Cited by 188Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsNeurological disorders and treatmentsNuclear Receptors and Signaling

Nilotinib Effects on Safety, Tolerability, and Potential Biomarkers in Parkinson Disease: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Pagan, Fernando. L., Hebron, Michaeline L., Wilmarth, Barbara, Torres-Yaghi, Yasar, Lawler, Abigail, Mundel, Elizabeth E., Yusuf, Nadia, Starr, Nathan J. +10 more·2020·JAMA Neurology

Abstract

Importance: This study evaluated nilotinib safety and its effects on biomarkers as a potential disease-modifying drug in Parkinson disease. Objectives: To assess nilotinib effects on safety and pharmacokinetics and measure the change in exploratory biomarkers in patients with moderately severe Parkinson disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-center, phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 300 patients approached in clinic; of these, 200 declined to participate, 100 were screened, 25 were excluded, and 75 were randomized 1:1:1 into placebo; nilotinib, 150-mg; or nilotinib, 300-mg groups. Recruitment started on May 17, 2017, and ended April 28, 2018, and follow-up ended August 10, 2019. Parkinson disease was confirmed according to the UK Brain Bank diagnostic criteria and symptoms were stabilized with use of optimal levodopa and/or dopamine agonists and other medications used in Parkinson disease. Interventions: Nilotinib vs placebo, administered orally once daily for 12 months followed by a 3-month washout period. Main Outcomes and Measures: It was hypothesized that nilotinib is safe and can be detected in the cerebrospinal fluid, where it alters exploratory biomarkers via inhibition of Abelson tyrosine kinase and potentially improves clinical outcomes. Results: Of the 75 patients included in the study, 55 were men (73.3%); mean (SD) age was 68.4 (8.2) years. Doses of 150 or 300 mg of nilotinib were reasonably safe, although more serious adverse events were detected in the nilotinib (150 mg: 6 [24%]; 300 mg: 12 [48%]) vs placebo (4 [16%]) groups. The 150-mg nilotinib group showed an increase in cerebrospinal fluid levels of the dopamine metabolites homovanillic acid (159.80nM; 90% CI, 7.04-312.60nM; P = .04) and 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (4.87nM; 90% CI, 1.51-8.23nM; P = .01), and the 300-mg nilotinib group showed an increase in 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (7.52nM; 90% CI, 2.35-12.69nM; P = .01). The nilotinib 150-mg but not the nilotinib 300-mg group demonstrated a reduction of α-synuclein oligomers (-0.04 pg/mL; 90% CI, -0.08 to 0.01 pg/mL; P = .03). A significant reduction of hyperphosphorylated tau levels was seen in the nilotinib 150-mg (-10.04 pg/mL; 90% CI, -17.41 to -2.67 pg/mL; P = .01) and nilotinib 300-mg (-12.05 pg/mL; 90% CI, -19.21 to -4.90 pg/mL; P = .01) groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, nilotinib appeared to be reasonably safe and detectable in the cerebrospinal fluid. Exploratory biomarkers were altered in response to nilotinib. Taken together, these data will guide the development of a phase 3 study to investigate the effects of nilotinib therapy in patients with Parkinson disease. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02954978.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4200

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pagan, F. L., Hebron, M. L., Wilmarth, B., Torres-Yaghi, Y., Lawler, A., Mundel, E. E., Yusuf, N., Starr, N. J., Anjum, M., Arellano, J., Howard, H. H., Shi, W., Mulki, S., Kurd-Misto, T., Matar, S., Liu, X., Ahn, J., & Moussa, C.
Affiliations
  • Translational Neurotherapeutics Program, Laboratory for Dementia and Parkinsonism, Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC
  • Georgetown University Medical Center (US)
  • MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Moussa, Charbel
Venue
JAMA Neurology
Published
2020-03-01
Volume
77
Issue
3
Pages
309
ISSN
2168-6149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2995537689
Cited by
185
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 1
FWCI
14.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Nuclear Receptors and Signaling
Keywords
nilotinib, Parkinson's disease, disease-modifying therapy, safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetics, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, homovanillic acid, DOPAC, dopamine metabolism, adverse events, dose comparison, washout
MeSH terms
Aged, Dopamine, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Parkinson Disease, Pyrimidines, Biomarkers, tau Proteins

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review