Comparative Effectiveness of Device-Aided Therapies on Quality of Life and Off-Time in Advanced Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Research comparing levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI) for advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD) is lacking. This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the comparative effectiveness of LCIG, DBS, CSAI and best medical therapy (BMT) in reducing off-time and improving quality of life (QoL) in patients with advanced PD. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational and interventional studies from January 2003 to September 2019. Data extracted at baseline and 6 months were off-time, as reported by diary or Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale Part IV item 39, and QoL, as reported by Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39/PDQ-8). Bayesian NMA was performed to estimate pooled treatment effect sizes and to rank treatments in order of effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (n = 2063 patients): four RCTs, and 16 single-armed, one 2-armed and one 3-armed prospective studies. Baseline mean age was between 55.5–70.9 years, duration of PD was 9.1–15.3 years, off-time ranged from 5.4 to 8.7 h/day in 9 studies, and PDQ scores ranged from 28.8 to 67.0 in 19 studies. Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel and DBS demonstrated significantly greater improvement in off-time and QoL at 6 months compared with CSAI and BMT (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the effects of LCIG and DBS, but DBS was ranked first for reduction in off-time, and LCIG was ranked first for improvement in QoL. CONCLUSIONS: This NMA found that LCIG and DBS were associated with superior improvement in off-time and PD-related QoL compared with CSAI and BMT at 6 months after treatment initiation. This comparative effectiveness research may assist providers, patients, and caregivers in the selection of the optimal device-aided therapy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40263-022-00963-9.