Email
stephane.thobois@chu-lyon.fr
Facility Name
CHU Marseille
City
Marseille
ZIP/Postal Code
13005
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jean REGIS, Pr
Facility Name
CHRU de Nancy
City
Nancy
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Sophie COLNAS-COULBOIS
Facility Name
CHU de Nice
City
Nice
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Denys FONTAINE, pr
Facility Name
CHU de Rouen
City
Rouen
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Stéphane DERREY, Pr
Facility Name
CHU de Strasbourg
City
Strasbourg
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Mathieu ANHEIM, Pr
Facility Name
CHU de Toulouse
City
Toulouse
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Amaury DE BARROS, Dr

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Learn more about this trial

Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Probabilistic STN Targeting Under General Anaesthesia Without Micro-electrode Recordings vs Current Targeting Procedure

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs