scieee Open visual document viewer

Predictors of clinically significant quality of life impairment in Parkinson’s disease

Santos García, Diego; Deus Fonticoba, Teresa de; Cores, Carlos; Muñoz, Guillermo; Paz González, José M.;; Martínez Miró, Cristina; Mir Rivera, Pablo

Abstract

Quality of life (QOL) plays an important role in independent living in Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients, being crucial to know what factors impact QoL throughout the course of the disease. Here we identified predictors of QoL impairment in PD patients from a Spanish cohort. PD patients recruited from 35 centers of Spain from the COPPADIS cohort from January 2016, to November 2017, were followed up during 2 years. Health-related QoL (HRQoL) and global QoL (GQoL) were assessed with the 39-item Parkinson’s disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) and the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index (EUROHIS-QOL8), respectively, at baseline (V0) and at 24 months ± 1 month (V2). Clinically significant QoL impairment was defined as presenting an increase (PDQ-39SI) or decrement (EUROHIS-QOL8) at V2 ≥ 10% of the score at baseline (V0). A comparison with a control group was conducted for GQoL. GQoL didnot change significantly in PD patients (N = 507; p = 0.686) or in the control group (N = 119; p = 0.192). The mean PDQ-39SI was significantly increased in PD patients (62.7 ± 8.5 years old; 58.8% males; N = 500) by 21.6% (from 16.7 ± 13 to 20.3 ± 16.4; p < 0.0001) at V2. Ninety-three patients (18.6%) presented a clinically significant HRQoL impairment at V2. To be younger (OR = 0.896; 95% CI 0.829–0.968; p = 0.006), to be a female (OR = 4.181; 95% CI 1.422–12.290; p = 0.009), and to have a greater increase in BDI-II (Beck Depression Inventory-II) (OR = 1.139; 95% CI 1.053–1.231; p = 0.001) and NMSS (Non-Motor Symptoms Scale) (OR = 1.052; 95% CI 1.027–1.113; p < 0.0001) total scores from V0 to V2 were associated with clinically significant HRQoL impairment at the 2-year follow-up (Hosmer–Lemeshow test, p = 0.665; R2 = 0.655). An increase in ≥5 and ≥10 points of BDI-II and NMSS total score at V2 multiplied the probability of presenting clinically significant HRQoL impairment by 5 (OR = 5.453; 95% CI 1.663–17.876; p = 0.005) and 8 (OR = 8.217; 95% CI, 2.975–22.696; p = 0.002), respectively. In conclusion, age, gender, mood, and non-motor impairmentwere associated with clinically significant HRQoL impairment after the 2-year follow-up in PD patients.

Full text

ARTICLE OPEN P edic o s o clinically significan quali y o li e impai men in Pa kinson’s disease Diego San os Ga cía 1 ✉, Te esa de Deus Fon icoba 2 , Ca los Co es 1 , Guille mo Muñoz 1 , Jose M. Paz González 1 , C is ina Ma ínez Mi ó 1 , Es e Suá ez 2 , Sil ia Jesús 3,4 , Miquel Aguila 5 , Pau Pas o 5 , Lluis Planellas 6 , Ma ina Cosgaya 7 , Juan Ga cía Calden ey 8 , Nu ia Caballol 9 , Inés Lega da 10 , Jo ge He nández Va a 11 , I ia Cabo 12 , Luis López Manzana es 13 , Isabel González A ambu u 4,14 , Ma ía A. Á ila Ri e a 15 , Ma ia J. Ca alán 16 , Víc o Noguei a 17 , Víc o Puen e 18 , Ma ía Ruíz de A cos 19 , Ca men Bo ué 20 , Be a Solano Vila 21 , Ma ía Ál a ez Sauco 22 , Lydia Vela 23 , Sonia Escalan e 24 , Es he Cubo 25 , F ancisco Ca illo Padilla 26 , Juan C. Ma ínez Cas illo 27 , Pila Sánchez Alonso 28 , Ma ia G. Alonso Losada 29 , Nu ia López A iz egui 30 , I zia Gas ón 31 , Ped o Cla e o 31 , Jaime Kulise sky 4,32 , Ma a Blázquez Es ada 33 , Manuel Seijo 12 , Ja ie Rúiz Ma ínez 34 , Ca idad Vale o 35 , Mónica Ku is 36 , O iol de Fáb egues 11 , Jessica González A du a 37 , Ca los O dás 38 , Luis M. López Díaz 39 , Da ian McA ee 40 , Pablo Ma inez-Ma in 4 , Pablo Mi 3,4 and COPPADIS S udy G oup* Quali y o li e (QOL) plays an impo an ole in independen li ing in Pa kinson’s disease (PD) pa ien s, being c ucial o know wha ac o s impac QoL h oughou he cou se o he disease. He e we iden ified p edic o s o QoL impai men in PD pa ien s om a Spanish coho . PD pa ien s ec ui ed om 35 cen e s o Spain om he COPPADIS coho om Janua y 2016, o No embe 2017, we e ollowed up du ing 2 yea s. Heal h- ela ed QoL (HRQoL) and global QoL (GQoL) we e assessed wi h he 39-i em Pa kinson’s disease Ques ionnai e (PDQ-39) and he EUROHIS-QOL 8-i em index (EUROHIS-QOL8), espec i ely, a baseline (V0) and a 24 mon hs ± 1 mon h (V2). Clinically significan QoL impai men was defined as p esen ing an inc ease (PDQ-39SI) o dec emen (EUROHIS-QOL8) a V2 ≥10% o he sco e a baseline (V0). A compa ison wi h a con ol g oup was conduc ed o GQoL. GQoL did no change significan ly in PD pa ien s (N=507; p=0.686) o in he con ol g oup (N=119; p=0.192). The mean PDQ-39SI was significan ly inc eased in PD pa ien s (62.7 ± 8.5 yea s old; 58.8% males; N=500) by 21.6% ( om 16.7 ± 13 o 20.3 ± 16.4; p< 0.0001) a V2. Nine y- h ee pa ien s (18.6%) p esen ed a clinically significan HRQoL impai men a V2. To be younge (OR =0.896; 95% CI 0.829–0.968; p=0.006), o be a emale (OR =4.181; 95% CI 1.422–12.290; p=0.009), and o ha e a g ea e inc ease in BDI-II (Beck Dep ession In en o y-II) (OR =1.139; 95% CI 1.053–1.231; p=0.001) and NMSS (Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale) (OR =1.052; 95% CI 1.027–1.113; p< 0.0001) o al sco es om V0 o V2 we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a he 2-yea ollow-up (Hosme –Lemeshow es , p=0.665; R 2 =0.655). An inc ease in ≥5 and ≥10 poin s o BDI-II and NMSS o al sco e a V2 mul iplied he p obabili y o p esen ing clinically significan HRQoL impai men by 5 (OR =5.453; 95% CI 1.663–17.876; p=0.005) and 8 (OR =8.217; 95% CI, 2.975–22.696; p=0.002), espec i ely. In conclusion, age, gende , mood, and non-mo o impai men we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a e he 2-yea ollow-up in PD pa ien s. npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 7:118 ; h ps://doi.o g/10.1038/s41531-021-00256-w INTRODUCTION Pa kinson’s disease (PD) is a complex diso de in which di e en mo o and non-mo o symp oms (NMS) can be p esen wi h a equency and se e i y ha a ies among pa ien s o e ime 1 . Bo h mo o and NMS a e impo an because hey nega i ely impac he pa ien ’s quali y o li e (QoL). Di e en s udies ha e analyzed wha ac o s con ibu e o a poo QoL in PD pa ien s 2–13 . Recen ly, we obse ed ha NMS bu den, mood, and gai p oblems we e he mos ele an ac o s a ec ing heal h- ela ed (HRQoL) and global pe cei ed QoL (GQoL) in non-demen ed PD pa ien s om he Spanish coho COPPADIS 14 . These esul s aligned wi h o he c oss-sec ional s udies obse a ions 15–17 . Howe e , wi h 1 CHUAC, Complejo Hospi ala io Uni e si a io de A Co uña, A Co uña, Spain. 2 CHUF, Complejo Hospi ala io Uni e si a io de Fe ol, A Co uña, Spain. 3 Unidad de T as o nos del Mo imien o, Se icio de Neu ología y Neu ofisiología Clínica, Ins i u o de Biomedicina de Se illa, Hospi al Uni e si a io Vi gen del Rocío/CSIC/Uni e sidad de Se illa, Se ille, Spain. 4 CIBERNED (Cen o de In es igación Biomédica en Red sob e En e medades Neu odegene a i as), Ála a, Spain. 5 Hospi al Uni e si a i Mu ua de Te assa, Te assa, Ba celona, Spain. 6 Neu ología, Clínica del Pila , Ba celona, Spain. 7 Hospi al Clínic de Ba celona, Ba celona, Spain. 8 Cen o Neu ológico Oms 42, Palma de Mallo ca, Spain. 9 Conso ci Sani a i In eg al, Hospi al Moisés B oggi, San Joan Despí, Ba celona, Spain. 10 Hospi al Uni e si a io Son Espases, Palma de Mallo ca, Spain. 11 Hospi al Uni e si a io Vall d´Heb on, Ba celona, Spain. 12 Complejo Hospi ala io Uni e si a io de Pon e ed a (CHOP), Pon e ed a, Spain. 13 Hospi al Uni e si a io La P incesa, Mad id, Spain. 14 Hospi al Uni e si a io Ma qués de Valdecilla, San ande , Spain. 15 Conso ci Sani a i In eg al, Hospi al Gene al de L´Hospi ale , L´Hospi ale de Llob ega , Ba celona, Spain. 16 Hospi al Uni e si a io Clínico San Ca los, Mad id, Spain. 17 Hospi al Da Cos a, Bu ela, Lugo, Spain. 18 Hospi al del Ma , Ba celona, Spain. 19 Hospi al Uni e si a io Vi gen Maca ena, Se illa, Spain. 20 Hospi al In an a So ía, Mad id, Spain. 21 Ins i u d’Assis ència Sani à ia (IAS) - Ins i u Ca alà de la Salu , Gi ona, Spain. 22 Hospi al Gene al Uni e si a io de Elche, Elche, Spain. 23 Fundación Hospi al de Alco cón, Mad id, Spain. 24 Hospi al de To osa Ve ge de la Cin a (HTVC), To osa, Ta agona, Spain. 25 Complejo Asis encial Uni e si a io de Bu gos, Bu gos, Spain. 26 Hospi al Uni e si a io de Cana ias, San C is óbal de la Laguna, San a C uz de Tene i e, Spain. 27 Hospi al Uni e si a io Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Mad id, Spain. 