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Parkinson's disease with dementia (Aarsland 2002a; Dubois 2007; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005), of which Dubois 2007 remains unpublished.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.

Impact of cholinesterase inhibitors on behavioral and psychological symptoms of Alzheimer's disease:a meta-analysis

Objective: To determine the efficacy of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) in improving the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Data sources: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Registry, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from 1966 to 2007. We limited our search to English Language, full text, published articles and human studies. Data extraction: We included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of donepezil, rivastigmine, or galantamine in managing BPSD displayed by AD patients. Using the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines, we critically appraised all studies and included only those with an attrition rate of less than 40%, concealed measurement of the outcomes, and intention to treat analysis of the collected data. All data were imputed into pre-defined evidence based tables and were pooled using the Review Manager 4.2.1 software for data synthesis. Results: We found 12 studies that met our inclusion criteria but only nine of them provided sufficient data for the meta-analysis. Among patients with mild to severe AD and in comparison to placebo, ChEIs as a class had a beneficial effects on reducing BPSD with a standard mean difference (SMD) of -0.10 (95% confidence interval [CI]; -0.18, -0.01) and a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -1.38 neuropsychiatry inventory point (95% CI; -2.30, -0.46). In studies with mild AD patients, the WMD was -1.92 (95% CI; -3.18, -0.66); and in studies with severe AD patients, the WMD was -0.06 (95% CI; -2.12, +0.57). Conclusion: Cholinesterase inhibitors lead to a statistical significant reduction in BPSD among patients with AD, yet the clinical relevance of this effect remains unclear.

A review of studies describing the use of acetyl cholinesterase inhibitors in Parkinson's disease dementia

Objective:  To review the literature relating to the use of acetyl cholinesterase inhibitors in Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD). Method:  MEDLINE (1966 – December 2004), PsychINFO (1972 – December 2004), EMBASE (1980 – December 2004), CINHAL (1982 – December 2004), and the Cochrane Collaboration were searched in December 2004. Results:  Three controlled trials and seven open studies were identified. Efficacy was assessed in three key domains: cognitive, neuropsychiatric and parkinsonian symptoms. Conclusion:  Cholinesterase inhibitors have a moderate effect against cognitive symptoms. There is no clear evidence of a noticeable clinical effect against neuropsychiatric symptoms. Tolerability including exacerbation of motor symptoms – in particular tremor – may limit the utility of cholinesterase inhibitors.

Cholinesterase inhibitors for Parkinson's disease dementia

Background - The loss of cholinergic, dopaminergic and noradrenergic innervations seen in Parkinson's Disease Dementia (PDD) suggest a potential role for cholinesterase inhibitors. Concerns have been expressed about a theoretical worsening of Parkinson's disease related symptoms, particularly movement symptoms. Objectives - To assess the efficacy, safety, tolerability and health economic data relating to the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in PDD. Search methods - The trials were identified from the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 19 April 2005 using the search term parkinson*. This register contains records from major health care databases and many ongoing trial databases and is updated regularly. Comprehensive searches of abstracts from major scientific meetings were performed. Pharmaceutical companies were approached for information regarding additional and ongoing studies. Selection criteria - Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies assessing the effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors in PDD. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were stated to limit bias. Data collection and analysis - Two reviewers (IM, CF) independently reviewed the quality of the studies utilizing criteria from the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. Medications were examined separately and as a group. The outcome measures assessed were in the following domains: neuropsychiatric features, cognition, global impression, daily living activities, quality of life, burden on caregiver, Parkinsonian related symptoms, treatment acceptability as determined by withdrawal from trials, safety as determined by the frequency of adverse events, institutionalisation, death and health economic factors. Main results - A detailed and systematic search of relevant databases identified one published randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (Emre 2004) involving 541 patients that compared rivastigmine with placebo. Rivastigmine produced statistically significant improvements in several outcome measures. On the primary cognitive measure, the ADAS-Cog, rivastigmine was associated with a 2.80 point ADAS-Cog improvement [WMD -2.80, 95% Cl -4.26 to -1.34, P = 0.0002] and a 2.50 point ADCS-ADL improvement [95% Cl 0.43 to 4.57, P = 0.02] relative to placebo. Clinically meaningful (moderate or marked) improvement occurred in 5.3% more patients on rivastigmine, and meaningful worsening occurred in 10.1% more patients on placebo. Tolerability appeared to be a significant issue. Significantly more patients on rivastigmine dropped out of the study due to adverse events [62/362 versus 14/179, OR 2.44, 95% Cl 1.32 to 4.48, P = 0.004]. Nausea [20/179 versus 105/362, OR 3.25, 95% Cl 1.94 to 5.45, P < 0.00001], tremor [7/179 versus 37/362, OR 2.80, 95% Cl 1.22 to 6.41, P = 0.01] and in particular vomiting [3/179 versus 60/362, OR 11.66, 95% Cl 3.60 to 37.72, P < 0.0001] were significantly more common with rivastigmine. However, significantly fewer patients died on rivastigmine than placebo [4/362 versus 7/179, OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.95, P = 0.04] Authors' conclusions - Rivastigmine appears to improve cognition and activities of daily living in patients with PDD. This results in clinically meaningful benefit in about 15% of cases. There is a need for more studies utilising pragmatic measures such as time to residential care facility and both patient and carer quality of life assessments. Future trials should involve other cholinesterase inhibitors, utilise tools to analyse the data that limit any bias and measure health economic factors. It is unlikely that relying solely on the last observation carried forward (LOCF) is sufficient. Publication of the observed case data in the largest trial would assist (Emre 2004). Adverse events were associated with the cholinergic activity of rivastigmine, but may limit patient acceptability as evidenced by the high drop out rate in the active arm.

