Trial of Solanezumab for Mild Dementia Due to Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is characterized by amyloid-beta (Aß) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. The humanized monoclonal antibody solanezumab was designed to increase the clearance from the brain of soluble Aß, peptides that may lead to toxic effects in the synapses and precede the deposition of fibrillary amyloid. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial involving patients with mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, defined as a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of 20 to 26 (on a scale from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognition) and with amyloid deposition shown by means of florbetapir positron-emission tomography or Aß1-42 measurements in cerebrospinal fluid. Patients were randomly assigned to receive solanezumab at a dose of 400 mg or placebo intravenously every 4 weeks for 76 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to week 80 in the score on the 14-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog14; scores range from 0 to 90, with higher scores indicating greater cognitive impairment). RESULTS: A total of 2129 patients were enrolled, of whom 1057 were assigned to receive solanezumab and 1072 to receive placebo. The mean change from baseline in the ADAS-cog14 score was 6.65 in the solanezumab group and 7.44 in the placebo group, with no significant between-group difference at week 80 (difference, -0.80; 95% confidence interval, -1.73 to 0.14; P=0.10). As a result of the failure to reach significance with regard to the primary outcome in the prespecified hierarchical analysis, the secondary outcomes were considered to be descriptive and are reported without significance testing. The change from baseline in the MMSE score was -3.17 in the solanezumab group and -3.66 in the placebo group. Adverse cerebral edema or effusion lesions that were observed on magnetic resonance imaging after randomization occurred in 1 patient in the solanezumab group and in 2 in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Solanezumab at a dose of 400 mg administered every 4 weeks in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease did not significantly affect cognitive decline. (Funded by Eli Lilly; EXPEDITION3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01900665 .).

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension in people without prior cerebrovascular disease for the prevention of cognitive impairment and dementia.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006 (McGuinness 2006), and previously updated in 2009 (McGuinness 2009). Hypertension is a risk factor for dementia. Observational studies suggest antihypertensive treatment is associated with lower incidences of cognitive impairment and dementia. There is already clear evidence to support the treatment of hypertension after stroke. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether pharmacological treatment of hypertension can prevent cognitive impairment or dementia in people who have no history of cerebrovascular disease. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, as well as many trials registries and grey literature sources, most recently on 7 July 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which pharmacological interventions to treat hypertension were given for at least 12 months. We excluded trials of pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure in non-hypertensive participants. We also excluded trials conducted solely in people with stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information regarding incidence of dementia, cognitive decline, change in blood pressure, adverse effects and quality of life. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 studies, totaling 30,412 participants, in this review. Eight studies compared active treatment with placebo. Of the four non-placebo-controlled studies, two compared intensive versus standard blood pressure reduction. The two final included studies compared different classes of antihypertensive drug. Study durations varied from one to five years. The combined result of four placebo-controlled trials that reported incident dementia indicated no evidence of a difference in the risk of dementia between the antihypertensive treatment group and the placebo group (236/7767 versus 259/7660, odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.09; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to study limitations and indirectness). The combined results from five placebo-controlled trials that reported change in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) may indicate a modest benefit from antihypertensive treatment (mean difference (MD) 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to study limitations, indirectness and imprecision). The certainty of evidence for both cognitive outcomes was downgraded on the basis of study limitations and indirectness. Study durations were too short, overall, to expect a significant difference in dementia rates between groups. Dementia and cognitive decline were secondary outcomes for most studies. Additional sources of bias include: the use of antihypertensive medication by the placebo group in the placebo-controlled trials; failure to reach recruitment targets; and early termination of studies on safety grounds. Meta-analysis of the placebo-controlled trials reporting results found a mean change in systolic blood pressure of -9.25 mmHg (95% CI -9.73, -8.78) between treatment (n = 8973) and placebo (n = 8820) groups, and a mean change in diastolic blood pressure of -2.47 mmHg (95% CI -2.70, -2.24) between treatment (n = 7700) and placebo (n = 7509) groups (both low certainty evidence downgraded on the basis of study limitations and inconsistency). Three trials - SHEP 1991, LOMIR MCT IL 1996 and MRC 1996 - reported more withdrawals due to adverse events in active treatment groups than placebo groups. Participants on active treatment in Syst Eur 1998 were less likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects, and participants on active treatment in HYVET 2008 reported fewer 'serious adverse events' than in the placebo group. There was no evidence of a difference in withdrawals rates between groups in SCOPE 2003, and results were unclear for Perez Stable 2000 and Zhang 2018. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Five of the placebo-controlled trials provided quality of life (QOL) data. Heterogeneity again precluded meta-analysis. SHEP 1991, Syst Eur 1998 and HYVET 2008 reported no evidence of a difference in QOL measures between active treatment and placebo groups over time. The SCOPE 2003 sub-study (Degl'Innocenti 2004) showed a smaller drop in QOL measures in the active treatment compared to the placebo group. LOMIR MCT IL 1996 reported an improvement in a QOL measure at twelve months in one active treatment group and deterioration in another. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: High certainty randomised controlled trial evidence regarding the effect of hypertension treatment on dementia and cognitive decline does not yet exist. The studies included in this review provide low certainty evidence (downgraded primarily due to study limitations and indirectness) that pharmacological treatment of hypertension, in people without prior cerebrovascular disease, leads to less cognitive decline compared to controls. This difference is below the level considered clinically significant. The studies included in this review also provide very low certainty evidence that pharmacological treatment of hypertension, in people without prior cerebrovascular disease, prevents dementia.

Statins for the prevention of dementia.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001 and then updated in 2009. Vascular risk factors including high cholesterol levels increase the risk of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease and of vascular dementia. Some observational studies have suggested an association between statin use and lowered incidence of dementia. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of statins for the prevention of dementia in people at risk of dementia due to their age and to determine whether the efficacy and safety of statins for this purpose depends on cholesterol level, apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype or cognitive level. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) Portal on 11 November 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials in which statins were administered for at least 12 months to people at risk of dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included two trials with 26,340 participants aged 40 to 82 years of whom 11,610 were aged 70 or older. All participants had a history of, or risk factors for, vascular disease. The studies used different statins (simvastatin and pravastatin). Mean follow-up was 3.2 years in one study and five years in one study. The risk of bias was low. Only one study reported on the incidence of dementia (20,536 participants, 31 cases in each group; odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.65, moderate quality evidence, downgraded due to imprecision). Both studies assessed cognitive function, but at different times using different scales, so we judged the results unsuitable for a meta-analysis. There were no differences between statin and placebo groups on five different cognitive tests (high quality evidence). Rates of treatment discontinuation due to non-fatal adverse events were less than 5% in both studies and there was no difference between statin and placebo groups in the risk of withdrawal due to adverse events (26,340 participants, 2 studies, OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.05). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is good evidence that statins given in late life to people at risk of vascular disease do not prevent cognitive decline or dementia. Biologically, it seems feasible that statins could prevent dementia due to their role in cholesterol reduction and initial evidence from observational studies was very promising. However, indication bias may have been a factor in these studies and the evidence from subsequent RCTs has been negative. There were limitations in the included studies involving the cognitive assessments used and the inclusion of participants at moderate to high vascular risk only.

Incidence of stroke and seizure in Alzheimer's disease dementia.

BACKGROUND: the objective of the study was to estimate and compare the incidence rates of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke and seizure among cohorts with and without Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. METHODS: we conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic medical records (EMRs) from primary care practices that participated in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) in the United Kingdom from 1 January 1990 to 31 July 2009. For each AD-dementia patient, we selected one general population control patient without AD-dementia matched to one AD-dementia patient on year of birth, sex and physician practice. FINDINGS: the AD-dementia cohorts were 68% female and averaged 80 years of age at the start of follow-up. Populations for analysis included 19,902 AD-dementia and matched non-AD-dementia patients with no history of stroke at baseline in which 790 incident cases of stroke occurred, and similarly, 22,084 AD-dementia and matched patients with no history of seizure at baseline in which 286 cases of seizure occurred. After adjusting for risk factors for each outcome, hazard ratios comparing AD-dementia with non-AD-dementia patients indicated higher rates among AD-dementia patients for stroke (HR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.11, 1.50) and seizure (HR = 5.31, 95% CI 3.97, 7.10). For stroke and seizure, the incidence rate ratios comparing AD-dementia patients with non-AD-dementia controls were greatest for the younger age groups. AD-dementia was observed to be a risk factor for both haemorrhagic stroke and seizures. Increasing age was associated with a decrease in relative risk and an increase in absolute risk.

The use of biomarkers for the etiologic diagnosis of MCI in Europe: an EADC survey.

We investigated the use of Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers in European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium centers and assessed their perceived usefulness for the etiologic diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We surveyed availability, frequency of use, and confidence in diagnostic usefulness of markers of brain amyloidosis (amyloid positron emission tomography [PET], cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] Aß42) and neurodegeneration (medial temporal atrophy [MTA] on MR, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography [FDG-PET], CSF tau). The most frequently used biomarker is visually rated MTA (75% of the 37 responders reported using it "always/frequently") followed by CSF markers (22%), FDG-PET (16%), and amyloid-PET (3%). Only 45% of responders perceive MTA as contributing to diagnostic confidence, where the contribution was rated as "moderate". Seventy-nine percent of responders felt "very/extremely" comfortable delivering a diagnosis of MCI due to AD when both amyloid and neuronal injury biomarkers were abnormal (P < .02 versus any individual biomarker). Responders largely agreed that a combination of amyloidosis and neuronal injury biomarkers was a strongly indicative AD signature.

Statins for the treatment of dementia.

BACKGROUND: The use of statin therapy in established Alzheimer's disease (AD) or vascular dementia (VaD) is a relatively unexplored area. In AD, ß-amyloid protein (Aß) is deposited in the form of extracellular plaques and previous studies have determined Aß generation is cholesterol dependent. Hypercholesterolaemia has also been implicated in the pathogenesis of VaD. Due to the role of statins in cholesterol reduction, it is biologically plausible they may be efficacious in the treatment of AD and VaD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of statins in the treatment of AD and VaD. To evaluate if the efficacy of statins in the treatment of AD and VaD depends on cholesterol level, ApoE genotype or cognitive level. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS, as well as many trials registries and grey literature sources (20 January 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: Double-blind, randomised controlled trials of statins given for at least six months in people with a diagnosis of dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent authors extracted and assessed data against the inclusion criteria. We pooled data where appropriate and entered them into a meta-analysis. We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We identified four studies (1154 participants, age range 50 to 90 years). All participants had a diagnosis of probable or possible AD according to standard criteria and most participants were established on a cholinesterase inhibitor. The primary outcome in all studies was change in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) from baseline. When we pooled data, there was no significant benefit from statin (mean difference -0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.05 to 0.52, P value = 0.51). All studies provided change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) from baseline. There was no significant benefit from statins in MMSE when we pooled the data (mean difference -0.32, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.06, P value = 0.10). Three studies reported treatment-related adverse effects. When we pooled data, there was no significant difference between statins and placebo (odds ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.06, P value = 0.78). There was no significant difference in behaviour, global function or activities of daily living in the statin and placebo groups. We assessed risk of bias as low for all studies. We found no studies assessing role of statins in treatment of VaD. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Analyses from the studies available, including two large randomised controlled trials, indicate that statins have no benefit on the primary outcome measures of ADAS-Cog or MMSE.

Memantine for dementia in adults older than 40 years with Down's syndrome (MEADOWS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Prevalence of Alzheimer's disease in people with Down's syndrome is very high, and many such individuals who are older than 40 years have pathological changes characteristic of Alzheimer's disease. Evidence to support treatment with Alzheimer's drugs is inadequate, although memantine is beneficial in transgenic mice. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of memantine on cognition and function in individuals with Down's syndrome. METHODS: In our prospective randomised double-blind trial, we enrolled adults (>40 years) with karyotypic or clinically diagnosed Down's syndrome, with and without dementia, at four learning disability centres in the UK and Norway. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) to receive memantine or placebo for 52 weeks by use of a computer-generated sequence and a minimisation algorithm to ensure balanced allocation for five prognostic factors (sex, dementia, age group, total Down's syndrome attention, memory, and executive function scales [DAMES] score, and centre). The primary outcome was change in cognition and function, measured with DAMES scores and the adaptive behaviour scale (ABS) parts I and II. We analysed differences in DAMES and ABS scores between groups with analyses of covariance or quantile regression in all patients who completed the 52 week assessment and had available follow-up data. This study is registered, number ISRCTN47562898. FINDINGS: We randomly allocated 88 patients to receive memantine (72 [82%] had DAMES data and 75 [85%] had ABS data at 52 weeks) and 85 to receive placebo (74 [87%] and 73 [86%]). Both groups declined in cognition and function but rates did not differ between groups for any outcomes. After adjustment for baseline score, there were non-significant differences between groups of -4·1 (95% CI -13·1 to 4·8) in DAMES scores, -8·5 (-20·1 to 3·1) in ABS I scores, and 2·0 (-7·2 to 11·3) in ABS II scores, all in favour of controls. 10 (11%) of 88 participants in the memantine group and six (7%) of 85 controls had serious adverse events (p=0·33). Five participants in the memantine group and four controls died from serious adverse events (p=0·77). INTERPRETATION: There is a striking absence of evidence about pharmacological treatment of cognitive impairment and dementia in people older than 40 years with Down's syndrome. Despite promising indications, memantine is not an effective treatment. Therapies that are effective for Alzheimer's disease are not necessarily effective in this group of patients. FUNDING: Lundbeck.

Single-domain amnestic mild cognitive impairment identified by cluster analysis predicts Alzheimer's disease in the european prospective DESCRIPA study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To identify prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD) subjects using a data-driven approach to determine cognitive profiles in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: A total of 881 MCI subjects were recruited from 20 memory clinics and followed for up to 5 years. Outcome measures included cognitive variables, conversion to AD, and biomarkers (e.g. CSF, and MRI markers). Two hierarchical cluster analyses (HCA) were performed to identify clusters of subjects with distinct cognitive profiles. The first HCA included all subjects with complete cognitive data, whereas the second one selected subjects with very mild MCI (MMSE ≥28). ANOVAs and ANCOVAs were computed to examine whether the clusters differed with regard to conversion to AD, and to AD-specific biomarkers. RESULTS: The HCAs identified 4-cluster solutions that best reflected the sample structure. One cluster (aMCIsingle) had a significantly higher conversion rate (19%), compared to subjective cognitive impairment (SCI, p < 0.0001), and non-amnestic MCI (naMCI, p = 0.012). This cluster was the only one showing a significantly different biomarker profile (Aß42, t-tau, APOE ε4, and medial temporal atrophy), compared to SCI or naMCI. CONCLUSION: In subjects with mild MCI, the single-domain amnestic MCI profile was associated with the highest risk of conversion, even if memory impairment did not necessarily cross specific cut-off points. A cognitive profile characterized by isolated memory deficits may be sufficient to warrant applying prevention strategies in MCI, whether or not memory performance lies below specific z-scores. This is supported by our preliminary biomarker analyses. However, further analyses with bigger samples are needed to corroborate these findings.

Cochrane review on 'Statins for the treatment of dementia'.

OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and tolerability of statins in the treatment of dementia. METHODS: We searched the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS, as well as many trials registries and grey literature sources (27 October 2008). Double-blind, randomized controlled trials of statins given for at least 6 months in people with a diagnosis of dementia were included. Two independent authors extracted and assessed data independently against the inclusion criteria. Data were pooled where appropriate and entered into a meta-analysis. RESULTS: Three studies were identified (748 participants, age range 50-90 years). All patients had a diagnosis of probable or possible Alzheimer's disease according to standard criteria, and most patients were established on a cholinesterase inhibitor. Change in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale from baseline was a primary outcome in three studies; when data were pooled, statins did not provide any beneficial effect in this cognitive measure (mean difference -1.12; 95% confidence interval -3.99, 1.75; p = 0.44). All studies provided a change in Mini-Mental State Examination from baseline; there was no significant benefit from statins in this cognitive measure when the data were pooled (mean difference -1.53; 95% confidence interval -3.28; 0.21, p = 0.08). There were no studies identified assessing the role of statins in treatment of vascular dementia. There was no evidence that statins were detrimental to cognition. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to recommend statins for the treatment of dementia.

Hip fracture risk and subsequent mortality among Alzheimer's disease patients in the United Kingdom, 1988-2007.

BACKGROUND: hip fractures result in a significant burden to the patient, their caregivers and the health care system. Patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) have a higher incidence of hip fracture compared with other older people without AD, although it is not clear if AD is an independent risk factor for hip fracture. METHODS: a retrospective cohort study was conducted using anonymised electronic medical records from primary care practices in the United Kingdom. Proportional hazards regression modelling with adjustment for potential confounders was used to evaluate AD as an independent risk factor for predicting hip fractures. RESULTS: the incidence of hip fracture among patients with and without AD was 17.4 (95% CI, 15.7-19.2) and 6.6 (95% CI, 5.8-7.6) per 1,000 person years, respectively. Patients with AD had a hazard that was 3.2 (95% CI, 2.4-4.2) times that of non-AD patients after controlling for potential confounders. AD patients who experienced a hip fracture also had an increased mortality rate compared with non-AD patients who experienced a hip fracture (hazard ratio = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9). CONCLUSION: patients with AD and their caregivers should be advised on how to prevent hip fractures and more attention should be given to AD patients who are undergoing rehabilitation following a hip fracture.

Defining optimal treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease.

Despite growing recognition that Alzheimer's disease (AD) represents a global public health and social care crisis, diagnosis is frequently slow and many patients still receive no treatment at all. Of those who do receive treatment, many remain on lower than recommended doses. The Alzheimer's disease International Global Charter promotes awareness and understanding of AD, stressing the importance of optimal treatment. However, the definition of "optimal treatment" is unclear. Since cholinesterase inhibitors became available nearly 20 years ago, clinicians have developed a variety of protocols on the basis of clinical experiences. This review considers what is optimal for several aspects of cholinesterase inhibitor therapy, taking into account initiation strategies, dosages, modes of drug delivery (e.g., oral vs. transdermal), and treatment durations. Regardless of management approach, individuals with AD, their families, and caregivers have a right to a timely diagnosis and access to best available treatment.

Potential Virus Involvement in Alzheimer's Disease: Results from a Phase IIa Trial Evaluating Apovir, an Antiviral Drug Combination.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating data suggest infectious agents are involved in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The two primary aims of this trial were to assess safety and efficacy of an antiviral drug combination on AD progression. OBJECTIVE: The trial evaluated whether Apovir, a combination of two antiviral agents, pleconaril (active on enteroviruses) and ribavirin (active on several viruses), could slow AD progression. METHODS: Sixty-nine patients 60-85 years were treated with Apovir or placebo for 9 months and followed until 12 months after end of treatment. Cognitive tests, safety, biomarkers, drug plasma, and cerebrospinal fluid concentrations were assessed. RESULTS: The tolerability of Apovir was compromised as demonstrated by the large drop-out rate and increased frequency and severity of adverse events. The primary endpoint, demonstrating a difference in change from baseline to 9 months between groups in ADAS-cog total score, was not met (p = 0.1809). However, there were observations indicating potential effects on both ADAS-cog and CDR-SB but these effects need to be verified. Also, there was a decrease in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-ß in Apovir at 9 months (p = 0.0330) but no change in placebo. CONCLUSION: This was the first randomized, placebo controlled clinical trial exploring antiviral treatment on AD progression. The trial is considered inconclusive due to the large drop-out rate. New trials are needed to verify if the indications of effect observed can be confirmed and which component(s) in Apovir contributed to such effects. Pleconaril alone may be studied to improve the tolerability and to verify if enterovirus is involved in the disease process.

Donepezil for the treatment of agitation in Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Agitation is a common and distressing symptom in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Cholinesterase inhibitors improve cognitive outcomes in such patients, but the benefits of these drugs for behavioral disturbances are unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned 272 patients with Alzheimer's disease who had clinically significant agitation and no response to a brief psychosocial treatment program to receive 10 mg of donepezil per day (128 patients) or placebo (131 patients) for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in the score on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) (on a scale of 29 to 203, with higher scores indicating more agitation) at 12 weeks. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the effects of donepezil and those of placebo on the basis of the change in CMAI scores from baseline to 12 weeks (estimated mean difference in change [the value for donepezil minus that for placebo], -0.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.35 to 4.22). Twenty-two of 108 patients (20.4%) in the placebo group and 22 of 113 (19.5%) in the donepezil group had a reduction of 30% or greater in the CMAI score (the value for donepezil minus that for placebo, -0.9 percentage point; 95% CI, -11.4 to 9.6). There were also no significant differences between the placebo and donepezil groups in scores for the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Caregiver Distress Scale, or the Clinician's Global Impression of Change. CONCLUSIONS: In this 12-week trial, donepezil was not more effective than placebo in treating agitation in patients with Alzheimer's disease. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00142324 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Statins for the treatment of dementia.

