ArticleClinical parkinsonism & related disorders2026
Safety of opicapone in the elderly and very elderly population: an analysis of reported events in a global safety database.
Article in Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Older people with Parkinson's disease (PD) are under-represented in clinical trials despite increasing disease burden and complexity. Although opicapone is approved as an adjunct to levodopa, data in elderly populations are limited. This study assessed its real-world safety in the elderly using post-marketing pharmacovigilance data. Methods: This retrospective analysis used the global opicapone safety database (data-lock: 31 Jan 2026). Valid case safety reports with opicapone as the suspected product were included and classified as elderly (≥65-84 years) or very elderly (≥85 years). Adverse events were analyzed descriptively by system organ class, preferred term, and seriousness. Non-standard use and treatment actions were also assessed. Results: Among 2914 analyzed cases (2558 elderly; 356 very elderly), 7195 adverse events were reported. Most reported events were non-serious (81.4% of events in elderly cases; 73.5% in very elderly cases). Dyskinesia was the most frequently reported event in both groups (7.1%-7.7% of events), followed by hallucination and visual hallucination (all <5% of events). Serious events accounted for a greater proportion of reported events in the very elderly versus elderly group (26.5% vs 18.6%), although no individual preferred term exceeded 5%. Non-standard use accounted for 6.0% and 3.5% of reported events in the very elderly and elderly groups, respectively, and included altered administration and off-label indications. Treatment was discontinued in approximately half of cases in both groups. Conclusion: Reported adverse event patterns were generally consistent with the established safety profile of opicapone across both age groups. No unexpected reporting patterns were observed; however, findings should be interpreted within the limitations of spontaneous pharmacovigilance data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.