Memantine combined with an acetyl cholinesterase inhibitor:hope for the future?

Background:Memantine and cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI) have distinct pharmacological actions, and interest in the use of combination therapy for Alzheimer's disease (AD) is increasing. Objective: To assess the available data on the use of memantine–ChEI combination and to develop evidence-based recommendations.Method: A systematic literature review with detailed discussion of the current evidence base. Results: Available data are limited: five studies of which two were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. One study indicated that memantine–ChEI combination is not significantly more effective than placebo–ChEI in mild to moderate AD, but data were published in abstract and poster form only. A second study indicated that the memantine–ChEI combination is significantly more effective than placebo–ChEI in moderate to severe AD. The calculated effect sizes of 0.36 on cognition and 0.12 on function, which were the primary outcomes, were small, indicating a clinically minimal effect on cognition and no effect on function. No data are available on whether combination treatment is more effective than memantine monotherapy. Conclusion: The available data do not justify the use of combination therapy. Future studies should include three arms (memantine–placebo, placebo–ChEI, and memantine–ChEI), be of an adequate size and duration, and use pragmatic measures. Clinicians should have full access to data from any future trials.

The impact of anticholinergic burden in Alzheimer's dementia-the LASER-AD study

Objective - to examine the effect of medications with anticholinergic effects on cognitive impairment and deterioration in Alzheimer's dementia (AD). Methods - cognitive function was measured at baseline and at 6- and 18-month follow-up using the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) and the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Battery, Cognitive subsection (ADAS-COG) in a cohort study of 224 participants with AD. Baseline anticholinergic Burden score (ABS) was measured using the Anticholinergic Burden scale and included all prescribed and over the counter medication. Results - the sample was 224 patients with Alzheimer's dementia and 71.4% were women. Their mean age was 81.0 years [SD 7.4 (range 55–98)]. The mean number of medications taken was 3.6 (SD 2.4) and the mean anticholinergic load was 1.1 (SD 1.4, range 0–7). The total number of drugs taken and anticholinergic load correlated (rho = 0.44; P < 0.01). There were no differences in MMSE and other cognitive functioning at either 6 or 18 months after adjusting for baseline cognitive function, age, gender and use of cholinesterase inhibitors between those with, and those without high anticholinergenic load. Conclusions - medications with anticholinergic effect in patients with AD were not found to effect deterioration in cognition over the subsequent 18 months. Our study did not support a continuing effect of these medications on people with AD who are established on them.

The neurotoxicity of acrylamide

The experiments described in this thesis compared conventional methods of screening for neurotoxins with potential electrophysiological and pharmacological tests in an attempt to improve the sensitivity of detection of progressive distal neuropathy. Adult male albino mice were dosed orally with the neurotoxicant acylamide and subjected to a test of limb strength and co-ordination and a functional observational battery. These methods established a no observable effect level of 10 mg/kg. A dose of 200 mg/kg resulted in abnormalities of gait and reduced limb strength and/or co-ordination. Analysis of the in vitro 'jitter' of the latency of trains of action potentials evoked at a frequency of 30 Hz in the mouse phrenic nerve/hemidiaphragm preparation showed this technique to be unsuitable for detection of the early phases of acrylamide induced peripheral neuropathy (l00 mg/kg). The evoked and spontaneous twitch responses of the hemidiaphragm preparation following in vitro exposure to the organophosphorous anticholinesterase compound ecothiopate were altered by in vivo pre treatment with acrylamide. Acrylamide caused an increase in the time course of the potentiation of stimulated twitches and a decrease in the maximum potentiation. Spontaneous twitches were reduced in amplitude and frequency. These effects occurred at an acrylamide dose level insufficient to cause clinical signs of neuropathy. Investigations into the mechanisms underlying these observations yielded the following observations. Analysis of miniature endplate potentials at this dose level indicated prolongation of the life of acetylcholine in the synaptic cleft but the implied decrease in cholinesterase activity could not be demonstrated biochemically or histologically. The electrical excitability of the nerve terminal region of phrenic motor nerves was reduced following acrylamide although a possible compromise of antidromic action potential conduction could not be confirmed. There was no histopathological evidence of neuropathy at this dose level. Further exploration of this phenomenon is desirable in order to ascertain whether the effect is specific to acrylamide and/or ecothiopate and to elucidate the mechanisms behind these novel observations.