Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Maastricht University Medical Center | OTHER |
| Amsterdam University Medical Centers (UMC), Location Academic Medical Center (AMC) | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This multi-center pilot study compares conventional DBS (cDBS) and adaptive DBS (aDBS) in Parkinson's disease patients using the Medtronic Perceptâ„¢ system.
The aim of the study is to identify which patients benefit most from aDBS, and to explore patient and LFP signal characteristics as well as stimulation parameters as potential predictors of treatment preference and efficacy. The study utilizes a blinded, randomized N-of-1 trial design, where each patient tests the following:
The main study outcome consists of the patient's final preference among the three DBS programs: original cDBS, O-cDBS, or O-aDBS. Secondary outcomes focus on differences between cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS regarding the following parameters (among others):
The study also incorporates real-world home-based assessments using the Experience Sampling Method (ESM) to capture motor and non-motor symptom fluctuations in daily life and identify differences among the three settings.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) is an established treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), particularly for those experiencing motor fluctuations that do not respond adequately to medication. Optimal clinical outcomes depend on precise programming of stimulation parameters to effectively reduce motor symptoms, while avoiding side effects by minimizing stimulation of adjacent brain structures. During surgery, an electrode with eight contact points (1-3-3-1 design) is permanently implanted.
At the Haga Teaching Hospital, Maastricht UMC+, and Amsterdam UMC, the Medtronic Perceptâ„¢ PC/RC system is commonly used for PD patients. This system provides not only stimulation but also the ability to record brain signals in the form of local field potentials (LFPs). This recording functionality can offer valuable insights for clinicians to fine-tune DBS parameters. For instance, elevated beta activity (13-35 Hz) in LFPs has been shown to correlate with the severity of symptoms such as rigidity and bradykinesia in PD patients.
In January 2025, a software update was introduced for the Perceptâ„¢ system, enabling more advanced LFP measurements. This update allows the system to deliver adaptive DBS (aDBS), in which brain signals are used in real-time to continuously and automatically adjust stimulation amplitude. Although aDBS is a promising advancement, comprehensive research comparing its benefits and drawbacks to conventional DBS (cDBS) is still lacking. The only major study, ADAPT-PD, found that aDBS and cDBS result in similar durations of time spent in the "ON" phase, but it did not clarify which subgroup of patients benefits most from aDBS. Interestingly, many participants in the ADAPT-PD study expressed a desire to switch from cDBS to aDBS after the trial, though the factors influencing these preferences remain unclear. This highlights the need for detailed investigation into the relative advantages of aDBS and for whom the current form of aDBS provides the greatest benefit.
This study targets PD patients who have undergone cDBS for at least six months but are not experiencing optimal results due to persistent motor symptoms or stimulation-induced side effects that are insufficiently addressed by standard cDBS. Within this pilot study, using a combined N-of-1 trial design, outcomes of the patient's current cDBS settings and optimized conventional DBS (O-cDBS) will be objectively compared with those of optimized adaptive DBS (O-aDBS).
In an N-of-1 trial, an individual patient undergoes different test and placebo treatments in a randomized order. By conducting multiple N-of-1 trials across several patients, reliable and objective outcomes can be gathered both at the individual and population levels. In this study, each patient will test all three stimulation programs (current cDBS, O-cDBS, and O-aDBS) in a blinded and randomized sequence, each for seven days. The final outcome will be the patient's preferred program, with the patient's personal choice taking priority. To better understand the impact of switching from cDBS to aDBS-and to include effects on patient quality of life-this study will analyze not only motor symptoms but also cognitive and behavioral effects in daily life. This will be assessed through structured questionnaires, including a symptom diary and questions via the Experience Sampling Method (ESM). ESM is a validated, CE-certified digital diary method where patients provide feedback on the patient's symptoms at semi-random times, helping to reduce recall bias. By objectively analyzing the pros and cons of switching from cDBS to aDBS in these specific patient groups, this study aims to support neurologists in the clinical use of this new technology. Furthermore, the findings may contribute to more effective use of the system and ultimately to improved DBS treatment and quality of life for patients with Parkinson's disease.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| N-of-1 study arm | Experimental | Main study arm where each participant tests conventional DBS, optimized conventional DBS, and optimized adaptive DBS for seven days each, in a blinded and randomized sequence |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional DBS | Device | Treatment for a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 7 days with the patient's original conventional DBS (cDBS) settings. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Patient preference of DBS settings | The patient's choice for one of the three program options (standard cDBS, O-cDBS, or O-aDBS) | after the three week trial phase of the study |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Quality of life per DBS settings | The 39 item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) score for cDBS, O-cDBS, O-aDBS (score between 0 (good quality) and 100 (bad quality)) | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| General Prompt Experience Sampling Method score per DBS settings |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive functioning at baseline | Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score at baseline (no more than 6 months old), with a score ranging from 0 (poor) to 30 (good). | prior to or at study start (no more than 6 months old) |
| Disease duration at baseline |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maria Fiorellla Contarino, MD, PhD | Contact | +31 (0)70 210 2997 | m.contarino@hagaziekenhuis.nl | |
| Marjolein Muller, Msc | Contact | +31 (0)70 210 2997 | ma.muller@hagaziekenhuis.nl |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Maria Fiorella Contarino, MD, PhD | HagaZiekenhuis | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amsterdam UMC | Amsterdam | 1105AZ | Netherlands |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Background | Bronte-Stewart H, Beudel M, Ostrem J, Little S, Almeida L, Zamora AR, et al. Chronic Adaptive DBS Provides Similar "On" Time with Trend of Improvement Compared to Continuous DBS in Parkinson's Disease and 98% of Participants Chose to Remain on aDBS (S2.008). Neurology (internet). 2024 Apr 9;102(17_supplement_1). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000204762 | ||
| 34483867 | Background | Nakajima A, Shimo Y, Fuse A, Tokugawa J, Hishii M, Iwamuro H, Umemura A, Hattori N. Case Report: Chronic Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation Personalizing Therapy Based on Parkinsonian State. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021 Aug 13;15:702961. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.702961. eCollection 2021. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Description Medtronic Percept System (conventioal/adaptive DBS system used in this research) | View source |
Not provided
Personal data security issues
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
An N-of-1 trial design in which each patient tests conventional DBS, optimized conventional DBS, and optimized adaptive DBS for seven days each, in a blinded and randomized sequence.