28 Hospi al Uni e si a io Pue a de Hie o, Mad id, Spain. 29 Hospi al Ál a o Cunquei o, Complejo Hospi ala io Uni e si a io de Vigo (CHUVI), Vigo, Spain. 30 Complejo Hospi ala io de Toledo, Toledo, Spain. 31 Complejo Hospi ala io de Na a a, Pamplona, Spain. 32 Hospi al de San Pau, Ba celona, Spain. 33 Hospi al Uni e si a io Cen al de As u ias, O iedo, Spain. 34 Hospi al Uni e si a io Donos ia, San Sebas ián, Spain. 35 Hospi al A nau de Vilano a, Valencia, Spain. 36 Hospi al Rube In e nacional, Mad id, Spain. 37 Hospi al Uni e si a io de Cabueñes, Gijón, Spain. 38 Hospi al Rey Juan Ca los, Mad id, Spain, Mad id, Spain. 39 Complejo Hospi ala io Uni e si a io de O ense (CHUO), O ense, Spain. 40 Uni e is y o Pennsyl ania, Pennsyl ania, USA. *A lis o au ho s and hei a filia ions appea s a he end o he pape . ✉email: diegosan[email p o ec ed]s www.na u e.com/npjpa kd Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion 1234567890():,; ega d o how he QoL o PD changes h oughou he cou se o he disease, he e is much less in o ma ion 18–23 and p ospec i e longi udinal s udies a e needed. In clinical p ac ice, i is impo an o know wha ac o s wo sen PD pa ien s’QoL wi h he in en ion o ca y ou e ec i e in e en ions. Known in o ma ion limi ed by ac o s om he s udies such as he sample size, he di e ences be ween scales used o assessing QoL, he di e en ypes o QoL assessed, being a non-mul icen e s udy, he absence o a con ol g oup, and/o he lack o a global e alua ion including di e en aspec s ha could impac on QoL 18–23 . In addi ion, he impac o some complica ions on QoL in ad anced PD has been analyzed be o e 24,25 . Howe e , i is no clea wha he significance o sho - e m changes in QoL is in ea ly PD pa ien s o wha ac o s con ibu e o i when an ex ensi e assessmen conside ing mo o and NMS is pe o med 26 . I is ema kable ha NMS occu no only in ad anced bu also in he ea ly s ages o PD. Some symp oms, o example, ol ac o y defici , cons ipa ion, apid-eye- mo emen sleep beha io diso de , and dep ession, can e en p ecede he appea ance o mo o symp oms by many yea s 1 .By he con a y, o he s such as psychosis o demen ia a e no p esen . The fi s yea s a e condi ioned by he accep ance o he diagnosis, bu in gene al, he pa ien has g ea e au onomy. In his con ex , i is essen ial o know wha influences he changes in he PD pa ien QoL pe cep ion wi h he in en ion o being able o ac as soon as possible. The aim o he p esen s udy was o (1) analyze he change in HRQoL and GQoL in PD pa ien s om he COPPADIS coho a e he 2-yea ollow-up, (2) o compa e wi h a con ol g oup, and (3) o iden i y p edic o s o clinically significan QoL impai men in he PD g oup. Finally, a subanalysis was conduc ed in a subg oup o pa ien s wi h ea ly PD (≤5 yea s o disease du a ion). RESULTS Changes in assessmen s om V0 o V2 A e he 2-yea ollow-up, GQoL did no change significan ly in PD pa ien s ( om PQ-10 V0 o 7.28 ± 1.55 o PQ-10 V2 o 7.14 ± 1.54 [N=503; p=0.070]; om EUROHIS-QOL8 V0 o 3.77 ± 0.54 o EUROHIS-QOL8 V2 o 3.75 ± 0.58 [N=507; p=0.686]) o in he con ol g oup ( om PQ-10 V0 o 8.07 ± 1.22 o PQ-10 V2 o 7.86 ± 1.65 [N=122; p=0.361]; om EUROHIS-QOL8 V0 o 4.18 ± 0.5 o EUROHIS-QOL8 V2 o 4.12 ± 0.51 [N=119; p=0.192] (Fig. 1). The mean PDQ-39SI was significan ly inc eased in PD pa ien s (62.7 ± 8.5 yea s old; 58.8% males; N=500) by 21.6% ( om 16.72 ± 13.02 o 20.3 ± 16.41; p< 0.0001) a V2 (Table 1and Fig. 1). By domains, he sco e o all domains o he PDQ-39SI a V2 was significan ly highe han a V0 excep o domain 4 (s igma iza ion) (Table 1). The change in he sco e o o he scales om V0 o V2 in PD pa ien s and con ols is shown in Table 1. Pa ien s wi h s wi hou clinically HRQoL impai men Al hough 291 PD pa ien s (58.2%) p esen ed an inc ease in he PDQ-39SI sco e a e he 2-yea ollow-up, only 93 (18.6%) p esen ed a clinically significan HRQoL impai men a V2. Di e ences in change om V0 o V2 o UPDRS-III, UPDRS-IV, FOGQ, NMSS, BDI-II, PDSS, NPI, VAS-PAIN, VASF-physical, VASF- men al, and ADLS sco es be ween pa ien s wi h and wi hou clinically significan HRQoL impai men we e obse ed (Table 2). Specifically, PD pa ien s who p esen ed a he 2-yea ollow-up a clinically significan HRQoL impai men p esen ed a 97.3% inc ease o he NMS bu den (NMSS o al sco e om 29.2 ± 25.87 o 57.84 ± 46.73 [p< 0.0001]) compa ed o 8.6% in hose pa ien s who did no (NMSS o al sco e om 48.38 ± 38.59 o 52.53 ± 41.35 [p=0.003]) (Fig. 2A). By domains, he mos significan di e ences we e obse ed o sleep/ a igue (p< 0.0001) and mood/apa hy (p< 0.0001) (Table 2and Fig. 2B). Mode a e co ela ions we e obse ed be ween he change om V0 o V2 in he PDQ-39SI sco e and he sco e in FOGQ ( =0.34; p< 0.0001), NMSS ( =0.41; p< 0.0001), BDI-II ( =0.33; p< 0.0001) and ADLS ( =−0.40; p< 0.0001) (Supplemen a y Table 1). P edic o s o clinically HRQoL impai men To be younge (OR =0.896; 95% CI 0.829–0.968; p=0.006), o be a emale (OR =4.181; 95% CI 1.422–12.290; p=0.009), and o ha e a g ea e inc ease in BDI-II (OR =1.139; 95% CI 1.053–1.231; p=0.001) and NMSS (OR =1.052; 95% CI 1.027–1.113; p< 0.0001) o al sco es om V0 o V2 we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a he 2-yea ollow-up, a e adjus men o many co a ia es (Hosme –Lemeshow es , p= 0.665; R 2 =0.655) (Table 3). Specifically, an inc ease in ≥5 and ≥10 poin s o BDI-II and NMSS o al sco e a V2 mul iplied he p obabili y o p esen ing a clinically significan HRQoL impai men by 5 (OR =5.453; 95% CI 1.663–17.876; p=0.005) and 8 (OR = 8.217; 95% CI 2.975–22.696; p=0.002), espec i ely. When ADLS was included in he model (ADLS a V0 and he change in ADLS sco e om V0 o V2), only a g ea e inc ease in BDI-II (OR =1.148; 95% CI 1.057–1.258; p=0.001), NMSS (Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale) (OR =1.056; 95% CI 1.029–1.083; p< 0.0001) and NPI (OR = 1.072; 95% CI, 1.001–1.147; p=0.046) o al sco es and a dec ease in ADLS sco e (OR =0.884; 95% CI 0.820–0.954; p< 0.0001) om V0 o V2 we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a he 2-yea ollow-up (Hosme –Lemeshow es , p=0.621; R 2 =0.718). Fig. 1 Change in PDQ-39SI, PQ-10, and EUROHIS-QOL8 sco es om V0 (baseline) o V2 (2 yea ± 1 mon h) in PD pa ien s and/o con ols. Da a a e p esen ed as box plo s, wi h he box ep esen ing he median and he wo middle qua iles (25–75%). p- alues we e compu ed using he Wilcoxon-signed ank es . Mild ou lie s (O) a e da a poin s ha a e mo e ex eme han Q1 −1.5 * IQR o Q3 +1.5 * IQR. EUROHIS-QOL8, Eu opean Heal h In e iew Su ey-Quali y o Li e 8-I em Index; PDQ-39SI, 39-i em Pa kinson’s Disease Quali y o Li e Ques ionnai e Summa y Index. D.S. Ga cía e al. 2 npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion 1234567890():,; In he subg oup o ea ly PD (N=277), qui e simila esul s, an inc ease in mean PDQ-39SI om V0 o V2 o 23.4% ( om 14.22 ± 11.29 o 17.62 ± 15.36; p< 0.0001), we e obse ed. Fi y-six pa ien s (20.2%) p esen ed a clinically significan HRQoL impai - men a he 2-yea ollow-up. Howe e , as in he whole coho , GQoL did no change significan ly (PQ-10, p=0.111; EUROHIS- QOL8, p=0.756). In he bina y eg ession model, as in he all coho , o be younge (OR =0.813; 95% CI 0.709–0.933; p=0.003), o be a emale (OR =35.847; 95% CI 3.452–372.204; p=0.003), and o ha e a g ea e inc ease in BDI-II (OR =1.400; 95% CI 1.149–1.705; p=0.001) and NMSS (OR =1.069; 95% CI 1.007–1.043; p=0.001) o al sco es om V0 o V2 we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a he 2-yea ollow- up, a e adjus men o many co a ia es (Hosme –Lemeshow es , p=0.998; R 2 =0.745) (Table 3). When ADLS was included in he model, o be younge (OR =0.769; 95% CI 0.624–0.946; p=0.013), Table 1. Changes in mo o and non-mo o symp oms, disabili y, and quali y o li e in PD pa ien s and/o con ols om V0 (baseline) o V2 (2 yea s ± 1 mon h). PD pa ien s V0 PD pa ien s V2 p a Con ols V0 Con ols V2 p b Hoehn & Yah (OFF) (%) <0.0001 N. A. N. A. N. A. S age 1 22.7 13.3 S age 2 68 77 S age 3–5 9.3 9.7 UPDRS-III (OFF) 21.92 ± 10.53 25.26 ± 12.19 <0.0001 N. A. N. A. N. A. UPDRS-IV 1.99 ± 2.41 2.65 ± 2.75 <0.0001 N. A. N. A. N. A. FOGQ 3.76 ± 4.69 4.94 ± 5.18 <0.0001 N. A. N. A. N. A. LEDD 577.48 ± 412.09 767.56 ± 307.1 <0.0001 N. A. N. A. Numbe o non-an ipa k. d ugs 2.35 ± 2.38 3.08 ± 2.65 <0.0001 2.04 ± .2.16 2.76 ± 2.35 0.001 PD-CRS 92 ± 15.65 90.26 ± 18.07 <0.0001 99.65 ± 13.56 99.68 ± 13.73 0.744 NMSS 45.08 ± 37.62 53.55 ± 42.28 <0.0001 14.74 ± 18.72 14.65 ± 21.82 0.428 BDI-II 8.28 ± 6.9 8.54 ± 7.48 0.472 4.56 ± 5.46 4.31 ± 5.5 0.776 PDSS 117.13 ± 24.48 117.85 ± 24.98 0.797 131.26 ± 17.41 126.67 ± 26.46 0.947 QUIP-RS 4.6 ± 8.8 4.66 ± 9.22 0.937 1.51 ± 3.73 1.32 ± 3.37 0.498 NPI 5.82 ± 7.88 6.17 ± 9.39 0.671 3.31 ± 7.15 2.64 ± 7.67 0.120 VAS-PAIN 2.61 ± 2.92 2.96 ± 2.88 0.013 1.49 ± 2.41 1.70 ± 2.32 0.319 VASF −physical 2.86 ± 2.67 3.17 ± 2.8 0.010 1.52 ± 2.35 1.29 ± 2.12 0.103 VASF −men al 2.09 ± 2.51 2.20 ± 2.61 0.538 1.29 ± 2.09 1.03 ± 1.97 0.273 ADLSL 88.58 ± 10.19 84.26 ± 13.38 <0.0001 98.87 ± 6.65 99.52 ± 2.15 0.285 PDQ-39SI 16.72 ± 13.02 20.3 ± 16.41 <0.0001 N. A. N. A. N. A. Mobili y 16.28 ± 19.2 21.31 ± 22.5 <0.0001 Ac i i ies o daily li ing 17.83 ± 18.83 21.82 ± 21.37 <0.0001 Emo ional well-being 20.92 ± 19.52 23.53 ± 23.45 <0.0001 S igma iza ion 12.81 ± 19.24 14.14 ± 21.09 0.069 Social suppo 7.29 ± 15.43 10.01 ± 19.09 <0.0001 Cogni ion 18.51 ± 17.38 23.17 ± 20.16 <0.0001 Communica ion 9.68 ± 14.44 13.55 ± 18.88 <0.0001 Pain and discom o 26.75 ± 22.33 28.67 ± 23.37 0.009 PQ-10 7.28 ± 1.55 7.14 ± 1.54 0.070 8.07 ± 1.22 7.86 ± 1.65 0.361 EUROHIS-QOL8 3.77 ± 0.54 3.75 ± 0.58 0.686 4.18 ± 0.5 4.12 ± 0.51 0.192 Quali y o li e 3.8 ± 0.7 3.68 ± 0.67 0.003 4.14 ± 0.65 4.2 ± 0.63 0.298 Heal h s a us 3.18 ± 0.87 3.32 ± 0.93 0.004 3.97 ± 0.75 3.87 ± 0.82 0.148 Ene gy 3.76 ± 0.79 3.72 ± 0.86 0.266 4.15 ± 0.68 4.11 ± 0.69 0.531 Au onomy o ADL 3.61 ± 0.86 3.63 ± 0.88 0.852 4.24 ± 0.75 4.19 ± 0.61 0.983 Sel -es eem 3.83 ± 0.76 3.82 ± 0.81 0.866 4.18 ± 0.68 4.00 ± 0.66 0.124 Social ela ionships 4.04 ± 0.67 3.94 ± 0.75 0.004 4.29 ± 0.65 4.19 ± 0.61 0.071 Economic capaci y 3.84 ± 0.78 3.77 ± 0.8 0.091 4.07 ± 0.74 3.97 ± 0.81 0.078 Habi a 4.22 ± 0.67 4.21 ± 0.67 0.904 4.43 ± 0.63 4.29 ± 0.66 0.016 p- alues we e compu ed using he Wilcoxon-signed ank es o ma ginal homogenei y es . The esul s ep esen mean ± SD o %; p a , V2 s V0 in PD pa ien s; p b , V2 s V0 in con ols. ADLS Schwab & England Ac i i ies o Daily Li ing Scale, BDI-II Beck Dep ession In en o y-II, FOGQ F eezing O Gai Ques ionnai e, LEDD le odopa equi alen daily dose (mg), NMSS Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale, NPI Neu opsychia ic In en o y, PD-CRS Pa kinson’s Disease Cogni i e Ra ing Scale, PDSS Pa kinson’s Disease Sleep Scale, QUIP-RS Ques ionnai e o Impulsi e-Compulsi e Diso de s in Pa kinson’s Disease-Ra ing Scale, UPDRS Unified Pa kinson’s Disease Ra ing Scale, VAFS Visual Analog Fa igue Scale, VAS-Pain Visual Analog Scale-Pain. The bold alues indica es s a is ically significan p alues. D.S. Ga cía e al. 3 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 o be a emale (OR =31.982; 95% CI 1.678–609.587; p =0.021), and o ha e a g ea e inc ease in BDI-II (OR =1.197; 95% CI 1.126–1.990; p=0.006), NMSS (Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale) (OR =1.108; 95% CI 1.033–1.188; p=0.004) and NPI (OR =1.323; 95% CI 1.041–1.681; p=0.022) o al sco es om V0 o V2 we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a he 2-yea ollow-up (Hosme –Lemeshow es , p=0.217; R 2 =0.816), bu no he change in he ADLS sco e (OR =0.889; 95% CI 0.786–1.1006; p=0.062). Mode a e co ela ions we e obse ed be ween he change om V0 o V2 in he PDQ-39SI sco e and he sco e in FOGQ ( =0.39; p< 0.0001), NMSS ( =0.41; p< 0.0001), NPI ( =0.35; p< 0.0001) and ADLS ( =−0.41; p< 0.0001) (Supplemen a y Table 2). P edic o s o he change in he PDQ-39SI om V0 o V2 Finally, simila esul s we e obse ed in bo h g oups, he whole coho and he ea ly PD subg oup, when a linea eg ession model was conside ed (PDQ-39SI change om V0 o V2 as dependen a iable) (Supplemen a y Table 2). To be a emale (β=0.17; p< 0.0001) and change in UPDRS-III (β=0.23; p< 0.0001), FOGQ (β= 0.20; p< 0.0001), and NMSS (β=0.37; p< 0.0001) sco es p o ided he highes con ibu ion o he model (adjus ed R-squa ed 0.45) in he whole coho . In ea ly PD pa ien s, he a iables associa ed wi h HRQoL change a he 2-yea ollow-up we e he same (Supplemen a y Table 2). When he ADLS sco e was included in he model, he esul s we e simila bu wi h he ADLS as an independen a iable associa ed wi h HRQoL change oo (β= −0.21; 95% CI −0.353, −0.107; p< 0.0001; adjus ed R-squa ed 0.45 [N=500; all coho ]; β=−0.23; 95% CI −0.433, −0.076; p=0.005; adjus ed R-squa ed 0.431 [N=277; ea ly PD subg oup]). DISCUSSION In his longi udinal ollow-up s udy, we epo ha he e is a significan HRQoL impai men in PD pa ien s in he sho - e m and ha impai men in he mo o s a us du ing he OFF s a e (UPDRS-III), inc eased gai p oblems (FOGQ), and inc eased NMS bu den con ibu e o i . Specifically, mood impai men and NMS bu den inc ease we e independen ac o s associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a he 2-yea ollow-up, which one was p esen in abou e e y 5 pa ien s. Mo eo e , he esul s indica e ha i will be especially impo an o be igilan abou clinically significan HRQoL impai men in women and younge pa ien s. A e a 2-yea ollow-up, PD pa ien s om he COPPADIS coho demons a ed impai men in mo o unc ion (H&Y, UPDRS-III, UPDRS- IV, FOGQ). The inc ease o mo o impai men s measu ed wi h he UPDRS we e in ag eemen wi h o he s udies 27,28 .Also,significan changes in NMS we e obse ed in he NMS bu den as a whole, pain, a igue, and cogni ion, bu no in con ols. These esul s aligned wi h p e ious longi udinal s udies indica ing ha he se e i y o NMS in PD ends o become p og essi ely wo se wi h he cou se o he disease and also indica e ha non-mo o e alua ion is complemen- a y o measu ing PD p og ession 19,26,29–32 .Wi h espec o heQoL, al hough mo e han a hal o PD pa ien s p esen ed a PDQ-39SI sco e a he 2-yea ollow-up highe han a baseline, only 18.6% p esen ed HRQoL impai men as clinically significan . In a p e ious s udy wi h 707 PD pa ien s ollowed p ospec i ely o he 2-yea as well, 17% wo sened clinically while 584 we e a ed as s able 29 .The esul scan be a y due o he defini ion o QoL impai men as clinically significan 31,33,34 . Based on he pos al eply o 728 PD pa ien s, Pe o e al. 34 de e mined ha 1.6 poin s wo sening on a PDQ-39SI is he minimal clinically impo an di e ence h eshold. Mo e ecen ly, Ho á h e al. 31 conside ed he mos op imal es ima es h eshold o PDQ-39-SI in +4.22 poin s o de ec ing minimal clinically impo an wo sening. Howe e , he e is no “gold s anda d”me hodology o es ima ing he minimal impo an di e ence and as he deg ee o imp o emen is condi ioned by he baseline sco e; he e o e, he use o a pe cen age migh be mo e app op ia e 35,36 . Pa ien s appea o be able o de ec changes o 7–10% on QoL ins umen s o pain scales 36 . In ou case, he minimal impo an di e ence was conside ed Table 2. Changes in mo o and non-mo o symp oms and disabili y in PD pa ien s om V0 (baseline) o V2 (2 yea s ± 1 mon h) wi h ega ds o p esen ing o no clinically significan HRQoL impai men . Non clinically significan HRQoL impai men N=407 Clinically significan HRQoL impai men N=93 p Age a baseline 63.04 ± 7.99 61.32 ± 10.17 0.354 Gende (males) (%) 60 57 0.341 Disease du a ion (a V0) 5.65 ± 4.36 4.91 ± 3.55 0.247 Numbe o non- an ipa k. d ugs (a V0) 2.56 ± 2.36 2.33 ± 2.49 0.220 Change a V2 ( om V0 o V2) LEDD +177.15 ± 330.2 +228.75 ± 318.27 0.174 Numbe o non- an ipa k. d ugs +0.55 ± 1.56 +0.65 ± 1.45 0.685 UPDRS-III (OFF) +2.25 ± 9.77 +7.76 ± 11.2 <0.0001 UPDRS-IV +0.47 ± 2.47 +1.47 ± 2.55 0.002 FOGQ +0.68 ± 3.85 +3.32 ± 4.71 <0.0001 PD-CRS −2.17 ± 12.18 −0.67 ± 10.12 0.293 NMSS +4.15 ± 32.03 +28.64 ± 35.65 <0.0001 Ca dio ascula +6.21 ± 14.41 +8.11 ± 12.83 0.310 Sleep/ a igue +0.7 ± 15.96 +12.98 ± 18.42 <0.0001 Mood/apa hy +0.5 ± 14.57 +8.62 ± 15.19 <0.0001 Pe cep ual symp oms +1.89 ± 10.61 +4.35 ± 12.56 0.141 A en ion/memo y +1.74 ± 14.16 +7.28 ± 17.30 0.07 Gas oin es inal symp oms +2.19 ± 12.64 +4.9 ± 12.8 0.020 U ina y symp oms +1.29 ± 20.22 +9.28 ± 21.56 0.001 Sexual dys unc ion +2.63 ± 30.71 +10.51 ± 23.43 0.007 Miscellaneous +0.72 ± 14.88 +6.19 ± 14.89 0.011 BDI-II −0.63 ± 7.75 +4.51 ± 6.13 <0.0001 PDSS +2.82 ± 25.80 −9.04 ± 24.96 <0.0001 QUIP-RS −0.02 ± 9.25 +0.34 ± 8.06 0.736 NPI −0.43 ± 4.28 +4.28 ± 8.06 <0.0001 VAS-PAIN +0.18 ± 3.21 +1.01 ± 3.74 0.023 VASF −physical +0.09 ± 2.97 +1.1 ± 2.92 0.004 VASF-men al −0.12 ± 2.76 +1.05 ± 2.95 0.002 ADLS −2.84 ± 11.08 −10.97 ± 12.42 <0.0001 Chi-squa ed and Mann–Whi ney–Wilcoxon es we e applied. The esul s ep esen pe cen ages o mean ± SD. The symbol “+”indica es an inc ease in he sco e o he scale a V2 compa ed o V0 while he symbol “–” indica es a dec ease. Da a abou UPDRS-III a e du ing he OFF s a e (fi s hou in he mo ning wi hou aking medica ion in he p e ious 12 h). ADLS Schwab & England Ac i i ies o Daily Li ing Scale, BDI-II Beck Dep ession In en o y-II, FOGQ, F eezing O Gai Ques ionnai e, LEDD le odopa equi alen daily dose (mg), NMSS Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale, NPI Neu opsychia ic In en o y, PD-CRS Pa kinson’s Disease Cogni i e Ra ing Scale, PDSS Pa kinson’s Disease Sleep Scale, QUIP-RS Ques ionnai e o Impulsi e-Compulsi e Diso de s in Pa kinson’s Disease-Ra ing Scale, UPDRS Unified Pa kinson’s Disease Ra ing Scale, VAFS Visual Analog Fa igue Scale, VAS-Pain Visual Analog Scale-Pain. The bold alues indica es s a is ically significan p alues. D.S. Ga cía e al. 4 npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion as an inc ease o 10% o mo e in he PDQ-39SI sco e 33,35–37 .Ten pe cen o he mean sco e o he PDQ-39SI in ou s udy ep esen s 1.6 poin s; he e o e, simila o he p oposal o Pe o e al. 34 .Howe e , in a pa ien wi h a highe baseline PDQ-39SI sco e, o example, 50 poin s, he minimal clinically significan wo sening change should be 5 poin s. Hence, in less han 1 in 3 pa ien s who had an inc ease in he PDQ-39 sco e, his was conside ed clinically significan . In any case,i seemsclea ha e enina ela i elysho ollow-uppe iod, pa ien s wi h PD expe ience a significan dec ease in HRQoL 21,29 . Howe e , as Reu he e al. 22 epo ed in 145 PD pa ien s a e a 12- mon h ollow-up, he e doesn’ seem o be a significan change in QoL gene ic scales. Fo assessing he NMS as a whole, we used he NMSS. To da e, his scale has been used in mo e han 100 clinical s udies and ials and i has shown o be capable o de ec ing longi udinal changes in NMS, whe e s udies ha e shown di e en ial changes o e ime o se e al o he NMSS domains 32,38,39 . Mo eo e , i has been demons a ed a consis en and s ong co ela ions be ween NMSS bu den and HRQoL measu es 32,40–42 . In ou s udy, a e y clea di e ence in he change o NMS bu den was obse ed be ween pa ien s wi h and wi hou clinically significan HRQoL impai men . Changes in all domains o he NMSS scale co ela ed wi h QoL changes. Simila ly, p e ious s udies obse ed a co ela ion be ween NMS bu den assessed wi h he NMSS and QoL changes o e ime 19 . Mo eo e , in ou analysis, NMS bu den p og ession was an independen ac o ela ed o HRQoL impai men . P akash e al. obse ed o he fi s ime ha non- mo o p oblems p o ided a be e p edic ion o he change o QoL in 227 PD pa ien s o e a 2-yea ollow-up pe iod 19 . Howe e , hey did no p o ide he a iance alue o he model, many ac o s po en ially a ec ing QoL we e no included, and wha hey conside ed was he baseline NMSS sco e. On he con a y, in his s udy we wan ed o analyze in de ail wha changes in many aspec s o he disease obse ed a e he 2-yea ollow-up con ibu ed o a wo sening in he pa ien s´ QoL. So, se e al a iables we e included, he esul s o he model ep esen ed ~70% o he a iance when HRQoL changes we e conside ed, and he changes in all a iables we e adjus ed o he sco es a baseline. To ou bes knowledge, his is he fi s longi udinal- p ospec i e s udy analyzing in such de ail which a e he p edic o s o QoL impai men in a la ge sample o PD pa ien s. Rein o cing he idea ha he p og ession o NMS is pi o al o he wo sening o he QoL h oughou he e olu ion o he disease, imp o emen s o NMS we e associa ed wi h imp o ed QoL in ad anced pa kinso- nian pa ien s du ing 2‐yea ea men wi h le odopa‐ca bidopa in es inal gel in usion he apy 43 . In line wi h his, E o e al. obse ed ha NMS significan ly a ec ed QoL in PD, demons a - ing ha his was especially he case when pa ien s we e in hei honeymoon pe iod (du ing which ime he side e ec s o he disease a en’ oo disabling and he e is a esponse o medica ions) 44 . In he subg oup o ea ly PD pa ien s om ou s udy, he change in he NMSS o al sco e a 2-yea s was one o he mos significan con ibu o s o HRQoL impai men . Ano he impo an ac o is mood. Like in o he s udies, he mean sco e o BDI didn’ change o e ime 18,22 , sugges ing ha dep ession- ype equency does no appea o change o e ime in PD 45 . C oss-sec ional s udies ha e epo ed he clea con ibu- ion o dep ession o a wo se mood o a poo e QoL in PD pa ien s 3,12,13 . In ac , i was obse ed in he COPPADIS baseline c oss-sec ional analysis 14 . Howe e , o ou knowledge, his is he fi s ime ha mood wo sening is iden ified as an independen ac o associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men in PD pa ien s. This subg oup o pa ien s (N=93) p esen ed a mean inc ease in he BDI-II sco e o 4.5 poin s a he 2-yea ollow-up and specifically, an inc ease in ≥5 poin s mul iplied by 5 he p obabili y o p esen ing a clinically significan HRQoL impai - men , independen o o he ac o s. Reu he e al. 22 iden ified dep ession as he s onges p edic o o educed HRQoL in 145 PD pa ien s a e 1-yea ollow-up. Howe e , we iden ified he change in he sco e o he BDI-II as a p edic o o clinically significan HRQoL impai men a e adjus men o BDI-II sco e a baseline. F om a p ac ical poin o iew, ou findings sugges an impo an ole o he neu ologis being ale o a possible wo sening o mood, as well as g ea e NMS bu den, in pa ien s wi h PD h oughou he e olu ion o he disease since his is wha impac s on he pa ien ’s QoL. Knowing wha impac s on he QoL and con ibu es o i s wo sening, depending on he a iable, in e en ion measu es wi h he in en ion o co ec ing hem can be p oposed 46 . S udies demons a ing a QoL imp o emen co ela ed wi h mood and NMS bu den imp o emen ha e been published 47 . Wi h ega ds o he esul s obse ed he e, i should be necessa y o be ale abou mood and NMS bu den changes o e ime, especially in younge pa ien s and emales. A mildly significan gende di e ence in disabili y and QoL epo ing has been no ed, wi h women ci ing g ea e disabili y and educed QoL 48,49 . Dep ession and a igue we e he majo causes o low Fig. 2 E olu ion o NMS a e 2-yea ollow up. A Change in he NMSS o al sco e om V0 (baseline) o V2 (2 yea ± 1 mon h) in PD pa ien s wi hou s wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men . BMean sco e on each domain o he ESS scale a V0 and V2 in PD pa ien s wi hou s wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men . Da a a e p esen ed as box plo s, wi h he box ep esen ing he median and he wo middle qua iles (25–75%). p- alues we e compu ed using he Wilcoxon-signed ank es . Mild ou lie s (O) a e da a poin s ha a e mo e ex eme han Q1 −1.5 * IQR o Q3 +1.5 * IQR. NMSS, Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale. D.S. Ga cía e al. 5 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 HRQoL in women e en in he ea ly phases o PD 50 . To a enua e his sex di e ence in disease expe ience, psychological dis ess sc eening and managemen (pa icula ly a ge ing emales) should be conside ed as pa o PD clinical ca e 23 . Mo eo e , QoL, as measu ed on he PDQ-39, is significan ly wo se in young- onse PD pa ien s han in olde -onse PD pa ien s, and young- onse PD pa ien s also expe ience loss o employmen , dis up ion o amily li e, g ea e pe cei ed s igma iza ion, and dep ession han do olde -onse PD pa ien s 51,52 . The mos impo an limi a ion o his s udy is he ac ha in o ma ion abou ollow-up was eco ded only in 524 pa ien s o 695 ini ially included in he s udy (75.5%). O hem, da a o he PDQ-39, PQ-10, and EUROHIS-QOL8 a baseline and a V2 was a ailable in 500, 503, and 507 PD pa ien s, espec i ely. Thi y-eigh pa ien s (5.5%) d opped ou o he s udy (1 dea h; 2 wi h change in diagnosis; 35 o he easons) a he 2-yea ollow-up and 132 (19%) we e no assessed. Howe e , his is a limi a ion obse ed in o he p ospec i e s udies. O 7507 PD pa ien s, ollow-up da a was a ailable only o 4680 pa icipan s (62.3%) 53 . In he s udy o An onini e al. 29 , 707 PD pa ien s om 1142 ini ially included (61.9%) we e e aluable a 24 mon hs. An impo an second limi a ion is ha PD pa ien s olde han 75 yea s old we e excluded om pa icipa ion by COPPADIS s udy p o ocol 14 , which leads o an ea ly PD bias in his coho . Fo some a iables, he in o ma ion was no collec ed in all cases. Mo eo e , his is a mul icen e mono-coun y s udy, being he ideal o his ype o s udies he pa icipa ion o pa ien s om di e en pa s o he wo ld, so he esul s should be conside ed wi h cau ion when ex apola ing hem o he gene al PD popula ion (i.e., ace, coun y heal hca e, e c.). By he con a y, s eng hs o ou s udy include a e y comple e assessmen , he la ge sample size, a p ospec i e longi udinal ollow-up design, he ac ha his analysis was “a p io i”planned as one objec i e o he mul icen e COPPADIS p ojec 16 , and he ex ensi e clinical and demog aphic in o ma ion eco