Table 1.

Summary of the 22 studies included in the network meta-analysis

Author/Reference	Study design	Countries	Number of patients included in analysis	Data source	Trial interventions
Antonini et al. (2017) [25]	Single-arm, prospectivea	Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, UK	375	Patient-level	LCIG
Fernandez et al. (2015) [23]	Single-arm, prospective	Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Spain, Thailand, United Kingdom, USA	272	Patient-level	LCIG
Palhagen et al. (2016) [24]b	Single-arm, prospective	Norway, Sweden	37	Patient-level	LCIG
De Fabregues et al. (2017) [36]	Single-arm, prospective	Spain	37	Aggregate level	LCIG
Honig et al. (2009) [40]	Single-arm, prospective	Germany, Italy, UK	22	Aggregate level	LCIG
Vijiaratanam et al. (2018) [47]	Single-arm, prospective	Australia	22	Aggregate level	LCIG
Murata et al. (2016) [44]	Single-arm, prospective	Japan, South Korea, Taiwan	31	Aggregate level	LCIG
Floden et al. (2015) [39]	Single-arm, retrospective	USA	106	Aggregate level	DBS
Dafsari et al. (2016) [48]	Single-arm, retrospective	Germany, UK	67	Aggregate level	DBS
Dafsari et al. (2018) [34]	Single-arm, prospective	Germany, UK	67	Aggregate level	DBS
Kubu et al. (2017) [41]	Single-arm, prospective	USA	52	Aggregate level	DBS
Soulas et al. (2011) [45]	Single-arm, prospective	France	41	Aggregate level	DBS
Timmermann et al. (2015) [46]	Single-arm, prospective	Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK	40	Aggregate level	DBS
Li et al. (2017) [42]c	Single-arm, prospective	China	32	Aggregate level	DBS
Drapier et al. (2016) [38]	Single-arm, prospective	France	142	Aggregate level	CSAI
Borgemeester and van Laar (2017) [33]	Single-arm, retrospective	Netherlands	45	Aggregate level	CSAI
Martinez-Martin et al. (2015) [43]	Two-arm prospective	Austria, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK	87	Aggregate level	LCIG vs CSAI
Dafsari et al. (2019) [35]	Three-arm prospective	Brazil, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, UK	173	Aggregate level	DBS vs LCIG vs CSAI
Weaver et al. (2009) [13]	Randomized, controlled trial	USA	255	Aggregate level	DBS vs BMT
Deuschl et al. (2006) [37]	Randomized, controlled trial	Austria, Germany	156	Aggregate level	DBS vs BMT
Katzenschlager et al. (2018) [12]	Randomized, controlled trial	Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, Netherlands, UK	106	Aggregate level	CSAI vs BMT
Olanow et al. (2014) [11]	Randomized, controlled trial	Germany, New Zealand, USA	66	Patient-level	LCIG vs BMT

BMT best medical treatment, CSAI continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion, DBS deep brain stimulation, LCIG levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel

^aIncluded both prospective and retrospective data

^bOnly LCIG naïve patients included

^cOnly 1 month group included