BACKGROUND: The use of statin therapy in established Alzheimer's disease (AD) or vascular dementia (VaD) is a relatively unexplored area. In AD ss-amyloid protein (Ass) is deposited in the form of extracellular plaques and previous studies have determined Ass generation is cholesterol dependent. Hypercholesterolaemia has also been implicated in the pathogenesis of VaD. Due to the role of statins in cholesterol reduction it is biologically plausible they may be efficacious in the treatment of AD and dementia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical efficacy and tolerability of statins in the treatment of dementia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS, as well as many trials registries and grey literature sources (27 October 2008). SELECTION CRITERIA: Double-blind, randomized controlled trials of statins given for at least six months in people with a diagnosis of dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent authors extracted and assessed data independently against the inclusion criteria. Data were pooled where appropriate and entered into a meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies were identified (748 participants, age range 50-90 years). All patients had a diagnosis of probable or possible AD according to standard criteria and most patients were established on a cholinesterase inhibitor. Treatment in ADCLT 2005 consisted of 80mg atorvastatin compared to placebo for 52 weeks, serum low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol was reduced by 54% in the atorvastatin group. Treatment in Simons 2002 consisted of 40mg simvastatin compared to placebo for 26 weeks, serum LDL cholesterol was reduced by 52% in the simvastatin group. Treatment in LEADe 2010 consisted of 80mg atorvastatin compared to placebo for 72 weeks, LDL cholesterol was reduced by 50.2% by month 3 and remained constant through month 18. Change in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale- cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) from baseline was a primary outcome in 3 studies; when data were pooled there was considerable heterogeneity so the random effects model was used, statins did not provide any beneficial effect in this cognitive measure [mean difference -1.12, 95% CI -3.99, 1.75, p = 0.44]. All studies provided change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) from baseline; again random effects model was used due to considerable heterogeneity: there was no significant benefit from statins in this cognitive measure when the data were pooled [mean difference -1.53, 95% CI -3.28, 0.21, p = 0.08]. There was some evidence that patients on statins in ADCLT 2005 maintained better cognitive function if serum cholesterol was high at baseline, MMSE was higher at baseline or if they had an apolipoprotein E4 allele present. This would need to be confirmed in larger studies however. Treatment related adverse effects were available from two studies, LEADe 2010 and Simons 2002; when data were pooled there was no significant difference between statins and placebo [odds ratio 2.45, 95% CI 0.69, 8.62, p = 0.16]. There was no significant difference in global function, behaviour or activities of daily living in the statin and placebo groups. One large randomised controlled trial (RCT) ( CLASP 2008) has not yet published its results. There were no studies identified assessing role of statins in treatment of VaD. There was no evidence that statins were detrimental to cognition. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to recommend statins for the treatment of dementia. Analysis from the studies available, including one large RCT, indicate statins have no benefit on the outcome measures ADAS-Cog or MMSE. We need to await full results from CLASP 2008 before we can be certain. This Cochrane review will be updated as these results become available.

Safety and efficacy of galantamine (Reminyl) in severe Alzheimer's disease (the SERAD study): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of galantamine has been shown in patients with mild, moderate, and advanced moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Here we report its efficacy in patients with severe AD. METHODS: Between December, 2003, and March, 2007, patients aged 84 (SD 6) years with severe AD (mini-mental state examination [MMSE] score 5-12 points), in a nursing home setting were randomly assigned to receive galantamine (n=207), titrated initially to 24 mg/day, or placebo (n=200). Co-primary efficacy measures for cognitive function and ability to undertake normal daily activities were the severe impairment battery (SIB) and the seven-item minimum data set-activities of daily living (MDS-ADL), respectively. Adverse events, vital signs, laboratory parameters, and electrocardiograms were monitored. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00216593. FINDINGS: 168 of 207 (81%) patients in the galantamine group and 161 of 200 (81%) in the placebo group completed the study. Mean SIB scores increased (improved) by 1.9 (95% CI -0.1 to 3.9) points with galantamine and decreased (worsened) by 3.0 (-5.6 to -0.5) points with placebo (between-group least squares mean difference 4.36, 1.3 to 7.5; p=0.006). Mean MDS-ADL self-performance score worsened by 1.2 (0.6 to 1.8) points and 1.6 (0.8 to 2.3) points, respectively (between-group least squares mean difference -0.41, -1.3 to 0.5; p=0.383). Nominally significant between-group differences in favour of galantamine occurred for the SIB domains of memory (p=0.006), praxis (p=0.010), and visuospatial ability (p=0.002), and for the MDS-ADL subitem locomotion on unit (p=0.021). 183 of 207 patients (88%) who received galantamine and 177 of 200 (89%) who received placebo had adverse events, which were mostly mild to moderate. Eight patients (4%) in the galantamine group and 21 patients (11%) in the placebo group died. ECG abnormalities were similar between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Galantamine can be started and used safely in elderly patients with severe AD. Galantamine improved cognitive function but failed to significantly improve the co-primary parameter of overall activities of daily living.

Long-term effects of Abeta42 immunisation in Alzheimer's disease: follow-up of a randomised, placebo-controlled phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: Immunisation of patients with Alzheimer's disease with full-length amyloid-beta peptide (Abeta(42)) can clear amyloid plaques from the brain. Our aim was to assess the relation between Abeta(42) immune response, degree of plaque removal, and long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: In June, 2003, consent for long-term clinical follow-up, post-mortem neuropathological examination, or both, was sought from 80 patients (or their carers) who had entered a phase I randomised, placebo-controlled trial of immunisation with Abeta(42) (AN1792, Elan Pharmaceuticals) in September, 2000. The follow-up study was completed in September, 2006. Plaques were assessed in terms of the percentage area of the cortex with Abeta immunostaining (Abeta load) and in terms of characteristic histological features reflecting plaque removal. Survival of all 80 individuals until severe dementia or death was assessed with a Cox proportional hazard model. FINDINGS: 20 participants--15 in the AN1792 group, five in the placebo group--died before follow-up started. A further 22 patients--19 in the AN1792 group, three in the placebo group--died during follow-up. Nine of the deceased patients, all in the AN1792 group, had given consent for post-mortem analysis; one of these who did not die with Alzheimer's disease was excluded. In the remaining eight participants who received immunisation and who were examined neuropathologically, mean Abeta load was lower than in an unimmunised control group that was matched for age at death (2.1% [SE 0.7] in treated participants vs 5.1% [0.9] in controls; mean difference 3.0%, 95% CI 0.6-5.4; p=0.02). Although there was considerable variation in Abeta load and degree of plaque removal among immunised participants, the degree of plaque removal varied significantly with mean antibody response attained during the treatment study period (Kruskal-Wallis p=0.02). Seven of the eight immunised patients who underwent post-mortem assessment, including those with virtually complete plaque removal, had severe end stage dementia before death. In the whole cohort, there was no evidence of improved survival (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.43-3.11; p=0.86) or of an improvement in the time to severe dementia (1.18, 0.45-3.11; p=0.73) in the AN1792 group versus the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Although immunisation with Abeta(42) resulted in clearance of amyloid plaques in patients with Alzheimer's disease, this clearance did not prevent progressive neurodegeneration.

Brief psychosocial therapy for the treatment of agitation in Alzheimer disease (the CALM-AD trial).

BACKGROUND: Good practice guidelines state that a psychological intervention should usually precede pharmacotherapy, but there are no data evaluating the feasibility of psychological interventions used in this way. METHODS: At the first stage of a randomized blinded placebo-controlled trial, 318 patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) with clinically significant agitated behavior were treated in an open design with a psychological intervention (brief psychosocial therapy [BPST]) for 4 weeks, preceding randomization to pharmacotherapy. The therapy involved social interaction, personalized music, or removal of environmental triggers. RESULTS: Overall, 318 patients with AD completed BPST with an improvement of 5.6 points on the total Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI; mean [SD], 63.3 [16.0] to 57.7 [18.4], t = 4.8, df = 317, p < 0.0001). Therapy worksheets were completed in six of the eight centers, with the key elements of the intervention delivered according to the manual for >95% of patients. More detailed evaluation of outcome was completed for the 198 patients with AD from these centers, who experienced a mean improvement of 6.6 points on the total CMAI (mean [SD], 62.2 [14.3] to 55.6 [15.8], t = 6.5, df = 197, p < 0.0001). Overall, 43% of participants achieved a 30% improvement in their level of agitation. CONCLUSION: The specific attributable benefits of BPST cannot be determined from an open trial. However, the BPST therapy was feasible and was successfully delivered according to an operationalized manual. The encouraging outcome indicates the need for a randomized controlled trial of BPST.

Statins for the prevention of dementia.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001. At that stage there was insufficient evidence to recommend statins for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The scope of this review has been expanded to include all forms of dementia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of statins in the prevention of dementia. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 10 October 2007 using the terms statin*, lovastatin*, pravastatin*, simvastatin*, fluvastatin*, atorvastatin* and rosuvastatin*. The CDCIG Register contains records from many healthcare databases, SIGLE, LILACS as well as many trials databases and is updated regularly. SELECTION CRITERIA: Double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials of statins in people at risk of AD and dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers extracted and assessed data independently and agreement was reached after discussion. Adverse effects were noted. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials were identified with 26,340 participants; HPS 2002 and PROSPER 2002. Age range was 40-82 years across the two studies, PROSPER 2002 included 5804 patients aged 70-82 years and HPS included 20,536 patients with 5806 at least 70 years old at study entry. Mean total cholesterol 5.9 mmol/l, LDL cholesterol 3.4 mmol/l at study entry with mean reduction in LDL cholesterol of 1.0 mmol/l in simvastatin treated patients compared to placebo in HPS 2002. Mean total cholesterol 5.7 mmol/l, LDL cholesterol 3.8 mmol/l at study entry with mean reduction in LDL cholesterol of 1.02 mmol/l in pravastatin treated patients compared to placebo in PROSPER 2002. Mean follow-up 3.2 years in PROSPER, 5 years in HPS 2002. Cognition was measured at different times and with different scales so could not be combined in a meta-analysis. There was no difference in incidence of dementia in HPS 2002 (31 cases in simvastatin group, 31 cases in placebo group) nor in performance on the modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status at final follow-up (23.7% simvastatin group cognitively impaired vs 24.2% in placebo group). There was no difference in cognition between groups either in relation to age at study entry or previous history of cerebrovascular disease. Cognitive function declined at the same rate in both treatment groups in PROSPER 2002, there was no significant difference between pravastatin treated and placebo groups in performance on letter digit codes, picture word learning test, Stroop and Mini Mental State Examination. There was no evidence that statins were detrimental to cognition. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is good evidence from RCTs that statins given in late life to individuals at risk of vascular disease have no effect in preventing AD or dementia. Biologically it seems feasible that statins could prevent dementia due to their role in cholesterol reduction and initial evidence from observational studies was very promising. Indication bias may have been a factor in these studies however and the evidence from subsequent RCTs has been negative.

Blood pressure lowering in patients without prior cerebrovascular disease for prevention of cognitive impairment and dementia.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a previous review (McGuinness 2006).Hypertension and cognitive impairment are prevalent in older people. Hypertension is a direct risk factor for vascular dementia (VaD) and recent studies have suggested hypertension impacts upon prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Therefore does treatment of hypertension prevent cognitive decline? OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of blood pressure lowering treatments for the prevention of dementia and cognitive decline in patients with hypertension but no history of cerebrovascular disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS as well as many trials databases and grey literature sources were searched on 13 February 2008 using the terms: hypertens$ OR anti-hypertens$. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials in which pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure were given for at least six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The following outcomes were assessed: incidence of dementia, cognitive change from baseline, blood pressure level, incidence and severity of side effects and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials including 15,936 hypertensive subjects were identified. Average age was 75.4 years. Mean blood pressure at entry across the studies was 171/86 mmHg. The combined result of the four trials reporting incidence of dementia indicated no significant difference between treatment and placebo (236/7767 versus 259/7660, Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% CI 0.74, 1.07) and there was considerable heterogeneity between the trials. The combined results from the three trials reporting change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) did not indicate a benefit from treatment (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) = 0.42, 95% CI 0.30, 0.53). Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were reduced significantly in the three trials assessing this outcome (WMD = -10.22, 95% CI -10.78, -9.66 for systolic blood pressure, WMD = -4.28, 95% CI -4.58, -3.98 for diastolic blood pressure). Three trials reported adverse effects requiring discontinuation of treatment and the combined results indicated no significant difference (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.92, 1.11). When analysed separately, however, more patients on placebo in Syst Eur 1997 were likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects; the converse was true in SHEP 1991. Quality of life data could not be analysed in the four studies. Analysis of the included studies in this review was problematic as many of the control subjects received antihypertensive treatment because their blood pressures exceeded pre-set values. In most cases the study became a comparison between the study drug against a usual antihypertensive regimen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no convincing evidence from the trials identified that blood pressure lowering in late-life prevents the development of dementia or cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients with no apparent prior cerebrovascular disease. There were significant problems identified with analysing the data, however, due to the number of patients lost to follow-up and the number of placebo patients who received active treatment. This introduced bias. More robust results may be obtained by conducting a meta-analysis using individual patient data.

Predicting time to nursing home placement based on activities of daily living scores--a modelling analysis using data on Alzheimer's disease patients receiving rivastigmine or donepezil.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of activities of daily living (ADL) scores on the risk of nursing home placement (NHP) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. SETTING: Models predicting NHP for AD patients have depended on cognitive deterioration as the primary measure. However, there is increased recognition that both patient functioning and cognition are predictive of disease progression. METHODS: Using the database from a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial of rivastigmine and donepezil, two treatments indicated for AD, Cox regression models were constructed to predict the risk of NHP using age, gender, ADL and MMSE (Mini-Mental State Examination) scores as independent variables. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 50-85 years, with MMSE scores of 10-20, and a diagnosis of dementia of the Alzheimer type. RESULTS: Cox regression analyses indicated that being female, older age, lower ADL score at baseline, and deterioration in ADL all significantly increased the risk of NHP. Over 2 years, risk of NHP increased by 3% for each 1-point deterioration in ADL score independent of cognition. CONCLUSION: Data analyses from this long-term clinical trial established that daily functioning is an important predictor of time to NHP. Further research may be required to confirm whether this finding translates to the real world.