ded. The findings o his s udy ha e impo an implica ions in daily clinical p ac ice. In a diso de like PD in which one he e is no a cu e, ea men is symp oma ic and he aim is o imp o e he pa ien ’s QoL. This is complex because many ac o s influence QoL in PD. Fu he mo e, PD is a complex diso de wi h many mani es a ions and wi h a g ea a iabili y in i s p og ession among pa ien s. Rega ding his s udy obse a ions, some impo an poin s should be conside ed in daily clinical p ac ice. Fi s , a comple e assessmen o he pa ien wi h PD pe iodically including mo o s a us, NMS, QoL and disabili y should be he ideal p ac ice. Second, NMS p og ession con ibu es significan ly o a QoL wo sening and i is c ucial i s e alua ion. Ve y in e es ingly, we epo ed e y ecen ly ha PD pa ien s om he COPPADIS coho wi h a lowe H&Y s age bu a g ea e global NMS bu den may ha e a wo se QoL han pa ien s wi h a highe H&Y s age bu lowe global NMS 54 . Thi d, mood is ano he key ac o o conside whene e we e alua e he pa ien in clinical p ac ice. Fou h, we ha e o keep in mind ha mood impai men and global NMS p og ession p edic a pa ien ´s QoL wo sening. Finally, we should be especially ca e ul in all o he abo e in he case o a emale pa ien and in young pa ien s. A p oblem in clinical p ac ice is he lack o ime o e alua e he pa ien . Fo he PD pa ien , o b ing adequa ely co e ed ques- ionnai es o he consul a ion, o example wi h he help o nu sing s a , o e en in he u u e wi h mobile applica ions ha ans e he da a o he pa ien ’s medical eco d, i could be a possibili y ha acili a es he comple e and comp ehensi e assessmen . In gene al, i is some hing ha is no done oday, and p oo o his is he ala ming lack o li e a u e abou he global p og ession o he disease including NMS in la ge coho s o pa ien s. Mo e s udies wi h la ge PD coho s and long- e m ollow-up a e equi ed. Ou aim wi h he COPPADIS coho is o ollow o 5 yea s 55 . Collec ing da a om di e en coho s and making compa isons would also be o g ea in e es . In conclusion, he p esen s udy obse es HRQoL impai men in PD pa ien s in a sho 2-yea ollow-up, e en in ea ly PD pa ien s, bu no he GQoL. A younge age, o be a emale, and mood and NMS bu den impai men we e associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a e he 2-yea ollow- up. The p og ession o NMS is pi o al in he wo sening o he QoL h oughou he e olu ion o he disease in PD, and i is necessa y o keep in mind o ask o mood o NMS changes, especially in emales and young pa ien s. Table 3. Bina y logis ic eg ession model abou ac o s associa ed wi h clinically significan HRQoL impai men a V2 (2 yea s ollow-up). OR a OR b 95% CI a 95% CI b p a p b Age 0.896 0.813 0.829–0.968 0.709–0.933 0.006 0.003 Gende ( emale) 4.181 35.847 3.452–372.204 1.378–8.424 0.009 0.003 Disease du a ion 1.040 0.734 0.388–1.389 0.763–1.360 0.673 0.342 No. o non-an ipa kinsonian d ugs/day 0.922 1.005 0.728–1.167 0.697–1.449 0.499 0.979 Change a 2 yea s ollow-up LEDD (mg) 1.000 1.002 0.998–1.005 0.998–1.002 0.860 0.385 UPDRS-III 1.056 1.088 0.995–1.120 0.978–1.211 0.071 0.121 UPDRS-IV 0.959 0.756 0.417–1.372 0.650–1.137 0.785 0.358 FOGQ 1.143 1.160 0.906–1.485 1.108–1.559 0.088 0.239 NMSS 1.052 1.069 1.027–1.113 1.007–1.043 <0.0001 0.001 PD-CRS 0.995 0.972 0.900–1.050 0.963–1.045 0.837 0.473 BDI-II 1.139 1.400 1.053–1.231 1.149–1.705 0.001 0.001 NPI 1.037 1.158 0.976–1.103 0.995–1.348 0.238 0.058 Dependen a iable: Clinically significan HRQoL impai men (defined as PDQ-39SI V2 ≥10% PDQ-39SI V0 ). OR and 95% CI a e shown. Hosme –Lemeshow es , p a =0.665; p b =0.998; R 2a =0.655; R 2b =745. The model was adjus ed o a iables a baseline: LEDD (mg), UPDRS-III, UPDRS-IV, FOGQ, NMSS, PD-CRS, BDI-II, NPI, PDQ-39SI. BDI-II Beck Dep ession In en o y-II, FOGQ F eezing O Gai Ques ionnai e, LEDD le odopa equi alen daily dose (mg), NMSS Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale, NPI Neu opsychia ic In en o y, PD-CRS Pa kinson’s Disease Cogni i e Ra ing Scale, PDQ-39SI 39-i em Pa kinson’s Disease Quali y o Li e Ques ionnai e Summa y Index, QUIP-RS, Ques ionnai e o Impulsi e-Compulsi e Diso de s in Pa kinson’s Disease-Ra ing Scale, UPDRS Unified Pa kinson’s Disease Ra ing Scale. a All coho (n=500). b Ea ly PD pa ien s (n=277). The bold alues indica es s a is ically significan p alues. D.S. Ga cía e al. 6 npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion METHODS PD pa ien s and con ols who we e ec ui ed om Janua y 2016 o No embe 2017 (baseline isi ; V0) and e alua ed again a he 2-yea ollow-up (V2) om 35 cen e s o Spain om he COPPADIS coho 56 , we e included in he s udy. Me hodology abou COPPADIS-2015 has been p e iously published 57 . This is a mul icen e , obse a ional, longi udinal- p ospec i e, 5-yea ollow-up s udy designed o analyzing disease p og ession in a Spanish popula ion o PD pa ien s. Specifically, 17 objec i es we e p oposed in he p o ocol 55 . E en hough he ec ui men pe iod ended in Oc obe 2017, he p ospec i e ollow-up phase is ongoing. Pa ien s, ca egi e s (pa ien ´s p ima y ca egi e ), and con ols (subjec s wi hou PD and any o he se e e and disabling concomi an diso de ) we e included 55 . Annual isi s om V0 (baseline) o V5 (60 mo hs ± 3 mon hs) a e conduc ed o he pa ien s and a V0, V2, V4, and V5 o he con ols and ca egi e s. All pa ien s included we e diagnosed acco ding o UK PD B ain Bank c i e ia 57 . Exclusion c i e ia 55 we e: non-PD pa kinsonism, demen ia c i e ia (Mini Men al S a e Examina ion [MMSE] ≥26), age < 18 o >75 yea s, inabili y o ead o unde s and he ques ionnai es, o be ecei ing any ad anced he apy (con inuous in usion o le odopa o apomo phine, and/ o wi h deep b ain s imula ion), and p esence o como bidi y, sequelae, o any diso de ha could in e e e wi h he assessmen . In o ma ion on sociodemog aphic aspec s, ac o s ela ed o PD, como bidi y, and ea men we e collec ed. V0 and V2 e alua ions included 55 : (1) mo o assessmen (Hoenh & Yah [H&Y] 58 , Unified Pa kinson’s Disease Ra ing Scale [UPDRS] pa III and pa IV 59 , F eezing o Gai Ques ionnai e [FOGQ] 60 ; (2) NMS (Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale [NMSS] 61 , Pa kinson’s Disease Sleep Scale [PDSS] 62 , Visual Analog Scale- Pain [VAS-Pain] 63 , Visual Analog Fa igue Scale [VAFS] 64 , cogni ion (MMSE 65 , Pa kinson’s Disease Cogni i e Ra ing Scale [PD-CRS] 66 , comple ing a simple 16-piece puzzle); (3) mood and neu opsychia ic symp oms (Beck Dep ession In en o y-II [BDI-II] 67 , Neu opsychia ic In en o y [NPI] 68 , Ques ionnai e o Impulsi e-Compulsi e Diso de s in Pa kinson’s Disease- Ra ing Scale [QUIP-RS] 69 ; (4) and disabili y (Schwab & England Ac i i ies o Daily Li ing Scale [ADLS] 70 . In pa ien s wi h mo o fluc ua ions, he mo o assessmen was made du ing he OFF s a e (wi hou medica ion in he las 12 h) and du ing he ON s a e. On he o he hand, he assessmen was only conduc ed wi hou medica ion in pa ien s wi hou mo o fluc ua ions. The same e alua ion as o he pa ien s, excep o he mo o assessmen , was conduc ed in con ol subjec s a V0 and a V2 (2 yea s ± 1 mon h). Th ee scales we e used o assess QoL a V0 and a V2 28 : (1) he 39-i em Pa kinson’s disease Ques ionnai e (PDQ-39) 71 , (2) a a ing o global pe cei ed QoL (PQ-10) on a scale om 0 (wo s ) o 10 (bes ) 13 , and (3) he EUROHIS-QOL 8-i em index (EUROHIS-QOL8) 72 . The PDQ-39 is a PD- specific ques ionnai e ha assesses he pa ien s’HRQoL. The e a e 39 i ems g ouped in o 8 domains: (1) Mobili y (i ems 1 o 10); (2) Ac i i ies o daily li ing (i ems 11 o 16); (3) Emo ional well-being (i ems 17 o 22); (4) S igma (i ems 23 o 26); (5) Social suppo (i ems 27 o 29); (6) Cogni ion (i ems 30 o 33); (7) Communica ion (i ems 34 o 36); (8) Pain and discom o (i ems 37 o 39). Fo each i em, he sco e may ange om 0 (ne e ) o 4 (always). The symp oms e e o he 4 weeks p io o assessmen . Domain o al sco es a e exp essed as a pe cen age o he co esponding maximum possible sco e and a Summa y Index is ob ained as a e age o he domain sco es. The EUROHIS-QOL8 is an 8-i em GQoL ques ionnai e (quali y o li e, heal h s a us, ene gy, au onomy o ac i i ies o daily li ing, sel -es eem, social ela ionships, economic capaci y, and habi a ) de i ed om he WHOQOL-BREF. Fo each i em, he sco e anges om 0 (no a all) o 5 (comple ely). The o al sco e is exp essed as he mean o he indi idual sco es. A highe sco e indica es a be e QoL. In con ols, only he PQ-10 and he EUROHIS-QOL8 we e assessed. Clinically significan HRQoL impai men was defined as p esen ing an inc ease in PDQ-39SI sco e a V2 ≥10% o