Dose effects associated with rivastigmine transdermal patch in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease.

AIM: The cholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine is available in both oral and transdermal forms. The efficacy of oral rivastigmine appears to be dose-dependent. The current analysis investigates the effect of dose on the efficacy of the rivastigmine transdermal patch. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a large, international, 24-week, randomised, placebo- and active-controlled trial (IDEAL, CENA713D2320) of rivastigmine in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Patients received the 9.5 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch, the 17.4 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch, 12 mg/day rivastigmine capsules or placebo. Changes from baseline at week 24 on the AD Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), AD Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) and the AD Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale were calculated based on the patient's mode and last prescribed patch dose. The analysis included the 4.6 mg/24 h and 13.3 mg/24 h patch doses, for which efficacy data have not previously been reported. RESULTS: Significant differences (p<0.05 vs. placebo) were seen on the ADAS-cog and ADCS-ADL for all mode rivastigmine patch doses (except 4.6 mg/24 h) and all last prescribed rivastigmine patch doses (except 4.6 mg/24 h and 13.3 mg/24 h). Patients with a last prescribed/mode patch dose of 9.5 mg/24 h and 13.3 mg/24 h showed significant improvements (p<0.05 vs. placebo) on the ADCS-CGIC. CONCLUSION: Rivastigmine patch doses higher than 9.5 mg/24 h may offer additional benefits. The 13.3 mg/24 h patch is worthy of further investigation.

Rivastigmine transdermal system for the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.

Today patients with mild to moderate Alzhiemer's disease (AD) have a treatment approach choice: oral or transdermal delivery. The aim of this review was to provide a concise, comprehensive overview of the clinically relevant safety, tolerability and efficacy information available for the rivastigmine transdermal system. Relevant articles were identified through a MEDLINE search of publications in the past 3 years using the terms 'rivastigmine' and 'transdermal' or 'patch'. Efficacy, safety and tolerability of the rivastigmine patch vs. placebo were established in a large, international, 24-week, double-blind, randomised clinical trial and subsequent 28-week open-label extension study. Drug exposure with the 9.5 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch was not significantly different to that provided by an oral capsule dose of 12 mg/day. Most frequently observed adverse events were gastrointestinal. In the primary study, incidences of nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea were: 5%, 3% and 3% respectively in the placebo group; 7%, 6% and 6% in the 9.5 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch group; and 23%, 17% and 5% in the 12 mg/day capsule group. Most patients experienced no, slight or mild application-site skin reactions. De novo patients or those taking oral rivastigmine or donepezil may tolerate a switch to rivastigmine patch. By providing drug exposure that is not significantly different to the highest recommended rivastigmine capsule dose (12 mg/day), with less fluctuation over 24 h, rivastigmine patch offers similar efficacy with an improved tolerability profile. The rivastigmine patch provides a viable treatment option for patients with mild to moderate AD.

Safety and tolerability of rivastigmine transdermal patch compared with rivastigmine capsules in patients switched from donepezil: data from three clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and tolerability of switching patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease from donepezil to either rivastigmine capsule or transdermal patch. METHODS: Three studies investigated the switch from donepezil to rivastigmine; study US13 was a 26-week, single-arm, immediate-switch study; US18 was a 26-week, sequential cohort study (both studies evaluated rivastigmine capsules 3-12 mg/day); study US38 was a 25-week, randomised, parallel-group, open-label study which investigated switch (immediate or after 7 days' withdrawal) from donepezil to rivastigmine transdermal patch (4.6 mg/24 hr). Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), discontinuations caused by AEs and serious AEs (SAEs). RESULTS: Patient groups receiving rivastigmine patch (n = 261) or capsules (n = 331) had mean +/- SD ages of 77.3 +/- 8.0 and 78.1 +/- 7.8 years, dementia durations of 3.9 +/- 2.6 and 3.6 +/- 2.2 years and Mini-Mental State Examination scores of 18.3 +/- 4.00 and 17.9 +/- 4.4 respectively. Overall, 184 (70.5%) and 276 (83.4%) patients experienced at least one AE, and 23 (8.8%) and 55 (16.6%) patients experienced an SAE with the rivastigmine patch and capsules respectively. Of the patients who experienced an AE, 10 (3.8%) and 109 (32.9%) experienced nausea, and 11 (4.2%) and 80 (24.1%) experienced vomiting with the rivastigmine patch and capsules respectively. Discontinuations because of AEs occurred in 64 (19.3%) patients receiving capsules and 38 (14.6%) patients in the transdermal patch group. The most common reasons for discontinuation with the transdermal patch were application site reaction and disease progression, and nausea and vomiting with the capsules. CONCLUSIONS: The rivastigmine transdermal patch appears to have better tolerability than rivastigmine capsules, with fewer gastrointestinal AEs and discontinuations because of these AEs. Simple daily rotation of patch location will likely reduce the frequency of skin reactions. This post hoc analysis was carried out by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Data for the analysis were collected from the US13 study (CENA713B US13), the US18 study (CENA713B US18) and the US38 study (CENA713D US38).

A double-blind crossover pilot study of l-deprenyl (selegiline) combined with cholinesterase inhibitor in Alzheimer's disease.

The potential efficacy of oral l-deprenyl (5 mg b.i.d.) added to the regimen of 10 patients with Alzheimer's disease receiving either tacrine or physostigmine was assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4-week, two-period crossover pilot study. l-Deprenyl was associated with significant improvement in scores on the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, suggesting possible additive effects of l-deprenyl to the effects of cholinesterase inhibitors.

Overview of clinical trials of hydergine in dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the overall effect of Hydergine (a combination drug called ergoloid mesylates) on patients with possible dementia and to investigate potential moderators of an effect. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and two proprietary databases were searched for reports of clinical trials. STUDY SELECTION: Included were randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trials in subjects with symptoms consistent with dementia performed with specified outcome instruments and sufficient statistical information to calculate effect sizes. Forty-seven (31%) of 151 trials reviewed met selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Potential moderating variables were extracted from each trial: sample size, inpatient-outpatient status, trial duration, age, gender, medication dose, publication year, and diagnostic grouping. Outcome measures were extracted with their associated statistics. DATA SYNTHESIS: The overall combined treatment effects ("adjusted d") for three types of outcome measures were calculated. Overall, Hydergine was more effective than placebo as assessed by comprehensive ratings (d = 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.56; P = .0001), clinical global ratings (d = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.68; P = .0001), and combined neuropsychological measures (d = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.32; P = .0001). Inpatient status, daily doses of 4 mg or more, and vascular dementia were generally associated with larger effects. The effect in patients with possible Alzheimer's dementia was significant only for combined neuropsychological measures in five trials (d = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.44; P = .0001; and with a dose-response, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, ergoloid mesylates were more effective than placebo. However, the effect in patients with possible Alzheimer's dementia was very modest at best. The dose-response relation suggests that potentially effective doses may be higher than the currently approved. The circumstances of the efficacy of Hydergine remain inadequately defined.

Eligibility of Alzheimer's disease clinic patients for clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the percentage of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in a general clinic population who would be provisionally eligible for randomized clinical trials and the extent to which these patients represent the overall clinic-based population. BACKGROUND: Many randomized clinical trials have restricted enrollment criteria that may limit generalizability, i.e., AD patients who fulfill selection criteria for phase III clinical trials may not be representative of other AD patients in clinical settings. DESIGN AND SETTING: Patients diagnosed as probable or possible AD from the nine clinical sites of the State of California's Alzheimer's Disease Diagnostic and Treatment Centers (ADDTC) were selected on the basis of their provisionally fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria of two typical AD clinical trials at the time of their first visit (ECG and brain imaging criteria were not available). RESULTS: From a sample of 3470 subjects with possible or probable AD, overall, only 4.4% or 7.9% would have been provisionally eligible for each of two trials. Patients provisionally eligible were younger, relatively underrepresented by women, better educated, wealthier, and more likely to be white than ineligible patients. The major independent demographic predictors for eligibility were (1) income greater than $15,000 per year, (2) male gender, and (3) college education. More than 60% of probable AD patients were excluded because of significant behavioral problems; approximately one-quarter each were excluded because of significant medical or neurological problems. Allowing patients with probable or possible AD to enroll would have resulted in 10.6% being eligible. CONCLUSION: Selection criteria for AD clinical trials result in a demographically and clinically constrained subgroup that is not representative of the overall clinic population.

Clinical evaluation of global change in Alzheimer's disease: identifying consensus.

It is important that clinicians who rate global change as part of Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical drug trials agree on a relevant set of behaviors and information to be considered in formulating their rating. Yet, consensus among raters has been difficult to establish, and inter-rater reliability of clinical global impression of change (CGIC) ratings has been low. In preparation for the development of a new CGIC scale to be used in AD clinical trials, the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC), we surveyed clinicians at sites comprising the National Institute on Aging-sponsored ADCS participating centers to identify whether or not consensus regarding CGICs exists. Overall, respondents reported that a CGIC should include an assessment of the patient's function and mental status, a care giver interview, and a standardized set of questions, and it should take approximately 20 minutes per interview. Depending on a patient's level of impairment, raters consider different areas of behavior in formulating a CGIC rating. These findings demonstrate the considerable consensus regarding the CGIC rating process, and were integrated into the design of the ADCS-CGIC, currently in use.

Clinical global impressions in Alzheimer's clinical trials.

This article reviews the history of Clinical Global Impressions of Change (CGIC) instruments, their use and limitations in clinical trials of Alzheimer's disease, and the development of the National Institute on Aging's Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change Scale (ADCS-CGIC). Originally, CGICs were simple and unstructured instruments that asked a clinician to rate change over the duration of a clinical trial. The method, however, failed to consistently detect treatment effects, leading to the development of more structured and subsequently validated approaches, such as the Clinician Interview-Based Impression Scale (CIBI) and the ADCS-CGIC. Both are currently used in clinical trials. The implications and importance of choosing an appropriate global rating are discussed.

Efficacy of acute treatment for geriatric depression.