Not provided
Not provided
Patients are not masked for the group they are in, but they are blinded for the order in which they receive treatment with three different deep brain stimulation settings.
Not provided
| Optimized conventional DBS | Device | Treatment for a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 7 days with a previously optimized version of the patient's original conventional DBS (O-cDBS) settings. |
|
| Optimized adaptive DBS | Device | Treatment for a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 7 days with previously optimized adaptive DBS (O-aDBS) settings. |
|
Custom general prompt daily (non-)motor fluctuations questionnaire via Experience Sampling Method (ESM), with a score ranging from 0 (good) to 270 (poor) |
| Reported average daily score within each week with one of the DBS settings (at 1-7 days, 8-14 days and 15-21 days) |
| Patient satisfaction per DBS settings | 5-point Likert scale score for patient satisfaction with cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS (1=very dissatisfied; 2= dissatisfied; 3=neutral; 4=satisfied; 5=very satisfied) | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Time spent in ON/OFF per DBS settings according to symptom diary | Percentage of time spent in OFF during time awake for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS according to symptom diary (0% (good) to 100% (poor)). | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Time spent with dyskinesia per DBS setting according to symptom diary | Percentage of time awake spent with dyskinesia for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS according to symptom diary (0% (good), 100% (poor)). | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Time spent with most bothersome symptom per DBS setting according to symptom diary | Percentage of time awake spent with most bothersome symptom for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS according to symptom diary. (0% (good), 100% (poor)) | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Total score for motor fluctuations per DBS setting | Motor score according to Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III (MDS-UPDRS-III) for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS, with the score ranging from 0 (good) to 132 (poor) | Reported at baseline and after optimizing each intervention |
| Levodopa equivalent daily dose per DBS setting | According to latest levodopa equivalent daily dose scheme, determined for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Time spent in ON/OFF per DBS settings | Percentage of time spent in OFF during time awake for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS according to Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part IV (MDS-UPDRS-IV) for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS (0% (good) to 100% (poor)). | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Time spent with dyskinesia per DBS setting | Percentage of time awake spent with dyskinesia for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS according to Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part IV (MDS-UPDRS-IV) (0% (good), 100% (poor)) | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Time spent with most bothersome symptom per DBS setting | Percentage of time awake spent with most bothersome symptom for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS according to Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part IV (MDS-UPDRS-IV) in case of symptom being either "Motor fluctuations", "Dyskinesia", "OFF- dystonia", (0% (good), 100% (poor)). | Reported after each week with one of the DBS settings (at 7 days, 14 days and 21 days) |
| Total score for non-motor fluctuations per DBS setting | Non-motor score according to Movement Disorder Society - Non-Motor Symptom Questionnaire (MDS-NMS-Q) for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS, with scores ranging from 0 (good) to 208 (poor)). | Reported at baseline and after optimizing each intervention |
| Morning Prompt Experience Sampling Method score per DBS settings | Custom morning prompt daily (non-)motor fluctuations questionnaire via Experience Sampling Method (ESM), with a score ranging from 0 (good) to 35 (poor) | Reported average daily score within each week with one of the DBS settings (at 1-7 days, 8-14 days and 15-21 days) |
| Evening Prompt Experience Sampling Method score per DBS settings | Custom evening prompt daily (non-)motor fluctuations questionnaire via Experience Sampling Method (ESM), with a score ranging from 0 (good) to 76 (poor) | Reported average daily score within each week with one of the DBS settings (at 1-7 days, 8-14 days and 15-21 days) |
Disease duration in years at baseline (study start)
| at baseline (start of study participation) |
| Age at baseline | Age in years at baseline (study start) | at baseline (start of study participation) |
| Biological sex | Biologically determined sex at baseline | at baseline (start of study participation) |
| Time after lead implantation at baseline | Time after lead implantation surgery in months at baseline (study start) | at baseline (start of study participation) |
| At-home recorded local field potentials per DBS setting | Local field potentials recorded using BrainSense Timeline and Events for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS | Recorded during each week per DBS setting (1-7 days, 8-14 days, and 15-21 days) |
| In-clinic general local field potential recordings | Local field potential recordings using the BrainSense Survey, Electrode identifier, Setup during in-clinic visit at baseline. | at baseline (start of study participation) |
| In-clinic local field potential recordings per DBS setting | Local field potential recordings using the BrainSense Streaming during in-clinic visits for cDBS, O-cDBS and O-aDBS | At baseline and after optimization of each of the DBS settings |
| Stimulation settings per DBS setting | Stimulation settings (contact point, power, pulse width, frequency, adaptive protocol (i.e. single or dual threshold + thresholds)) | At the start of each intervention period (at 1 day, 8 days, 15 days) |
| Maastricht UMC+ | Maastricht | 6229HX | Netherlands |
|