sco e a baseline (V0) whe eas GQoL impai men as p esen ing a dec emen in PQ-10 and/o EUROHIS- QOL8 sco e a V2 ≤10% o sco e a baseline (V0) 33 . Taking in o accoun ha in he COPPADIS coho he ange o disease du a ion a ies om <1 yea o 30 yea s and based on he gene al esponse o ea men and p og ession o symp oms in PD and conside ing a ecen publica ion o his same coho 73 , pa ien s wi h ≤5 yea s o disease du a ion we e conside ed as ea ly PD pa ien s. Da a analysis Da a we e p ocessed using SPSS 20.0 o Windows. Fo compa isons be ween pa ien s and con ols, he S uden ’s - es , Mann–Whi ney U es , Chi-squa e es , o Fishe es we e used as app op ia e (dis ibu ion o a iables was e ified by one-sample Kolmogo o –Smi no es ). The Wilcoxon-signed ank es was pe o med o es whe he he mean di e ences o he PDQ-39SI, PQ-10, and EUROHIS-QOL8 sco es and he indi idual PDQ-39SI and EUROHIS- QOL8 domain sco es be ween he wo isi s (V0 and V2) we e significan . This es and/o he ma ginal homogenei y es we e applied o o he scales o analyzing he change om V0 o V2. Spea man’so Pea son’s co ela ion coe ficien , as app op ia e, we e used o analyzing he ela ionship be ween con inuous a iables. Co ela ions we e conside ed weak o coe ficien alues ≤0.29, mode a e o alues be ween 0.30 and 0.59, and s ong o alues ≥0.60. Clinically significan QoL impai men was exp essed as a pe cen age and i was only calcula ed i he change be ween sco es (PDQ-39SI; PQ-10; EUROHIS-QOL8) om V0 o V2 was significan . Fo de e mining p edic i e ac o s o QoL impai men , a logis ic eg ession model (QoL impai men as dependen a iable) was pe o med. The model was well-planned, as ecommended by bes -p ac ice me hods 74 , in which known and p e- sumably p edic o a iables a ec ing QoL changes (dependen a iable) we e included: change om V0 o V2 in le odopa equi alen daily dose (LEDD) 75 , UPDRS-III-OFF (mo o se e i y), UPDRS-IV (mo o complica ions), FOGQ, NMSS (NMS bu den), PD-CRS (cogni ion), BDI-II (mood), and NPI (neu opsychia ic symp oms). The model was adjus ed o baseline QoL and age, gende , disease du a ion, como bidi y ( o al numbe o non- an ipa kinsonian medica ions as su oga e ma ke 14 ), and he sco e o he es o he a iables a baseline (LEDD, UPDRS-III-OFF, UPDRS-IV, FOGQ, NMSS, PD-CRS, and NPI). Disabili y (ADLS) was no included in he model because his is consequence o symp oms, bu since i is ela ed o QoL, in a second model ADLS a baseline and change in ADLS om V0 o V2 we e included. Hosme –Lemeshow es was applied and adjus ed R-squa ed was calcula ed o all analyses. Finally, mul iple linea eg essions we e pe o med wi h “change in QoL”as dependen a iable bu only o a iables (PDQ-39SI; PQ-10; EUROHIS-QOL8) changing significan ly om V0 o V2. The independen a iables included we e he same as in he bina y model. The p- alue was conside ed significan when i was <0.05. S anda d p o ocol app o als, egis a ions, and pa ien consen s The Comi é de É ica de la In es igación Clínica de Galicia om Spain (2014/ 534; 02/DEC/2014) app o al was ob ained. W i en in o med consen s om all pa icipan s in his s udy we e ob ained be o e he s a o he s udy. COPPADIS-2015 was classified by he AEMPS as a Pos -au ho iza ion P ospec i e Follow-up s udy wi h he code COH-PAK-2014-01. Repo ing summa y Fu he in o ma ion on esea ch design is a ailable in he Na u e Resea ch Repo ing Summa y linked o his a icle. DATA AVAILABILITY The da a ha suppo he findings o his s udy a e a ailable om he co esponding au ho upon easonable eques . CODE AVAILABILITY No compu e coding was used in he comple ion o he cu en manusc ip . Recei ed: 25 Ma ch 2021; Accep ed: 27 July 2021; Published online: 16 Decembe 2021 REFERENCES 1. Chaudhu i, K. R. e al. The nondecla a ion o nonmo o symp oms o Pa kinson’s disease o heal h ca e p o essionals: an in e na ional s udy using he nonmo o symp oms ques ionnai e. Mo . Diso d. 25, 704–709 (2010). 2. Hinnell, C. e al. Nonmo o e sus mo o symp oms: how much do hey ma e o heal h s a us in Pa kinson’s disease? Mo . Diso d. 27, 236–241 (2012). 3. Sch ag, A., Jahanshahi, M. & Quinn, N. Wha con ibu es o quali y o li e in pa ien s wi h Pa kinson’s disease? J. Neu ol. Neu osu g. Psychia y 69, 308–312 (2000). 4. Kuopio, A. M., Ma ila, R. J., Helenius, H., Toi onen, M. & Rinne, U. K. The quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease. Mo . Diso d. 15, 216–223 (2000). 5. Muslimo ic, D., Pos , B., Speelman, J. D., Schmand, B. & de Haan, R. J. De e mi- nan s o disabili y and quali y o li e in mild o mode a e Pa kinson disease. Neu ology 70, 2241–2247 (2008). D.S. Ga cía e al. 7 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 6. Beha i, M., S i as a a, A. K. & Pandey, R. M. Quali y o li e in pa ien s wi h Pa - kinson’s disease. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 11, 221–226 (2005). 7. Ka lsen, K. H., La sen, J. P., Tandbe g, E. & Maland, J. G. Quali y o li e measu e- men s in pa ien s wi h Pa kinson’s disease: a communi ybased s udy. Eu . J. Neu ol. 5, 443–450 (1998). 8. Rahman, S., G i fin, H. J., Quinn, N. P. & Jahanshahi, M. Quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease: he ela i e impo ance o he symp oms. Mo . Diso d. 23, 1428–1434 (2008). 9. Slawek, J., De ejko, M. & Lass, P. Fac o s a ec ing he quali y o li e o pa ien s wi h idiopa hic Pa kinson’s disease-a c oss-sec ional s udy in an ou pa ien clinic a endees. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 11, 465–468 (2005). 10. Chapuis, S., Ouchchane, L., Me z, O., Ge baud, L. & Du i , F. Impac o he mo o complica ions o Pa kinson’s disease on he quali y o li e. Mo . Diso d. 20, 224–230 (2005). 11. Ka lsen, K. H., La sen, J. P., Tandbe g, E. & Maeland, J. G. Influence o clinical and demog aphic a iables on quali y o li e in pa ien s wi h Pa kinson’s disease. J. Neu ol. Neu osu g. Psychia y 66, 431–435 (1999). 12. Ma inez-Ma in, P. e al. The impac o non-mo o symp oms on heal h- ela ed quali y o li e o pa ien s wi h Pa kinson’sdisease.Mo . Diso d. 26,399–406 (2011). 13. San os Ga cía, D. & de la Fuen e-Fe nández, R. Impac o non-mo o symp oms on heal h- ela ed and pe cei ed quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease. J. Neu ol. Sci. 332, 136–140 (2013). 14. San os Ga cía, D. e al. Non-mo o symp oms bu den, mood, and gai p oblems a e he mos significan ac o s con ibu ing o a poo quali y o li e in non- demen ed Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s: esul s om he COPPADIS S udy Coho . Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 66, 151–157 (2019). 15. Ma inez-Ma in, P. Wha is quali y o li e and how do we measu e i ? Rele- ance o Pa kinson’s disease and mo emen diso de s. Mo . Diso d. 32, 382–392 (2017). 16. Ma inez-Ma in, P. & Ku is, M. M. Heal h- ela ed quali y o li e as an ou come a iable in Pa kinson’s disease. The . Ad . Neu ol. Diso d. 5, 105–117 (2012). 17. Soh, S. E., Mo is, M. E. & McGinley, J. L. De e minan s o heal h- ela ed quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease: a sys ema ic e iew. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 17,1–9 (2011). 18. Ka lsen, K. H., Tandbe g, E., A sland, D. & La sen, J. P. Heal h ela ed quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease: a p ospec i e longi udinal s udy. J. Neu ol. Neu osu g. Psychia y 69, 584–589 (2000). 19. P akash, K. M., Nadka ni, N. V., Lye, W. K., Yong, M. H. & Tan, E. K. The impac o non-mo o symp oms on he quali y o li e o Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s: a longi udinal s udy. Eu . J. Neu ol. 23, 854–860 (2016). 20. Higginson, I. J. e al. Symp oms and quali y o li e in la e s age Pa kinson syn- d omes: a longi udinal communi y s udy o p edic i e ac o s. PLoS ONE 7, e46327 (2012). 21. Visse , M., Ve baan, D., an Rooden, S., Ma inus, J., an Hil en, J. & S iggelbou , A. A longi udinal e alua ion o heal h- ela ed quali y o li e o pa ien s wi h Pa - kinson’s disease. Value Heal h 12, 392–396 (2009). 22. Reu he , M. e al. Assessing heal h- ela ed quali y o li e in pa ien s wi h Pa - kinson’s disease in a p ospec i e longi udinal s udy. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 13, 108–114 (2007). 23. Ab aham, D. S. e al. Sex di e ences in Pa kinson’s disease p esen a ion and p og ession. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 69,48–54 (2019). 24. Klie z, M. e al. Impai ed quali y o li e and need o pallia i e ca e in a Ge man Coho o ad anced Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s. F on . Neu ol. 9, 120 (2018). 