Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol: Beta adrenoreceptor drugs and risk of Parkinsons disease

Parkinsons disease (PD) is a progressive nervous system disorder characterised by the loss of dopaminergic neurons leading to motor and non-motor symptoms. Accumulation of -synuclein protein (SNCA) in the form of Lewy bodies has been observed in dopaminergic neurons of PD patients. Potential relationships between {beta}-adrenergic drugs (agonists and antagonist) and SNCA synthesis in PD have been recently suggested. This study aims to systematically review the evidence from various epidemiological studies that analysed the association between beta-adrenoceptors (agonists and antagonists) and the risk of PD. Biomedical databases such as PubMed and Embase will be searched to identify the individual studies that reported the relationship between beta-adrenoceptors and the risk of PD. JBI critical appraisal tool scale will be used to assess the quality of included studies. The primary outcome will be to compute the pooled risk of PD among beta-agonist and antagonist users. Furthermore, we will consider the pooled risk of PD based on study design, types of beta-agonist or antagonist exposure under secondary outcomes. RevMan 5, STATA 16, and ProMeta 3.0 will be used to conduct the statistical analysis.


Characteristics of comparators (C)
We will include all the studies assessing the risk of PD in beta-agonist and/or antagonist users compared to non-users or any other active drug users.

Outcomes of interest (O)
Our primary outcome is to compute the risk of PD among beta-agonist and/or antagonist users. Studies reporting the risk ratio, odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) or the absolute numbers to estimate these measures will be of interest. Studies that qualify all other inclusion criteria and assessed any of these outcomes but did not report the data or reported the data in a format not suitable for quantitative synthesis, we will include such studies in the review and present relevant information in the narrative form.

Characteristics of study design (S)
Epidemiological analytical studies such as retrospective studies, prospective studies, cohort studies, casecontrol studies will be included in this meta-analysis. Studies reporting reviews, case series, case reports, genetic studies, animal studies, commentary, editorial, or study protocol will be excluded.

Information sources and search procedure
We will implement the search procedure consistently with the following criteria.

Electronic source and search strategy
For this systematic review and meta-analysis, a three-step search strategy will be utilized to locate both published and unpublished studies. An initial limited search will be undertaken in MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid), using keywords and index terms related to Parkinson's disease, β2 adrenergic receptor agonists, β2 adrenergic receptor antagonists, risk factors or incidence. An analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract and the index terms used to describe the articles will follow. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms will be conducted across all included databases. Thirdly, the reference lists of all studies that will meet the inclusion criteria will be checked for additional records.
The databases to be searched include MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, Emcare (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCO). Sources of grey literature will be ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global and clinical trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). No language restriction will be applied during the search; however, only the studies published in English language will be included.

4
discussed and solved through consensus with other authors and independent expert consultation.

Assessment of risk of bias
The methodological quality of the selected studies will be evaluated using the Jonna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool. 12 A Risk-of-Bias form was adapted and will be used for data extraction (Appendix 2). Each article will be evaluated independently by two researchers using the JBI tool. Depending on the response, each domain of the tool will be classified as high, low or unclear risk of bias.

Data extraction
A standard data extraction form will be adapted and used for data extraction (Appendix 3). Two reviewers will extract data independently from the included studies for the following information: study design, characteristics of the population (age, sex, and male percentage), sample size, intervention details, duration of follow-up, outcome measurements, The missing data in the literature will be obtained by emailing the corresponding author; otherwise, it will be estimated by the appropriate method according to the Cochrane Handbook 5.1.0. 13

Statistical analysis
The primary outcome of this study is to compute the pooled RR of PD among beta-agonist and/or antagonist users, separately. A generic inverse variance method will be applied to compute the overall RR of PD among beta-agonist and antagonist users. Considering the incidence of PD to be rare or low, the risk ratio, OR, and HR will be considered an equivalent measure of risk; therefore, we will use RR representing all of these measures for simplicity. 14 Heterogeneity among the included studies will be assessed using Cochrane chisquared and I 2 tests. Cochrane chi-squared value (p< 0.10) and I 2 value ≥50% may represent considerable heterogeneity. 15 Based on the heterogeneity assessment, a random-effect or fixed-effect model will be chosen. If considerable heterogeneity observed, then the analysis will be performed using a random-effect model. Subgroup analysis will be performed based on study design, types of beta-agonist or antagonist exposure, and duration of exposure. Sensitivity analysis will be carried out by omitting a single study one by one (leave-one-out method) from the pooled analysis, and the risk of bias on the outcome will also be explored using the sensitivity analysis accordingly to the high, medium, or low risk. 16 Publication bias will be detected based on the visual inspection of the funnel plot, and the trim-and-fill method will be used to estimate the effect of publication bias (if any). Meta-analysis will be performed using Review Manager version 5.

Certainty of Evidence
The potential for publication bias will be assessed using a funnel plot construction if there are 10 or more studies. The y-axis will be the study population size, and the x-axis will be the measure of effect for that property. If a meta-analysis is conducted, the potential for small-study effects will be evaluated by comparing the fixed-effects model to the random-effects model. If the effects are similar, then small study effects are unlikely. If the random-effects model is more beneficial, then we will consider the potential for the results to be different in the smaller studies. As per COSMIN guidelines for systematic reviews, the quality of evidence will be assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) using the five domains: risk of bias, consistency, directness, precision, and publication bias. 17 Reviewers assessing the certainty of evidence will refer to the COSMIN handbook to ensure proper utilization of the tool for systematic reviews of exposures. The overall certainty of evidence will be considered high (a lot of confidence that the true effect is similar to the estimated effect), moderate (the true effect is probably close to . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 26, 2021. Other relevant data . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)

Systematic review
Fields that have an asterisk (*) next to them means that they must be answered. Word limits are provided for each section. You will be unable to submit the form if the word limits are exceeded for any section. Registrant means the person filling out the form.
1. * Review title. For reviews in languages other than English, give the title in the original language. This will be displayed with the English language title.

* Anticipated or actual start date.
Give the date the systematic review started or is expected to start. Tick the boxes to show which review tasks have been started and which have been completed. Update this field each time any amendments are made to a published record.

Reviews that have started data extraction (at the time of initial submission) are not eligible for inclusion in PROSPERO.
If there is later evidence that incorrect status and/or completion date has been supplied, the published PROSPERO record will be marked as retracted.
This field uses answers to initial screening questions. It cannot be edited until after registration.

The review has not yet started: No
Page: 1 / 12 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) 6. * Named contact.
The named contact is the guarantor for the accuracy of the information in the register record. This may be any member of the review team.
Give the electronic email address of the named contact. ambrish.singh@utas.edu.au

Named contact address
Give the full institutional/organisational postal address for the named contact.
Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia 9. Named contact phone number.
Give the telephone number for the named contact, including international dialling code.

Collaborators.
Give the name and affiliation of any individuals or organisations who are working on the review but who are not listed as review team members. NOTE: email and country must be completed for each person, unless you are amending a published record.

* Review question.
State the review question(s) clearly and precisely. It may be appropriate to break very broad questions down into a series of related more specific questions. Questions may be framed or refined using PI(E)COS or similar where relevant.

Do beta-adrenoceptor agonists use associated with the risk of Parkinson's disease (PD)?
Do beta-adrenoceptor antagonists use associated with the risk of PD?
Is there any association between the duration of beta-adrenoceptors (agonists and antagonists separately) exposure and the risk of PD?
What is the association between beta-adrenoceptors (agonists and antagonists separately) use and the risk of PD based on the type of beta-agonist or antagonist exposure? Page: 3 / 12 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) State the sources that will be searched (e.g. Medline). Give the search dates, and any restrictions (e.g. language or publication date). Do NOT enter the full search strategy (it may be provided as a link or attachment below.) A three-step search strategy will be utilized to locate both published and unpublished studies. An initial limited search will be undertaken in MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid), using keywords and index terms related to Parkinson's disease, ?2 adrenergic receptor agonists, ?2 adrenergic receptor antagonists, risk factors or incidence. An analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract and the index terms used to describe the articles will follow. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms will be conducted across all included databases. Thirdly, the reference lists of all studies that will meet the inclusion criteria will be checked="checked" value="1" for additional records.
Abstract booklet from conference proceedings and poster sessions, from last two years, will be hand

URL to search strategy.
Upload a file with your search strategy, or an example of a search strategy for a specific database, (including the keywords) in pdf or word format. In doing so you are consenting to the file being made publicly accessible. Or provide a URL or link to the strategy. Do NOT provide links to your search results.
Alternatively, upload your search strategy to CRD in pdf format. Please note that by doing so you are consenting to the file being made publicly accessible.
Do not make this file publicly available until the review is complete 18. * Condition or domain being studied.
Give a short description of the disease, condition or healthcare domain being studied in your systematic review.
Parkinson's disease is a neurodegenerative disorder that leads to progressive deterioration of motor function due to loss of dopaminergic neurons. PD is characterized by the cardinal features of rest tremor, bradykinesia, rigidity, postural instability, and a variety of other motor and non-motor symptoms. Globally, an Page: 4 / 12 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 26, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.19.21257436 doi: medRxiv preprint PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews estimated 9.4 million people live with PD. With an aging population, the prevalence and incidence of PD are expected to increase by 30% by 2030, contributing to a significant humanistic and economic burden globally.