The antidepressant literature for depression in late life tends to be interpreted as saying that certain antidepressant medications--e.g, nortriptyline, doxepin, fluoxetine--have fewer and milder side effects than others, whereas overall efficacy is equivalent (Plotkin et al., 1987; Rush, 1993; Salzman et al., 1995; Schneider, 1994). Further examination of this literature, however, suggests that both efficacy and side effect rates for any particular medication vary among trials, and often depend on the medications being compared, the use of placebo, the dose, and the design of the trial. In this report we review selected clinical trials, and summarize and discuss a previously published meta-analysis. Treatment recommendations from the 1991 NIH Consensus Development Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Depression in Late Life and from the Agency for Health Care Policy Research are discussed. Directions for future research are suggested. Both antidepressant medications and brief structured psychotherapies have efficacy in the acute treatment of elderly depressed outpatients with major unipolar, nondelusional depression. Effective treatment for depression involves consideration of the type and severity of illness, adequate prescribing, patient education, and regular patient monitoring for compliance, symptom change, side effects, and intercurrent medical disorders, which may complicate antidepressant therapy.

Can caregivers independently rate cognitive and behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer's disease patients?: A longitudinal analysis.

To examine whether informant-based assessments of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) can be used longitudinally to track patient functioning, the authors followed AD patients (N=153) and their caregivers over 1 year with the Relative's Assessment of Global Symptomatology-Elderly (RAGS-E) and the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADASc). Factor analysis of the RAGS-E yielded two subscales, Cognitive Functioning and Mood Disturbance. The cognitive subscale and ADASc correlated at all visits, whereas the mood subscale did not. After 12 months (n=62), the cognitive scale worsened at a rate similar to the ADASc, suggesting concurrent validity. Therefore, informant-based measures appear to be reliable and valid methods of identifying cognitive change in AD patients.

A pilot randomized trial of carbamazepine for behavioral symptoms in treatment-resistant outpatients with Alzheimer disease.

The authors performed a 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial of carbamazepine (400 mg/day) with 21 agitated subjects (16 completers) who had been treated unsuccessfully with antipsychotics. There was greater improvement for the carbamazepine group on the Clinical Global Impression of Change (P=0.055) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) Hostility item (P=0.009), with a trend toward worsening on the BPRS Hallucination item (P=0.067). Overall, carbamazepine showed modest clinical benefit in these subjects, who had not responded to antipsychotics, and particular benefit for hostility. The effect on global ratings was similar to those found in an earlier report in nursing home residents.

Severity of cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease affects list learning using the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT).

Impairment in list learning is considered a primary symptom of Alzheimer's disease (AD), yet there are no published reports examining the relationship between list learning and severity of cognitive impairment. We gave nine-item and 16-item versions of the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT; Delis et al., 1987), a standardized shopping list assessment of memory, to 24 AD patients (mean age = 76.2 +/- 8.1; mean years of education = 13.8 +/- 2.4), who were stratified into four groups based on MMSE scores (mean = 16.0 +/- 5.6). ANOVAs revealed severity effects for total list learning (p < 0.001), the first trial (p < 0.001), the last trial (p < 0.001) and short- and long-delay recall measures. Most of these differences seemed due to floor effects. For example, the modal number of words recalled after a delay was 0 by subjects with MMSE scores below 21. Severity of cognitive impairment was associated with the proportion of intrusions such that the most severely demented subjects gave almost entirely intrusion responses. Surprisingly, list length did not significantly affect any of the free recall measures. Our results suggest that list learning and recall seem to be lost relatively early in AD. Measures of list recall like the CVLT may not be useful in tracking severity of cognitive impairment over time.

Validity and reliability of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change. The Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study.

This article reports the development and psychometric properties of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC). At present, a number of unvalidated CGIC scales are used in clinical trials, with various methods for making ratings. The ADCS-CGIC was designed on the basis of a survey of ADCS clinicians and by adapting existing instruments. It includes an organized but unstructured format, with which a clinician can address clinically relevant change. The instrument's reliability and validity were assessed in a prospective trial of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and healthy subjects over a 12-month period. It showed good short-term reliability at 1 and 2 months, with 90 and 94% of AD subjects, respectively, rated as having changed not at all or only minimally. The ADCS-CGIC's face validity was demonstrated by untreated. AD subjects rated as having worsened over time at both 6 months (56% rated as having worsened) and 12 months (81% rated as having worsened), whereas only 2% of control subjects showed minimal worsening. As a measure of predictive validity, ADCS-CGIC ratings at 12 months were significantly associated with change on four severity scales. As with other measures, change ratings were sensitive to dementia severity. Moderately impaired subjects showed greater worsening than other subjects. ADCS-CGIC ratings of greater worsening were made after the informant interview, regardless of whether informants or subjects were interviewed first. The ADCS-CGIC is a valid and reliable instrument for use in clinical trials.

National Institute of Mental Health Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE): Alzheimer disease trial methodology.

The authors describe the development of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) protocol for Alzheimer disease (AD), a trial developed in collaboration with the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), assessing the effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics for psychosis and agitation occurring in AD outpatients. They provide an overview of the methodology utilized in the trial as well as the clinical-outcomes and effectiveness measures that were implemented.