Efficacy of memantine on behavioral and psychological symptoms related to dementia:a systematic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The behavioral and psychological symptoms related to dementia (BPSD) are difficult to manage and are associated with adverse patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To systematically analyze the data on memantine in the treatment of BPSD. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pharm-line, the Cochrane Centre Collaboration, www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.controlled-trials.com, and PsycINFO (1966-July 2007). We contacted manufacturers and scrutinized the reference sections of articles identified in our search for further references, including conference proceedings. Two researchers (IM and CF) independently reviewed all studies identified by the search strategy. We included 6 randomized, parallel-group, double-blind studies that rated BPSD with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) in our meta-analysis. Patients had probable Alzheimer's disease and received treatment with memantine for at least one month. Overall efficacy of memantine on the NPI was established with a t-test for the average difference between means across studies, using a random effects model. RESULTS: Five of the 6 studies identified had NPI outcome data. In these 5 studies, 868 patients were treated with memantine and 882 patients were treated with placebo. Patients on memantine improved by 1.99 on the NPI scale (95% Cl -0.08 to -3.91; p = 0.041) compared with the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Initial data appear to indicate that memantine decreases NPI scores and may have a role in managing BPSD. However, there are a number of limitations with the current data; the effect size was relatively small, and whether memantine produces significant clinical benefit is not clear.

Cholinesterase inhibitors for dementia with Lewy bodies, Parkinson's disease dementia and cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease

Background - Previous Cochrane reviews have considered the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in both Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). The clinical features of DLB and PDD have much in common and are distinguished primarily on the basis of whether or not parkinsonism precedes dementia by more than a year. Patients with both conditions have particularly severe deficits in cortical levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Therefore, blocking its breakdown using cholinesterase inhibitors may lead to clinical improvement. Objectives - To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of cholinesterase inhibitors in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease with dementia (PDD), and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease falling short of dementia (CIND-PD) (considered as separate phenomena and also grouped together as Lewy body disease). Search methods - The trials were identified from a search of ALOIS, the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (on 30 August 2011) using the search terms Lewy, Parkinson, PDD, DLB, LBD. This register consists of records from major healthcare databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL) and many ongoing trial databases and is updated regularly. Reference lists of relevant studies were searched for additional trials. Selection criteria - Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy of treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors in DLB, PDD and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease (CIND-PD). Data collection and analysis - Data were extracted from published reports by one review author (MR). The data for each 'condition' (that is DLB, PDD or CIND-PD) were considered separately and, where possible, also pooled together. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager version 5.0. Main results - Six trials met the inclusion criteria for this review, in which a total of 1236 participants were randomised. Four of the trials were of a parallel group design and two cross-over trials were included. Four of the trials included participants with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease with dementia (Aarsland 2002a; Dubois 2007; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005), of which Dubois 2007 remains unpublished. Leroi 2004 included patients with cognitive impairment and Parkinson's disease (both with and without dementia). Patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) were included in only one of the trials (McKeith 2000). For global assessment, three trials comparing cholinesterase inhibitor treatment to placebo in PDD (Aarsland 2002a; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005) reported a difference in the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) score of -0.38, favouring the cholinesterase inhibitors (95% CI -0.56 to -0.24, P < 0.0001). For cognitive function, a pooled estimate of the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on cognitive function measures was consistent with the presence of a therapeutic benefit (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.34, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.23, P < 0.00001). There was evidence of a positive effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in patients with PDD (WMD 1.09, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.73, P = 0.0008) and in the single PDD and CIND-PD trial (WMD 1.05, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.68, P = 0.01) but not in the single DLB trial. For behavioural disturbance, analysis of the pooled continuous data relating to behavioural disturbance rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.04, P = 0.01). For activities of daily living, combined data for the ADCS and the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) activities of daily living rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.02, P = 0.03). For safety and tolerability, those taking a cholinesterase inhibitor were more likely to experience an adverse event (318/452 versus 668/842; odds ratio (OR) 1.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.15, P = 0.0003) and to drop out (128/465 versus 45/279; OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.84, P = 0.0006). Adverse events were more common amongst those taking rivastigmine (357/421 versus 173/240; OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.38, P < 0.0001) but not those taking donepezil (311/421 versus 145/212; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.80, P = 0.25). Parkinsonian symptoms in particular tremor (64/739 versus 12/352; OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.44 to 5.09, P = 0.002), but not falls (P = 0.39), were reported more commonly in the treatment group but this did not have a significant impact on the UPDRS (total and motor) scores (P = 0.71). Fewer deaths occurred in the treatment group than in the placebo group (4/465 versus 9/279; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.84, P = 0.03). Authors' conclusions - The currently available evidence supports the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in patients with PDD, with a positive impact on global assessment, cognitive function, behavioural disturbance and activities of daily living rating scales. The effect in DLB remains unclear. There is no current disaggregated evidence to support their use in CIND-PD.

Dapagliflozin add-on to metformin in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin:a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 102-week trial

Background: Management of type 2 diabetes with metformin often does not provide adequate glycemic control, thereby necessitating add-on treatment. In a 24-week clinical trial, dapagliflozin, an investigational sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, improved glycemic control in patients inadequately controlled with metformin. The present study is an extension that was undertaken to evaluate dapagliflozin as long-term therapy in this population.Methods: This was a long-term extension (total 102 weeks) of a 24-week phase 3, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to blinded daily treatment (placebo, or dapagliflozin 2.5 to 5, or 10 mg) plus open-label metformin (=1,500 mg). The previously published primary endpoint was change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at 24 weeks. This paper reports the follow-up to week 102, with analysis of covariance model performed at 24 weeks with last observation carried forward; a repeated measures analysis was utilized to evaluate changes from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and weight.Results: A total of 546 patients were randomized to 1 of the 4 treatments. The completion rate for the 78-week double-blind extension period was lower for the placebo group (63.5%) than for the dapagliflozin groups (68.3% to 79.8%). At week 102, mean changes from baseline HbA1c (8.06%) were +0.02% for placebo compared with -0.48% (P = 0.0008), -0.58% (P

The efficacy and safety of imeglimin as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with sitagliptin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE: This 12-week study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of imeglimin as add-on therapy to the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with sitagliptin monotherapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, imeglimin (1,500 mg b.i.d.) or placebo was added to sitagliptin (100 mg q.d.) over 12weeks in 170 patientswith type 2 diabetes (mean age 56.8 years; BMI 32.2 kg/m2) that was inadequately controlled with sitagliptin alone (A1C ≥7.5%) during a 12-week run-in period. The primary ef ficacy end point was the change in A1C from baseline versus placebo; secondary end points included corresponding changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, strati fication by baseline A1C, and percentage of A1C responders. RESULTS: Imeglimin reduced A1C levels (least-squares mean difference) from baseline (8.5%) by 0.60% compared with an increase of 0.12% with placebo (between-group difference 0.72%, P < 0.001). The corresponding changes in FPG were -0.93 mmol/L with imeglimin vs. -0.11 mmol/L with placebo (P = 0.014). With imeglimin, the A1C level decreased by ≥0.5% in 54.3% of subjects vs. 21.6% with placebo (P < 0.001), and 19.8%of subjects receiving imeglimin achieved a decrease in A1C level of ≤7% compared with subjects receiving placebo (1.1%) (P = 0.004). Imeglimin was generally well tolerated, with a safety pro file comparable to placebo and no related treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Imeglimin demonstrated incremental efficacy benefits as add-on therapy to sitagliptin, with comparable tolerability to placebo, highlighting the potential for imeglimin to complement other oral antihyperglycemic therapies. © 2014 by the American Diabetes Association.

Differential control of two forms of glutamate release by group III metabotropic glutamate receptors at rat entorhinal synapses

Neurotransmitter release at CNS synapses occurs via both action potential-dependent and independent mechanisms, and it has generally been accepted that these two forms of release are regulated in parallel. We examined the effects of activation of group III metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) on stimulus-evoked and spontaneous glutamate release onto entorhinal cortical neurones in rats, and found a differential regulation of action potential-dependent and independent forms of release. Activation of presynaptic mGluRs depressed the amplitude of stimulus-evoked excitatory postsynaptic currents, but concurrently enhanced the frequency of spontaneous excitatory currents. Moreover, these differential effects on glutamate release were mediated by pharmacologically separable mechanisms. Application of the specific activator of adenylyl cyclase, forskolin, mimicked the effect of mGluR activation on spontaneous, but not evoked release, and inhibition of adenylyl cyclase with 9-tetrahydro-2-furanyl)-9H-purin-6-amine (SQ22536) blocked mGluR-mediated enhancement of spontaneous release, but not depression of evoked release. Occlusion studies with calcium channel blockers suggested that the group III mGluRs might depress evoked release through inhibition of both N and P/Q, but not R-type calcium channels. We suggest that the concurrent depression of action potential-evoked, and enhancement of action potential-independent glutamate release operate through discrete second messenger/effector systems at excitatory entorhinal terminals in rat brain. © 2007 IBRO.