PD-MIND was to be a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial of a nicotinic agonist, AZD0328, in patients with PD-MCI to improve their cognitive abilities. There is currently no treatment available.
Furthermore, imaging biomarker studies were meant to provide information on targets potentially modified by AZD0328, to further elucidate the role of a nicotinic agonist in cognitive decline in PD.
The trial was meant to include 160 individuals with PD-MCI: 80 in active (AZD0328) group and 80 in control (placebo) group. On a subset of 90 participants an MRI scan at study entry and exit as part of an MRI biomarker component was to be performed.
PD-MIND was going to use a composite score across an array of cognitive measures to account for differences in cognition patterns. PD-MIND would also use biomarkers as potential early predictors for effect cognitive decline to increase the body of evidence on AZD038 efficacy and on the other hand address potentially underlying disease mechanisms affected by AZD0328.
This study was going to test for the first time the potential of a nicotinic agonist in PD-MCI, primarily on cognitive symptoms. PD-MIND was to be one of the first RCT in PD-MCI to use the recently standardized and generally accepted diagnostic criteria for PD-MCI, and would employ computerized cognitive outcome measures, using the CogPro system. Thereby, PD-MIND would contribute to establishing and validating these criteria and measures in a clinical trial context for PD-MCI. The study would also aim to identify the most relevant cognitive areas improved by AZD0328.
The study was going to assess magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging biomarkers, to discover potential predictors of response to AZD0328, markers of target involvement and disease progression. There would have been the prospect of discovering new biomarkers for PD-MCI, important for detecting and monitoring the disease course in general. The MRI biomarkers that were going to be assessed could have had the potential to identify subgroups with high or low likelihood of response to nicotinic agents (i.e. “diagnostic MRI biomarker tools”). These could be further developed towards an opportunity for personalized medical interventions.
The sample size and the use of a sensitive computer-based cognitive outcome measure, which was to be administered three times in each phase without learning effect, would have promised a much improved signal-to-noise ratios and an increased likelihood to detect a treatment effect.
Being a Phase 2a study, the study was going to be an exploratory rather than a confirmatory study to assess whether a reasonably strong signal of efficacy could be achieved. Moreover, monitoring treatment effects using structural and functional MRI is in infancy. If successful, the findings would have informed phase III clinical trial designs.