CNS Drugs

, Volume 17, Issue 13, pp 965–973 | Cite as

Pramipexole in Routine Clinical Practice

A Prospective Observational Trial in Parkinson’s Disease
  • Heinz Reichmann
  • Michael H. Brecht
  • Jürgen Köster
  • Peter H. Kraus
  • Mathias R. Lemke
Original Research Article


Objective: The mixed dopamine D2/D3 receptor agonist pramipexole is effective as monotherapy in early Parkinson’s disease and as adjunctive therapy in advanced disease. Clinical trials suggest that the benefits of pramipexole may extend beyond the relief of motor symptoms (akinesia, rigidity and tremor at rest) to amelioration of depressive symptoms in Parkinson’s disease. The aim of this study was to confirm the beneficial effects of pramipexole on the core symptoms of Parkinson’s disease (with a focus on tremor), as well as to assess its antidepressant activity, during routine clinical practice. The study also aimed to demonstrate the practicability of the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS-D), the Tremor Impact Scale (TIS) and the Short Parkinson’s Evaluation Scale (SPES) under conditions of routine clinical practice.

Study design: This was a prospective observational study.

Patients: Data for 657 outpatients with Parkinson’s disease were collected from German hospitals and specialist practices. The majority of patients were in Hoehn & Yahr stage II or III and were receiving levodopa.

Methods: Pramipexole (Sifrol®) was initiated at a dosage of 0.375 mg/day (using a three-times-daily schedule) and titrated upwards, as required, at weekly intervals over a 4-week period to a maximum dosage of 4.5 mg/day (three times daily). Clinical evaluation was performed at baseline, at the end of the titration phase and at the end of maintenance therapy. Patients were assessed via the German questionnaire versions of the physician-assessed SPES, the self-evaluated TIS and the SHAPS-D. Changes in scale scores were evaluated nonparametrically, using the Wilcoxon-matched pairs test. Crombach’s α was used as a measure for item consistency.

Results: Pramipexole significantly improved SPES subscores for motor symptoms, complications of therapy, psychological status and activities of daily living. Pramipexole also reduced the detrimental effect of tremor on activities of daily living and social interactions, as assessed by patients via the TIS. As indicated by the results of the SHAPS-D questionnaire, pramipexole significantly reduced anhedonia in patients who had associated depression. Internal consistency of SPES subscales was found to be unaltered between the initial evaluation and follow-up. Likewise, internal consistency for TIS and SHAPS-D was demonstrated. Pramipexole was well tolerated and accepted by the vast majority of physicians and patients.

Conclusion: In addition to ameliorating the core symptoms of akinesia and rigidity in Parkinson’s disease, pramipexole improves tremor and depressive symptoms in routine clinical practice. The SPES, TIS and SHAPS-D were found to be useful instruments with validity in this study.


Levodopa Maintenance Therapy Routine Clinical Practice Pramipexole Ergot Alkaloid 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This study was supported by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Germany. H. Reichmann, P.H. Kraus and M.R. Lemke received financial compensation from Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG for developing the study concept.


