research v. Phase II exam, page-2

"This consideration raises another question. Are there studies that show the expected worsening of symptoms (i.e. increase in the UPDRS score) over a period of 26 weeks?"

everything is relative to the treatment at hand or you could ask do patients simply show distinctive degredation during any given 26 weeks regardless of the point of asking the question (in this case the implant is the point)


maybe if there were inconsistent applications of the MDS-UPDRS v. the standard and most oft used UPDRS

LCT (if memory serves) has always applied to the standard UPDRS

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16116612
"...amount by which raters may disagree should be quantified before starting longitudinal studies"
i'm guessing that's saying if you figure the difference between scales and then apply that difference to achieve consistency ....when just applying to one scale only will do regardless of how rigourous

if/when the placebo heads north and the consistency of the scale should continue to offer evidence of the true effect versus the drug and all patients cannot improve from the knowledge effect and I think that is going to bare out the value of NTcell as we saw in the previous 40 implant study

we cannot know how far out affected areas such as the basal ganglia can be remediated and the rate of repair for each patient again skewing the scale

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10821982