The impact of rivastigmine on post-surgical delirium and cognitive impairment; a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is an acute and transient disorder of brain function that often occurs in post-surgical patients. Rivastigmine is a cholinesterase inhibitor drug that has been proposed as an adjuvant drug in recent years, still, despite significant theoretical evidence, few clinical studies have been performed on its impact on delirium. AIM: Due to the widespread use of cholinesterase inhibitors in pediatric and adult surgery, the present study aims to investigate the impact of Rivastigmine as a cholinesterase inhibitor on delirium after radical surgery. METHODS: In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, a hundred recruited patients were randomly assigned to either Rivastigmine (n = 50) or placebo (n = 50) groups, and we measured post-operative impact on delirium, by Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) score, and cognitive impairment, by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Our univariate and multivariate logistical regression models assessed this hypothesized impact. RESULTS: Treatment with Rivastigmine was significantly associated with reduced day one post-op delirium, as measured by CAM score (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.97, p = 0.05), and cognitive impairment, as measured by MMSE (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.59, p = 0.0022). These associations became stronger after controlling for age, blood loss, and post-op blood sodium levels: Delirium (OR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92, p = 0.05), cognitive impairment (OR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.42, p = 0.000178). CONCLUSION: The significant result of our randomized clinical trial is that pre-op Rivastigmine treatment may be associated with a substantial drop in patients experiencing post-op delirium and post-op cognitive impairment.

Felbamate add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2017.Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurological disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available antiepileptic drugs and require treatment with multiple antiepileptic drugs in combination. Felbamate is a second-generation antiepileptic drug that can be used as add-on therapy to standard antiepileptic drugs. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), on 18 December 2018. There were no language or time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with drug-resistant focal seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel-group or cross-over design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. In the case of disagreements, the third review author arbitrated. Review authors assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised controlled trials, representing a total of 236 participants, in the review. Two trials had parallel-group design, the third had a two-period cross-over design, and the fourth had a three-period cross-over design. We judged all four studies to be at an unclear risk of bias overall. Bias arose from the incomplete reporting of methodological details, the incomplete and selective reporting of outcome data, and from participants having unstable drug regimens during experimental treatment in one trial. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the extracted data.Only one study reported the outcome, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, whilst three studies reported percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo. One study claimed an average seizure reduction of 35.8% with add-on felbamate while another study claimed a more modest reduction of 4.2%. Both studies reported that seizure frequency increased with add-on placebo and that there was a significant difference in seizure reduction between felbamate and placebo (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.018, respectively). The third study reported a 14% reduction in seizure frequency with add-on felbamate but stated that the difference between treatments was not significant. There were conflicting results regarding treatment withdrawal. One study reported a higher treatment withdrawal for placebo-randomised participants, whereas the other three studies reported higher treatment withdrawal rates for felbamate-randomised participants. Notably, the treatment withdrawal rates for felbamate treatment groups across all four studies remained reasonably low (less than 10%), suggesting that felbamate may be well tolerated. Felbamate-randomised participants most commonly withdrew from treatment due to adverse effects. The adverse effects consistently reported by all four studies were: headache, dizziness and nausea. All three adverse effects were reported by 23% to 40% of felbamate-treated participants versus 3% to 15% of placebo-treated participants.We assessed the evidence for all outcomes using GRADE and found it as being very-low certainty, meaning that we have little confidence in the findings reported. We mainly downgraded evidence for imprecision due to the narrative synthesis conducted and the low number of events. We stress that the true effect of felbamate could likely be significantly different from that reported in this current review update. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, the limited number of included studies and the differences in outcome measures, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in people with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Acute and chronic effects of exposure to the juvenile hormone analog fenoxycarb during sexual reproduction in Daphnia magna.

Recent studies have demonstrated that insect growth regulating insecticides are able to affect reproductive endpoints in zooplankton species at very low levels. For the cyclic parthenogenetic water flea Daphnia, most of this research has focused on the asexual part of the life cycle and induction of male offspring. Even though Daphnia and many other aquatic invertebrates rely on sexual reproduction and subsequent production of dormant eggs to recover from environmentally harsh conditions, much less is known about the effects of toxicants on the sexual reproductive phase. Using fenoxycarb as a model pesticide, we exposed male and female neonate Daphnia magna, under conditions inducing a switch to sexual reproduction, and tested for effects on dormant egg (ephippia) production and sex ratio of parthenogenetic offspring. Subsequently, we assessed whether fenoxycarb exposure affected the quality of the produced dormant eggs and viability of the hatchlings. Our results showed that exposure to sub-lethal concentrations of fenoxycarb caused a sharp decrease in parthenogenetic reproduction, while inducing male offspring. Dormant egg production was marginally negatively affected, but survival and fitness of the hatched individuals were not significantly affected. This indicates that under pesticide stress, surviving adult females invested in sexual reproduction at the expense of parthenogenetic reproduction. Exposure to toxicants during the sexual reproductive phase, could affect the active aquatic phase as well as the dormant phase in natural zooplankton populations. This indicates the need for further ecotoxicological research and development of test protocols taking into account the full life cycle of zooplankton species.

Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory partial epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 7, 2014) on 'Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy'. Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurologic disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available drugs. Felbamate is one of the second-generation antiepileptic drugs and we have assessed its effects as an add-on therapy to standard drugs in this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, up to 20 October 2016. There were no language and time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with refractory partial-onset seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel or cross-over design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. We resolved disagreements by discussion. If disagreements persisted, the third review author arbitrated. We assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised controlled trials with a total of 236 participants. Two trials were parallel design, the third had a two-period cross-over design, and the fourth had a three-period cross-over design. Two studies were at an unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. These two studies did not include any description of their methods for outcome assessment and performance blinding (i.e. participants or doctors). Two studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the results. Only one study reported 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. One study reported absolute and percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, P values were 0.046 and 0.018, respectively. One study reported percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, but there were no P values. Adverse effects rates were higher during the felbamate period than the placebo period, particularly headache, nausea and dizziness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, limited number of individual studies and differences in outcome measures, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Evaluating the safety and efficacy of felbamate in the context of a black box warning: A single center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Felbamate was approved in 1993 to treat partial seizures with and without secondary generalization in adults and in Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome in children. Its use was later restricted when rare but fatal cases of aplastic anemia and hepatic failure were identified. METHODS: This single center analysis retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of felbamate in a cohort of children, adolescents, and adults with epilepsy. RESULTS: A chart review identified 103 patients taking felbamate. The range of felbamate dose was 300-4500 mg (mean: 1800 ± 900 mg). The duration of therapy ranged from 1 month to 20 years (mean duration: 35 ± 45 months). Eighteen (17.5%) subjects experienced adverse events including insomnia, nausea, vomiting, decreased appetite, weight loss, gastric discomfort, diarrhea, mood and behavioral problems, high blood pressure, headache, and elevated liver enzymes. Out of these, 6 (5.9%) patients discontinued the therapy. No hepatic failure or agranulocytosis was observed. Fifty-nine (57.72%) patients achieved ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency, and 30 (29.12%) patients achieved seizure freedom. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that felbamate is safe, well tolerated, and effective in treatment of various types of epilepsy syndromes.

Residues and dissipation kinetics of carbendazim and diethofencarb in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) and intake risk assessment.

Dissipation behaviors and residues of carbendazim and diethofencarb in combination in tomato were investigated. The half-lives were 2.1-3.4 days for carbendazim, and 1.8-3.2 days for diethofencarb at a dose of 1.5 times of the recommended dosage. The residues of carbendazim and diethofencarb were below the maximum residue limits (MRLs) in China one day after application of the combination. The ultimate residues were significantly lower than the maximum permissible intake (MPI) in China at the recommended high dose for both child and adult. The values of the maximum dietary exposure for carbendazim and diethofencarb were 0.26 and 0.27 mg per person per day, respectively. The theoretical maximum daily intake (TMDI) values for carbendazim and diethofencarb were 1.5 and 0.5 mg/day, respectively. The dietary exposure was lower than the MPI, which indicates the harvested tomato samples under the experimental conditions (open field) are safe for human consumption at the recommended high dosage of the wettable powder.

