Novel treatments for Parkinson’s are being proposed on a regular basis, and I really like the way many are based on some pretty left field ideas (light buckets, I’m thinking of you here). Thinking outside the box is important to innovation and progress.
And some of those unconventional approaches are backed not only by historical precedent, but also scientific research.
Recently, researchers at Stanford University have presented just such an idea: It involves vibrating gloves.
In today’s post, we will explore what research has been conducted on vibrating hands in Parkinson’s, and discuss what comes next.
There are few figures in the history of neurology as revered as Jean-Martin Charcot.
Widely considered the ‘Father of neurology’ and the ‘Napoleon of the neuroses‘, the importance of Charcot’s contribution to modern medicine is definitely not up for debate. One only needs to read the names of the students that he taught at the Salpêtrière Hospital (in Paris) to appreciate that everyone who became someone in the field of neurology passed through his classes.
The mere fact that these students of Charcot all have Wikipedia pages should speak volumes to his impact on the field. Heck, even the great William James – one of the founding fathers of Psychology – travelled all the way from America just to sit in on Charcot’s classes.
Charcot was one of the most sought-after instructors in all of Europe, and he is immortalised in a painting by André Brouillet:
“Une leçon clinique à la Salpêtrière“ by André Brouillet (Source: Wikipedia)
Cool. But what does monsieur Charcot have to do with Parkinson’s?
New data from researchers in Taiwan has intriguing implications for our understanding of the development of Parkinson’s.
An analysis of the enormous national medical database pointed towards towards hepatitis C viral infections as a risk factor for developing Parkinson’s.
But here is the twist in the tale: Interferon-based antiviral therapy reduces that risk back to normal.
In today’s post, we will review the new research, discuss what interferons are, explore what other research has been conducted on interferons in the context of Parkinson’s, and consider the implications of this new research for Parkinson’s.
We have learnt a great deal about Parkinson’s over the last few years via the use of “big data”.
Whether it be the analysis of vast pools of genetic information collected from tens of thousands of individuals with the condition, to analysing massive datasets of longitudinal medical information, these investigations has open new avenues of research and investigation.
For example, “big data” studies have demonstrated that those who smoke cigarettes and drink coffee have a reduced chance of developing Parkinson’s (click here to read a previous SoPD post on this topic). ‘Big data studies have also pointed towards novel therapeutic approaches (click here for a previous SoPD post highighting an example).
Recently, an analysis of medical records from Taiwan have shed new light on another potential influencer of Parkinson’s risk: Hepatitis C
“In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable”
This quote has been attributed to General Dwight D. Eisenhower (Click here for the full story of this quote), and while the sentence does not immediately make a whole lot of sense, it does apply to our discussion here regarding research in Parkinson’s.
At the start of each year, it is a useful practise to layout what we are expecting and hoping to see in the world of Parkinson’s research over the next 12 months. This can help us better anticipate where ‘the battle’ may go, and allow us to prepare for things further ahead. Where it actually finishes is unpredictable, but where we currently stand will hopefully provide us with a useful measure.
In this post, I will lay out what we believe the next 12 months holds for us with regards to the Parkinson’s-related research.
And be warned: This is usually the longest post of the year.
In the introduction to last year’s outlook I wrote of the dangers of having expectations (Click here to read that post). A wise man (the great Charlie Munger) once said: If you want to lead a happy life, lower your expectations.
It is good advice, and as a rule, I try to follow it in life – I am a cup is completely empty kind of guy. I have no expectations, and so when anything happens – it is magic. I do have ambitions, but no expectations.
And others wrote about managing expectations in 2018 (Click here for a great example).
To put it plainly: Expectations are the primary cause of all disappointment.
In the 525600 minutes that made up 2018, a lot happened in the world of Parkinson’s research.
A total of 7672 research papers were published with the keyword ‘Parkinson’s’ according to the Pubmed website (this compared to 7675 for all of 2017 – this obviously represents a dismal failure for the Parkinson’s research community: the first time in quite a while that we haven’t beaten the number of research reports from the previous year!
I am of course kidding. The quantity of research reports is irrelevant. But it does make me smile that we missed the mile stone by just 3 papers!
2018 has been another amazing year for Parkinson’s research. And while I appreciate that a comment like this means little to someone living with the condition on a day-to-day, remarkable progress has been made not only in our understanding of the condition, but also in the various ways in which the research is being done and potential therapies are approaching the condition.
In this post, we will review the year that was by briefly summarising some of the major research-related events of each month in 2018.
At the end of each month the SoPD writes a post which provides an overview of some of the major pieces of Parkinson’s-related research that were made available during December2018.
The post is divided into five parts based on the type of research (Basic biology, disease mechanism, clinical research, other news, and Review articles/videos).
So, what happened during December 2018?
In world news:
7th December – The U.N.’s International Telecommunication Union reported that, by the end of 2018, more than half – a full 51.2 percent – of the world’s population will be using the Internet (Click here to read more about this).
8th December – Drama at the 24th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP24) meeting in Katowice, Poland. The US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait object to adopting the scientific report – which was commissioned at the 2015 meeting. The study suggests that the world is now “completely off track” on climate change, heading towards a 3 degree C. rise by the end of this century rather than a mere 1.5 degree C. rise (Click here to read more about this).
12th December – Negotiators at COP24 in Katowice finally secured an agreement on a range of measures that will make the Paris climate pact operational in 2020 (Click here to read more about this).
17th December – Astronomers announced that they have identified the most distant object ever observed within our solar system. Currently named “2018 VG18” (but nicknamed ‘Farout’), the 500km (310 miles) wide body is approximately is 120 times further away from the sun than Earth is (to put that in perspective, Pluto is only 34 times – Click here to read more about this).
In the world of Parkinson’s research, a great deal of new research and news was reported:
In December 2018, there were 597 research articles added to the Pubmed website with the tag word “Parkinson’s” attached (7672 for all of 2018 – compared to 7675 for all of 2017….seriously?!? Just 3 papers difference?!?). In addition, there was a wave to news reports regarding various other bits of Parkinson’s research activity (clinical trials, etc).
It is one of the most frequent non-motor features of Parkinson’s and yet it is one of the least publicly discussed.
The word ‘constipation’ is generally used to describe bowel movements that are infrequent or difficult to pass. The stool is often dry, lumpy and hard, and problematic to expel. Other symptoms can include abdominal pain, bloating, and the feeling that one has not completely passed the bowel movement.
In today’s post we look at what can cause constipation, why it may be so common in Parkinson’s, discuss what can be done to alleviate it, and look at clinical trials focused on this issue.
As many as 1 in 5 people say they have suffered from chronic (long-term) constipation at some point in their lives.
It results in more than 2.5 million hospital and physicians visits per year in the USA.
And Americans spend more than $700 million on treatments for it annually (Source).
More importantly, constipation is considered by many researchers to be a risk factor for developing Parkinson’s, as many people in the affected community claim to have experienced constipation for long periods prior to diagnosis.
Why this is, what is being done to research it, and what can be done about constipation in Parkinson’s is the topic of today’s post. But first, let’s start with the obvious question:
Regular readers will be aware that here at the SoPD, we are on a mission to change the way we clinically test drugs (Click here for the most recent rant on this topic).
We have a lot of interesting drugs waiting in the pipeline to be clinically tested and an eager (read: desperate) population of individuals affected by Parkinson’s, but we are missing one critical part of the equation: better tools of assessment.
How can we determine whether a drug is actually working or not? And how can we better monitor people over time on said drug?
Our current methods assessing individuals with Parkinson’s rely heavily on clinical rating scales and brain imaging. These are basic tools at best, conducted episodically (annually in general, or once every 2-6 months during a clinical trial), and provide little in the way of useful objective data (on an individual basis).
In today’s post, we will look at a single aspect of Parkinson’s – sleep – and try to nut-out a better/more informative method of assessing it over time.
This week Austrian biotech firm, AFFiRiS AG, made an announcement regarding their experimental immunotherapy/’vaccine’ approach for Parkinson’s.
In their press release, the company provided the results of a long-term Phase I clinical trial testing the tolerability and safety of their treatment AFFITOPE® PD01A.
The treatment was found to be safe and well-tolerated in people with Parkinson’s. But there was one sentence which was particularly intriguing in the press release regarding clinical symptoms.
In today’s post, we will discuss what is meant by ‘immunotherapy’, outline what this particular clinical trial involved, review the results, and explore what this could mean for the Parkinson’s community.
This week multiple research groups at the University of Oxford and Boston-based FORMA Therapeutics announced a collaboration to identify, validate and develop deubiquitinating enzyme (DUB) inhibitors for the treatment of neurodegenerative conditions, like Parkinson’s.
But what exactly are DUB inhibitors? And how do they work?
In today’s post, we will answer these questions, look at what the new collaboration involves, and look at what else is happening with DUB inhibitors for Parkinson’s.
Dubstep is a genre of electronic dance music that originated in South London in the late 1990s. Only recently -in the 2010s – has the culture really become more mainstream. And while I have a hard time appreciating the heavy bass music (man, I am becoming a grumpy old man before my time), it is amazing to watch some of the dancers who robotically embody this form of music:
The guy on the right is named Marquese Scott. Sometimes he simply defies the laws of physics.
The title of today’s post is a play on words, because rather than doing ‘Dubstep’ we are going to be discussing how to ‘DUB-stop’.
Researchers in Oxford have recently signed an agreement with a US company to focus resources and attention on a new approach for tackling neurodegenerative conditions, including Parkinson’s.
What they are proposing is a complicated biological dance.
Diagnosed at 46 with Parkinson’s, Mariëtte keeps a great blog that touches on many areas of life, including boxing. But it also provides her with a medium to discuss how she lives with Parkinson’s (you should follow her if you don’t already).
Her answer is ‘Yes!‘ and she listed 10 areas where the differences are apparent.
Mariëtte’s points are made from an educated point of view – she is a very dedicated Parkinson’s research advocate.
Reading through her post, however, I saw it as a nice opportunity to provide the view of things from the other world (Planet Researcher). So, with her permission, I have copied her 10 points here and I have tried to provide a Planet Researcher view of her thoughts (below in red). And I should add that I do not speak for everyone on Planet Researcher – my views are simply that: mine.