25. Fasano, A. e al. Cha ac e izing ad anced Pa kinson’s disease: OBSERVE-PD obse a ional s udy esul s o 2615 pa ien s. BMC Neu ol. 19, 50 (2019). 26. Valko ic, P., Ha sany, J., Hanako a, M., Ma inko a, J. & Bene in, J. Nonmo o symp oms in ea ly- and ad anced-s age Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s on dopa- mine gic he apy: how do hey co ela e wi h quali y o li e? ISRN Neu ol. 2014, 587302 (2014). 27. Velseboe , D. C. e al. P ognos ic ac o s o mo o impai men , disabili y, and quali y o li e in newly diagnosed PD. Neu ology 80, 627–633 (2013). 28. Pos , B. e al. P og ession and p ognos ic ac o s o mo o impai men , disabili y and quali y o li e in newly diagnosed Pa kinson’s disease. Mo Diso d. 26, 449–456 (2011). 29. An onini, A. e al. The p og ession o non-mo o symp oms in Pa kinson’s disease and hei con ibu ion o mo o disabili y and quali y o li e. J. Neu ol. 259, 2621–2631 (2012). 30. Simuni, T. e al. Baseline p e alence and longi udinal e olu ion o non-mo o symp oms in ea ly Pa kinson’s disease: he PPMI coho . J. Neu ol. Neu osu g. Psychia y. 89,78–88 (2018). 31. Ho á h, K. e al. Changes in quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease: how la ge mus hey be o be ele an ? Neu oepidemiology 48,1–8 (2017). 32. Ou, R. e al. P og ession o non-mo o symp oms in Pa kinson’sdiseaseamong di e en age popula ions: a wo-yea ollow-up s udy. J. Neu ol. Sci. 360,72–77 (2016). 33. Ringash, J., O’Sulli an, B., Bezjak, A. & Redelmeie , D. A. In e p e ing clinically significan changes in pa ien - epo ed ou comes. Cance 110, 196–202 (2007). 34. Pe o,V.,Jenkinson,C.&Fi zpa ick,R.De e mining minimally impo an di e ences o he PDQ-39 Pa kinson’s disease ques ionnai e. Age Ageing 30,299–302 (2001). 35. B ozek, J. L., Guya , G. H. & Schünemann, H. J. How a well-g ounded minimal impo an di e ence can enhance anspa ency o labelling claims and imp o e in e p e a ion o a pa ien epo ed ou come measu e. Heal h Qual. Li e Ou comes 27, 69 (2006). 36. Ba e , B., B own, D., Mund , M. & B own, R. Su ficien ly impo an di e ence: expanding he amewo k o clinical significance. Med. Decis. Making 25, 250–261 (2005). 37. Deng, X. e al. Fou -yea longi udinal s udy o mo o and non-mo o symp oms in LRRK2- ela ed Pa kinson’s disease. F on . Neu ol. 10, 1379 (2020). 38. an Wamelen, D. J. e al. In e na ional Pa kinson and Mo emen Diso de Socie y Pa kinson’s Disease Non-Mo o S udy G oup. The Non-Mo o Symp oms Scale in Pa kinson’s disease: alida ion and use. Ac a Neu ol. Scand. 143,3–12 (2021). 39. Ma inez-Ma in, P. e al. Gende - ela ed di e ences in he bu den o non-mo o symp oms in Pa kinson’s disease. J. Neu ol. 259, 1639–1647 (2012). 40. Guo, X. e al. Disease du a ion- ela ed di e ences in non-mo o symp oms: a s udy o 616 Chinese Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s. J. Neu ol. Sci. 330,32–37 (2013). 41. Song, W. e al. The impac o non-mo o symp oms on he heal h- ela ed quali y o li e o Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s om Sou hwes China. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 20, 149–152 (2014). 42. Wu, Y. e al. De e minan s o he quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease: esul s o a coho s udy om Sou hwes China. J. Neu ol. Sci. 340, 144–149 (2014). 43. Ray Chaudhu i, K. e al. Bu den o non-mo o symp oms in Pa kinson’s disease pa ien s p edic s imp o emen in quali y o li e du ing ea men wi h le odopa- ca bidopa in es inal gel. Eu . J. Neu ol. 26, 581–e43 (2019). 44. E o, R. e al. The non-mo o side o he honeymoon pe iod o Pa kinson’s disease and i s ela ionship wi h quali y o li e: a 4-yea longi udinal s udy. Eu . J. Neu ol. 23, 1673–1679 (2016). 45. San os-Ga cía, D. e al. Sleep p oblems a e ela ed o a wo se quali y o li e and a g ea e non-mo o symp oms bu den in Pa kinson’s disease. In . J. Ge ia . Psy- chia y 34, 642–658 (2021). 46. Ra e y, M. R. e al. Regula exe cise, quali y o li e, and mobili y in Pa kinson’s disease: a longi udinal analysis o Na ional Pa kinson Founda ion quali y imp o emen ini ia i e da a. J. Pa kinsons. Dis. 7, 193–202 (2017). 47. San os Ga cía, D. e al. Safinamide imp o es non-mo o symp oms bu den in Pa kinson’s disease: an open-label p ospec i e s udy. B ain Sci. 11, 316 (2021). 48. Shulman, L. M. Gende di e ences in Pa kinson’s disease. Gend. Med. 4,8–18 (2007). 49. C ispino, P. e al. Gende di e ences and quali y o li e in Pa kinson’s disease. In . J. En i on. Res. Public. Heal h 18, 198 (2020). 50. Yoon, J. E. e al. Gende di e ences o nonmo o symp oms a ec ing quali y o li e in Pa kinson disease. Neu odegene . Dis. 17, 276–280 (2017). 51. Sch ag, A., Ho is, A., Mo ley, A., Quinn, A. & Jahanshahi, M. Young- e sus olde - onse Pa kinson’s disease: impac o disease and psychosocial consequences. Mo . Diso d. 18, 1250–1256 (2003). 52. Mehanna, R. & Janko ic, J. Young-onse Pa kinson’s disease: I s unique ea u es and hei impac on quali y o li e. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 65,39–48 (2019). 53. Shahgholi, L. e al. Hospi aliza ion and ehospi aliza ion in Pa kinson disease pa ien s: da a om he Na ional Pa kinson Founda ion Cen e s o Excellence. PLoS ONE 12, e0180425 (2017). 54. San os Ga cía, D. e al. S aging Pa kinsonas disease combining mo o and non- mo o symp oms co ela es wi h disabili y and quali y o li e. Pa kinsons Dis. 2021, 8871549 (2021). 55. San os-Ga cía, D. e al. COPPADIS S udy G oup. COPPADIS-2015 (COho o Pa ien s wi h PA kinson’s DIsease in Spain, 2015), a global-clinical e alua ions, se um bioma ke s, gene ic s udies and neu oimaging-p ospec i e, mul icen e , non-in e en ional, long- e m s udy on Pa kinson’s disease p og ession. BMC Neu ol. 16, 26 (2016). 56. San os Ga cía, D. e al. COPPADIS S udy G oup. COPPADIS-2015 (COho o Pa ien s wi h PA kinson’s DIsease in Spain, 2015): an ongoing global Pa kinson’s disease p ojec abou disease p og ession wi h mo e han 1000 subjec s inclu- ded. Resul s om he baseline e alua ion. Eu . J. Neu ol. 26, 1399–1407 (2019). 57. Daniel, S. E. & Lees, A. J. Pa kinson’s Disease Socie y B ain Bank, London: o e iew and esea ch. J. Neu al. T ansm. Suppl. 39, 165–172 (1993). 58. Hoehn, M. M. & Yah , M. D. Pa kinsonism: onse , p og ession and mo ali y. Neu ology 17, 427–442 (1967). 59. Fanhn, S., El on, R. L. & Membe s o he UPDRS De elopmen Commi ee. in Recen De elopmen s in Pa kinson’s Disease (eds. Fahn, S., Ma sden, C. D., Calne, D. B. & Golds ein M.) Vol. 2, 153–164 (Macmillan Heal h Ca e In o ma ion, Flo ham Pa k, NJ, 1987). 60. Giladi, N., Shab ai, H., Simon, E. S., Bi an, S., Tal, J. & Ko czyn, A. D. Cons uc ion o eezing o gai ques ionnai e o pa ien s wi h Pa kinsonism. Pa kinsonism Rela . Diso d. 6, 165–170 (2000). D.S. Ga cía e al. 8 npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion 61. Chaudhu i, K. R. e al. The me ic p ope ies o a no el non-mo o symp oms scale o Pa kinson’s disease: Resul s om an in e na ional pilo s udy. Mo . Diso d. 22, 1901–1911 (2007). 62. Chaudhu i, K. R. e al. The Pa kinson’s disease sleep scale: a new ins umen o assessing sleep and noc u nal disabili y in Pa kinson’s disease. J. Neu ol. Neu o- su g. Psychia y 73, 629–635 (2002). 63. Bu ckha d , C. S. & Jones, K. D. Adul measu es o pain: The McGill Pain Ques- ionnai e (MPQ), Rheuma oid A h i is Pain Scale (RAPS), Sho Fo m McGill Pain Ques ionnai e (SF-MPQ), Ve bal Desc ip i e Scale (VDS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Wes Ha en-Yale Mul idisciplina y Pain In en o y (WHYMPI). A h i is. Rheum. 49,96–104 (2003). 64. Tseng, B. Y., Gajewski, B. J. & Kluding, P. M. Reliabili y, esponsi eness, and alidi y o he isual analog a igue scale o measu e exe ion a igue in people wi h ch onic s oke: a p elimina y s udy. S oke. Res. T ea . 2010, 412964 (2010). 65. Fols ein, M. F., Fols ein, S. E. & McHugh, P. R. Mini-men al s a e". A p ac ical me hod o g ading he cogni i e s a e o pa ien s o he clinician. J. Psychia . Res. 12, 189–198 (1975). 66. Pagonaba aga, J., Kulise sky, J., Lleba ia, G., Ga cía-Sánchez, C., Pascual-Sedano, B. & Gi onell, A. Pa kinson’s disease-cogni i e a ing scale: a new cogni i e scale specific o Pa kinson’s disease. Mo . Diso d. 23, 998–1005 (2008). 67. Beck, A. T., S ee , R. A. & B own, G. K. Beck Dep ession In en o y 2nd ed (The Psychological Co po a ion, San An onio, 1996). 68. Cummings, J. L., Mega, M., G ay, K., Rosenbe g-Thompson, S., Ca usi, D. A. & Go nbein, J. The Neu opsychia ic In en o y: comp ehensi e assessmen o psychopa hology in demen ia. Neu ology 44, 2308–2314 (1994). 