  1. 1.
    Clarke CE, Speller JM, Clarke JA. Pramipexole for levodopa-induced complications in Parkinson’s disease [systematic review]. Cochrane Movement Disorders Group. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; 1Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lieberman A, Minagar A, Pinter MM. The efficacy of pramipexole in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Rev Contemp Pharmacother 2001; 12: 59–86Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mierau J, Schneider FJ, Ensinger HA, et al. Pramipexole binding and activation of cloned and expressed dopamine D2, D3 and D4 receptors. Eur J Pharmacol 1995 Jun; 290(1): 29–36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guttman M, Jaskolka J. The use of pramipexole in Parkinson’s disease: are its actions D(3) mediated? Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2001 Jul; 7(3): 231–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parkinson Study Group. Safety and efficacy of pramipexole in early Parkinson’s disease: a randomised dose-ranging study. JAMA 1997 Jul; 278(2): 125–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shannon KM, Bennett JP, Friedman JH. Efficacy of pramipexole, a novel dopamine agonist, as monotherapy in mild to moderate Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1997 Sep; 49(3): 724–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parkinson Study Group. Pramipexole vs levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000 Oct; 284(15): 1931–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guttman M. Double-blind comparison of pramipexole and bromocriptine treatment with placebo in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 1997 Oct; 49(4): 1060–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lieberman A, Ranhosky A, Korts D. Clinical evaluation of pramipexole in advanced Parkinson’s disease: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Neurology 1997 Jul; 49(1): 162–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wermuth L. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter study of pramipexole in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol 1998 May; 5(3): 235–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pinter MM, Pogarell O, Oertel WH. Efficacy, safety, and tolerance of the non-ergoline dopamine agonist pramipexole in the treatment of advanced Parkinson’s disease: a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomised, multicentre study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1999 Apr; 66(4): 436–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kunig G, Pogarell O, Moller JC, et al. Pramipexole, a nonergot dopamine agonist, is effective against rest tremor in intermediate to advanced Parkinson’s disease. Clin Neuro-pharmacol 1999 Sep–Oct; 22(5): 301–5Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pogarell O, Gasser T, van Hilten JJ, et al. Pramipexole in patients with Parkinson’s disease and marked drug resistant tremor: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multi-centre study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002 Jun; 72(6): 713–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cummings JL. Depression and Parkinson’s disease: a review. Am J Psychiatry 1992 Apr; 149(4): 443–54PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corrigan MH, Denahan AQ, Wright CE, et al. Comparison of pramipexole, fluoxetine, and placebo in patients with major depression. Depress Anxiety 2000; 11(2): 58–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kraus PH, Martinez P, Bonicelli U, et al. The Short Parkinson Evaluation Scale (SPES) in routine use in a pramipexole study [abstract]. Mov Disord 2002; 17Suppl. 5: S224Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Snaith RP, Hamilton M, Morley S, et al. A scale for the assessment of hedonic tone: the Snaith-Hamilton pleasure scale. Br J Psychiatry 1995 Jul; 167(1): 99–103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Franz M, Lemke MR, Meyer T, et al. Deutsche version der Snaith-Hamilton-Pleasure Scale (SHAPS-D). Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 1998 Sep; 66(9): 407–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lemke MR, Puhl P, Koethe PP, et al. Psychomotor retardation and anhedonia in depression. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1999 Apr; 99(4): 252–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bland MJ, Altman DG. Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ 1997 Feb; 314(7080): 572PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rabey JM, Bass H, Bonuccelli U, et al. Evaluation of the short Parkinson’s evaluation scale: a new friendly scale for the evaluation of Parkinson’s disease in clinical drug trials. Clin Neuropharmacol 1997; 20(4): 322–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rabey JM, Klein C, Molochnikov A, et al. Comparison of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale and the Short Parkinson’s Evaluation Scale in patients with Parkinson’s disease after levodopa loading. Clin Neuropharmacol 2002 Mar–Apr; 25(2): 83–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yamamoto M. Depression in Parkinson’s disease: its prevalence, diagnosis and neurochemical background. J Neurol 2001 Sep; 248Suppl. 3: III5–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Snaith RP. Identifying depression: the significance of anhedonia. Hosp Pract (Off Ed) 1993 Sep; 28(9A): 55–60Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kuopio A-M, Marttila RJ, Helenius H, et al. The quality of life in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 2000 Mar; 15(2): 216–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schrag A, Jahanshahi M, Quinn N. What contributes to quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000 Sep; 69(3): 308–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fibiger HC. The neurobiological substrates of depression in Parkinson’s disease: a hypothesis. Can J Neurol Sci 1984 Feb; 11Suppl. 1: 105–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Braak H, Braak E. Pathoanatomy of Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol 2000 Apr; 247Suppl. 2: 113–10Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Szegedi A, Hillert A, Wetzel H, et al. Pramipexole, a dopamine agonist, in major depression: antidepressant effects and tolerability in an open-label study with multiple doses. Clin Neuropharmacol 1997; 20Suppl. 1: 36–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heinz Reichmann
    • 1
  • Michael H. Brecht
    • 2
  • Jürgen Köster
    • 2
  • Peter H. Kraus
    • 3
  • Mathias R. Lemke
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyTechnical University of DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Division of MedicineBoehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KGIngelheimGermany
  3. 3.Department of Neurology, St. Josef-HospitalUniversity of BochumBochumGermany
  4. 4.Center for Psychiatry and NeurologyRhine ClinicBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations