The BBC article is about a new device. The evidence base may be slim but the technology looks to be improving. I look forward to seeing new clinical trial results on modern DBS systems.
The BBC article is about a new device. The evidence base may be slim but the technology looks to be improving. I look forward to seeing new clinical trial results on modern DBS systems.
Has it been contradicted anywhere? I don't see any other studies that have looked into it.
>Most of the included trials in the meta analysis are 10-20 years old as well.
The meta-analysis is from less than 6 months ago, and looked at all the studies available, which cover a range from recent to 10-20 years ago. That is normal for a meta-analysis, so I'm not sure why you're making it sound like it's out of date.
>The BBC article is about a new device.
Yes, there seems to be one study underway, which is still recruiting:
My point is that the available data may not tell us much about the safety and efficacy of this new device.
Somewhat tangentially, and not specific to Parkinson's or DBS, but placebo has been getting stronger for at least some classes of treatment. E.g.:
Tuttle AH, Tohyama S, Ramsay T, Kimmelman J, Schweinhardt P, Bennett GJ, Mogil JS. Increasing placebo responses over time in U.S. clinical trials of neuropathic pain. Pain. 2015 Dec;156(12):2616-2626. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000333. PMID: 26307858.
Walsh BT, Seidman SN, Sysko R, Gould M. Placebo Response in Studies of Major Depression: Variable, Substantial, and Growing. JAMA. 2002;287(14):1840–1847. doi:10.1001/jama.287.14.1840
So I would not be surprised if placebo got stronger in this area as well.
So if that meta study finds that generally all evidence related to DBS effects on Parkinsons is low-confidence and old, then why believe that it is even the right direction?
- Studies on the purported mechanism(s) of action
- Preclinical results in vivo
- Anecdotal results like the one in the BBC article
- Mixed effects from older versions of the tech
That’s plenty to motivate further research and trials into this treatment.
Since Parkinsons is for now an incurable and barely treatable disease, it makes sense to try even things that are not very promising. But that doesn't mean we should hold out much hope for them, when all evidence suggests that they are not going to pan out.
Your points are all things that the authors of the meta-study should have looked for, or irrelevancies (anecdotes of people feeling better at some points after they underwent major neuro-surgery are entirely irrelevant to the complexity of a very slow acting degenerative disease).