69. Wein aub, D. e al. Valida ion o he ques ionnai e o impulsi e-compulsi e diso de s in Pa kinson’s disease. Mo . Diso d. 24, 1461–1467 (2009). 70. Schwab, R. S. & England, A. C. In Thi d Symposium on Pa kinson’s Disease 152–157 (E. And S. Li ings one, Edinbu gh, 1969). 71. Jenkinson, C., Fi zpa ick, R., Pe o, V., G eenhall, R. & Hyman, N. The Pa kinson’s Disease Ques ionnai e (PDQ-39): de elopmen and alida ion o a Pa kinson’s disease summa y index sco e. Age Ageing 26, 353–357 (1997). 72. Da Rocha, N. S., Powe , M. J., Bushnell, D. M. & Fleck, M. P. The EUROHIS-QOL 8-i em index: compa a i e psychome ic p ope ies o i s pa en WHOQOL-BREF. Value Heal h 15, 449–457 (2012). 73. San os-Ga cía, D. e al. COPPADIS S udy G oup. Non-mo o symp om bu den is s ongly co ela ed o mo o complica ions in pa ien s wi h Pa kinson’s disease. Eu . J. Neu ol. 27, 1210–1223 (2020). 74. Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. Applied Mul iple Reg ession/Co ela ion Analysis o he Beha io al Sciences 2nd ed (Law ence E lbaum, Hillsdale, New Je sey, 1983). 75. Schade, S., Mollenhaue , B. & T enkwalde , C. Le odopa equi alen dose con- e sion ac o s: an upda ed p oposal including opicapone and safinamide. Mo . Diso d. Clin. P ac . 2020, 343–345 (2020). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like o hank all pa ien s and hei ca egi e s who collabo a ed in his s udy. Many hanks also o Fundación Española de Ayuda a la In es igación en Pa kinson y o as En e medades Neu odegene a i as (Cu emos el Pa kinson; www. cu emoselpa kinson.o g), Alpha Bio esea ch (www.alphabio esea ch.com), and o he ins i u ions helping us. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS S.G.D.: concep ion, o ganiza ion, and execu ion o he p ojec ; s a is ical analysis; w i ing o he fi s d a o he manusc ip ; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. D.D.T.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.C.: e iew and c i ique. M.G.: e iew and c i ique. P.G.J.M.: e iew and c i ique. M.M. C.: e iew and c i ique. S.E.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. J.S.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. A.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. P.P.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. P.L.L.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. G.C.J.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.N.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. L.I.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. H.V.J.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.I.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. L.M.L.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. G.A.I.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. Á.R.M.A.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.M.J.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. N.V.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. P.V.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. R.d.A.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. B.C.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. S.V.B.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. Á.S.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. V.L.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. E.S.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.E.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.P.F.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. M.C.J.C.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. S.A.P.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. A.L.M.G.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. L.A.N.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. G.I.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. C.P.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. K.J.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. B.E.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. S.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. R.M.J.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. V.C.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. K.M.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. d.F.O.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. G.A.J.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. O.C.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. L.D.L.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. MD: e iew and c i ique; e iew o english s yle. M.-M.P.: e iew and c i ique; supe ision. M.P.: e iew and c i ique; ec ui men and/o e alua ion o pa icipan s. COMPETING INTERESTS San os Ga cía D. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, UCB Pha ma, Lundbeck, KRKA, Zambon, Bial, I al a maco, and Te a. De Deus Fon icoba T: None. Co es C. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Lundbeck and UCB Pha ma. Muñoz G: None. Paz González JM. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and/o ad ice se ice by UCB Pha ma, Lundbeck,KRKA,andZambon.Ma ínezMi óC:None.Suá ezE:None.JesúsS.has ecei ed hono a ia om AbbVie, Bial, Me z, UCB, and Zambon and holds he compe i i e con ac “Juan Rodés”suppo ed by he Ins i u o de Salud Ca los III. She has ecei ed g an s om he Spanish Minis y o Economy and Compe i i eness (PI18/01898) and he Conseje ía de Salud de la Jun a de Andalucía (PI-0459-2018). Aguila M: UCB and Schwabe wi h assis ance o a Cong ess; Nu icia wi h assis ance o a Cong ess and paymen o lec u e. Pas o P: None. Planellas LL. has ecei ed a el bu sa ies g an om Abb ie. Cosgaya M: None. Ga cía Calden ey J. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Qualigen, Nu icia, Abb ie, I al a maco, UCB Pha ma, Lundbeck, Zambon, Bial, and Te a. Caballol N. has ecei ed hono a ia om Bial, I al á maco, Qualigen, Zambon, UCB, Te a and KRKA and sponso ship om Zambon, TEVA and Abb ie o a ending medical con e ences. Lega da I. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, UCB Pha ma, Zambon, Bial, and Te a. He nández Va a J. has ecei ed a el bu sa ies and educa ional g an s om Abb ie and has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions om Abb ie, Te a, Bial, Zambon, I al a maco, and Sanofi-Genzyme. Cabo I. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, Zambon and Bial. López Manzana es L: Compensa ed ad iso y se ices, consul ing, esea ch g an suppo , o speake hono a ia: AbbVie, Aco da, Bial, In ec Pha ma, I al a maco, Pfize , Roche, Te a, UCB, and Zambon. González A ambu u I: None. Á ila Ri e a MA. has ecei ed hono a ia om Zambon, UCB Pha ma, Qualigen, Bial, and Te a, and sponso ship om Zambon and Te a o a ending con e ences. Ca alán MJ: None. Noguei a V: None. Puen e V. has se ed as consul an o Abb ie and Zambon; has ecei ed g an / esea ch om Abb ie. Ruíz de A cos M: None. Bo ué C: None. Solano Vila B. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by UCB, Zambon, Te a, Abb ie, Bial. Ál a ez Sauco M. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, UCB Pha ma, Zambon, Bial, and Te a. Vela L. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, UCB Pha ma, Lundbeck, KRKA, Zambon, Bial, and Te a. Escalan e S. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, Zambon, and Bial. Cubo E: T a el g an s: Abb ie, Alle gan,Bos on;Lec u ing hono a ia: Abb ie, In e na ional Pa kinson´s disease Mo emen Diso de Socie y. Ca illo Padilla F. has ecei ed hono a ia om Zambon (SEN Cong ess assis ance). Ma ínez Cas illo JC. has ecei ed esea ch suppo om Lundbeck, I al a maco, Alle gan, Zambon, Me z, and Abb ie. He has ecei ed speaking hono a ia om AbbVie, Bial, I al a maco, Lundbeck,K ka,TEVA,UCB,Zambon,Alle gan,Ipsen,andMe z.SánchezAlonsoP.has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, UCB Pha ma, Lundbeck, KRKA, Zambon, Bial, and Te a. Alonso Losada MG. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Zambon and Bial. López A iz egui N. has ecei ed hono a ia o educa ional p esen a ions and ad ice se ice by Abb ie, I al a maco, Zambon, and Bial. Gas ón I. has ecei ed esea ch suppo om Abb ie and Zambon and has se ed as a consul an o Abb ie, Exel s, and Zambon. Cla e o P: Kulise sky J: (1) Consul ing ees: Roche, Zambon; (2) S ock / allo men : No; (3) Pa en oyal ies / licensing ees: No; (4) Hono a ia (e.g., lec u e ees): Zambon, Te a, Bial, UCB; (5) Fees o p omo ional ma e ials: No; (6) Resea ch unding: Roche, Zambon, Cibe ned; Ins i u o de SaludCa los III; FundacióLa Ma a óde TV3; (7) Schola ship om D.S. Ga cía e al. 9 Published in pa ne ship wi h he Pa kinson’s Founda ion npj Pa kinson’s Disease (2021) 118