* Participants/population.
Specify the participants or populations being studied in the review. The preferred format includes details of both inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Patients of any age and receiving beta-agonist or antagonist and have confirmed diagnosis of PD. 20. * Intervention(s), exposure(s).
Give full and clear descriptions or definitions of the interventions or the exposures to be reviewed. The preferred format includes details of both inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Where relevant, give details of the alternatives against which the intervention/exposure will be compared (e.g. another intervention or a non-exposed control group). The preferred format includes details of both inclusion and exclusion criteria.
All the studies assessing the risk of PD in beta-agonist and/or antagonist users compared to non-users or any other active drug users.
22. * Types of study to be included.
Give details of the study designs (e.g. RCT) that are eligible for inclusion in the review. The preferred format includes both inclusion and exclusion criteria. If there are no restrictions on the types of study, this should be stated.
Epidemiological studies such as retrospective studies, prospective studies, cohort studies, case-control studies will be included in this meta-analysis.
Studies reporting reviews, case series, case reports, genetic studies, animal studies, commentary, editorial, or study protocol will be excluded.

Context.
Give summary details of the setting or other relevant characteristics, which help define the inclusion or exclusion criteria.
They assess the association between beta-adrenoceptors (agonists and antagonists separately) use and risk of PD.

* Main outcome(s).
Give the pre-specified main (most important) outcomes of the review, including details of how the outcome is defined and measured and when these measurement are made, if these are part of the review inclusion Page: 5 / 12 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) Our primary outcome is to compute the pooled risk of PD among beta-agonist and/or antagonist users.
Studies reporting the risk ratio (RR), odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) or the absolute numbers to estimate these measures will be of interest. Studies that qualify all other inclusion criteria and assessed any of these outcomes but did not report the data or reported the data in a format not suitable for quantitative synthesis, we will include such studies in the review and present relevant information in the narrative form

Measures of effect
Please specify the effect measure(s) for you main outcome(s) e.g. relative risks, odds ratios, risk difference, and/or 'number needed to treat.

* Additional outcome(s).
List the pre-specified additional outcomes of the review, with a similar level of detail to that required for main outcomes. Where there are no additional outcomes please state 'None' or 'Not applicable' as appropriate to the review Not applicable

Measures of effect
Please specify the effect measure(s) for you additional outcome(s) e.g. relative risks, odds ratios, risk difference, and/or 'number needed to treat.

* Data extraction (selection and coding).
Describe how studies will be selected for inclusion. State what data will be extracted or obtained. State how this will be done and recorded.
A standard data extraction form will be adapted and used for data extraction (Appendix 3). Two reviewers will extract data independently from the included studies for the following information: study design, characteristics of the population (age, sex, and male percentage), sample size, intervention details, duration of follow-up, outcome measurements, The missing data in the literature will be obtained by emailing the corresponding author; otherwise, it will be estimated by the appropriate method according to the Cochrane Handbook 5.1.0 27. * Risk of bias (quality) assessment.
State which characteristics of the studies will be assessed and/or any formal risk of bias/quality assessment tools that will be used.
The methodological quality of the selected studies will be evaluated using the Jonna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool. A Risk-of-Bias form was adapted and will be used for data extraction. Each article will be evaluated independently by two researchers using the JBI tool. Depending on the response, each domain of the tool will be classified as high, low or unclear risk of bias.
Describe the methods you plan to use to synthesise data. This must not be generic text but should be specific to your review and describe how the proposed approach will be applied to your data. If metaanalysis is planned, describe the models to be used, methods to explore statistical heterogeneity, and Page: 6 / 12 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 26, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.19.21257436 doi: medRxiv preprint PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews software package to be used.
The primary outcome of this study is to compute the pooled relative risk (RR) of PD among beta-agonist and/or antagonist users, separately. A generic inverse variance method will be applied to compute the overall RR of PD among beta-agonist and antagonist users. Considering the incidence of PD to be rare or low, the risk ratio, OR, and HR will be considered an equivalent measure of risk; therefore, we will use RR representing all of these measures for simplicity.14 Heterogeneity among the included studies will be assessed using Cochrane ?² and I² tests. Cochrane ?² value (p 0.10) and I² value ?50% may represent considerable heterogeneity.15 Based on the heterogeneity assessment, a random-effect or fixed-effect model will be chosen. If considerable heterogeneity observed, then the analysis will be performed using a random-effect model. Subgroup analysis will be performed based on study design, types of beta-agonist or antagonist exposure, and duration of exposure. Sensitivity analysis will be carried out by omitting a single study one by one (leave-one-out method) from the pooled analysis, and the risk of bias on the outcome will also be explored using the sensitivity analysis accordingly to the high, medium, or low risk.16 Publication bias will be detected based on the visual inspection of the funnel plot, and the trim-and-fill method will be used to estimate the effect of publication bias (if any). Meta-analysis will be performed using Review 29. * Analysis of subgroups or subsets.
State any planned investigation of 'subgroups'. Be clear and specific about which type of study or participant will be included in each group or covariate investigated. State the planned analytic approach. Subgroup analysis will be performed based on study design, types of beta-agonist or antagonist exposure, and duration of exposure. 30. * Type and method of review.
Select the type of review, review method and health area from the lists below. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)