Rivastigmine for Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is the commonest cause of dementia affecting older people. One of the therapeutic strategies aimed at ameliorating the clinical manifestations of Alzheimer's disease is to enhance cholinergic neurotransmission in the brain by the use of cholinesterase inhibitors to delay the breakdown of acetylcholine released into synaptic clefts. Tacrine, the first of the cholinesterase inhibitors to undergo extensive trials for this purpose, was associated with significant adverse effects including hepatotoxicity. Other cholinesterase inhibitors, including rivastigmine, with superior properties in terms of specificity of action and lower risk of adverse effects have since been introduced. Rivastigmine has received approval for use in 60 countries including all member states of the European Union and the USA. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical efficacy and safety of rivastigmine for patients with dementia of Alzheimer's type. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register, on 2 March 2015 using the terms: Rivastigmine OR  exelon OR ENA OR "SDZ ENA 713". ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases (Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS), numerous trial registries and grey literature sources. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all unconfounded, double-blind, randomised, controlled trials in which treatment with rivastigmine was administered to patients with dementia of the Alzheimer's type for 12 weeks or more and its effects compared with those of placebo in a parallel group of patients, or where two formulations of rivastigmine were compared. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author (JSB) applied the study selection criteria, assessed the quality of studies and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 13 trials met the inclusion criteria of the review. The trials had a duration of between 12 and 52 weeks. The older trials tested a capsule form with a dose of up to 12 mg/day. Trials reported since 2007 have tested continuous dose transdermal patch formulations delivering 4.6, 9.5 and 17.7 mg/day.Our main analysis compared the safety and efficacy of rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day orally or 9.5 mg/day transdermally with placebo.Seven trials contributed data from 3450 patients to this analysis. Data from another two studies were not included because of a lack of information and methodological concerns. All the included trials were multicentre trials and recruited patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease with a mean age of about 75 years. All had low risk of bias for randomisation and allocation but the risk of bias due to attrition was unclear in four studies, low in one study and high in two studies.After 26 weeks of treatment rivastigmine compared to placebo was associated with better outcomes for cognitive function measured with the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (ADAS-Cog) score (mean difference (MD) -1.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.21 to -1.37, n = 3232, 6 studies) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (MD 0.74; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.97, n = 3205, 6 studies), activities of daily living (SMD 0.20; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.27, n = 3230, 6 studies) and clinician rated global impression of changes, with a smaller proportion of patients treated with rivastigmine experiencing no change or a deterioration (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.80, n = 3338, 7 studies).Three studies reported behavioural change, and there were no differences compared to placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.04; 95% CI -0.14 to 0.06, n = 1529, 3 studies). Only one study measured the impact on caregivers using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Caregiver Distress (NPI-D) scale and this found no difference between the groups (MD 0.10; 95% CI -0.91 to 1.11, n = 529, 1 study). Overall, participants who received rivastigmine were about twice as likely to withdraw from the trials (odds ratio (OR) 2.01, 95% CI 1.71 to 2.37, n = 3569, 7 studies) or to experience an adverse event during the trials (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.82 to 2.57, n = 3587, 7 studies). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Rivastigmine (6 to 12 mg daily orally or 9.5 mg daily transdermally) appears to be beneficial for people with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. In comparisons with placebo, better outcomes were observed for rate of decline of cognitive function and activities of daily living, although the effects were small and of uncertain clinical importance. There was also a benefit from rivastigmine on the outcome of clinician's global assessment. There were no differences between the rivastigmine group and placebo group in behavioural change or impact on carers. At these doses the transdermal patch may have fewer side effects than the capsules but has comparable efficacy. The quality of evidence is only moderate for all of the outcomes reviewed because of a risk of bias due to dropouts. All the studies with usable data were industry funded or sponsored. This review has not examined economic data.

Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This review is an update of a previously published review in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 1, 2011) on 'Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy'. Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurologic disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available drugs. Felbamate is one of the second-generation antiepileptic drugs and its effects as an add-on therapy to standard drugs are assessed in this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (24 July 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2013, Issue 6), and PubMed (24 July 2013). This search was run for the original review on 20 May 2010. There were no language and time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with refractory partial-onset seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel or crossover design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. We resolved disagreements by discussion. If disagreements persisted, the third review author arbitrated. We assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials with a total of 153 participants were included. The first was a parallel design, the second had a two-period crossover design, and the third had a three-period crossover design. One study was at unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. And in the same study, there was no description of how to blind outcome assessment, performance blinding was for participants, might not be for doctors. Two studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the results. None of the three studies reported 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Only one study reported absolute and percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, P values were 0.046 and 0.018, respectively. Adverse effects rates were higher during the felbamate period than the placebo period, particularly headache, nausea and dizziness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, limited number of individual studies and differences in outcome measure, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in patients with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.Since the last version of this review no new studies have been found.

Cholinergic symptoms with low serum cholinesterase from therapeutic cholinesterase inhibitor toxicity.

Although cholinesterase inhibitors have been frequently used in the treatment of Alzheimer disease, its effects on serum cholinesterase concentrations have been rarely described. We described significant depression of serum cholinesterase levels due to cholinesterase inhibitor toxicity from redundant use of donepezil and rivastigmine in a 78-year-old man. Recovery of serum cholinesterase level was noted upon drug discontinuation and cholinergic symptom resolution. Serum cholinesterase level can be used as a biomarker for central cholinesterase inhibitor toxicity.

Cognitive function in early clinical phase huntington disease after rivastigmine treatment.

BACKGROUND: In Huntington disease (HD) patients receiving rivastigmine treatment improvement of behavioral symptoms and of cognitive function (assessed with screening diagnostic instruments) has been reported. The aim of the present study was to verify such improvement in cognitive function by cognitive function assessment with a detailed neuropsychological battery covering all relevant cognitive systems expected to be impaired in early phase HD. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighteen (18) HD patients entered the study and were randomly allocated to the rivastigmine and placebo group. All subjects underwent neuropsychological assessment at baseline. Follow-up neuropsychological assessment was applied after 6 months of rivastigmine or placebo treatment. Eighteen (18) healthy controls entered the study to control for practice effect and underwent neuropsychological assessment at baseline and after 6 months, without treatment. The neuropsychological battery consisted of assessment tools that are sensitive to cognitive impairment seen in early phase HD: CTMT, SDMT, Stroop (attention and information control), RFFT, TOL, Verbal fluency (executive functioning), CVLT-II, RCFT (learning and memory). Effect of rivastigmine and possible effect of practice was assessed using the mixed ANOVA model. RESULTS: No statistically significant effect of rivastigmine treatment on cognitive function in HD patients was detected. There was no evidence for practice or placebo effect. CONCLUSIONS: Detailed neuropsychological assessment did not confirm previously reported effect of rivastigmine treatment on cognitive function in HD patients. The limitations of our study are, in particular, small sample size and the lack of a single measure of relevant cognitive functioning in HD patients. Instead of focusing solely on statistical significance, a clinical relevance study is proposed to clarify the issue of rivastigmine effects in HD.

Urolithiasis in patients on high dose felbamate.

PURPOSE: We report 4 cases of felbamate urolithiasis. We identified only 1 prior case report of a felbamate stone. Felbamate is an antiepileptic drug used to treat refractory seizures and has minor side effects when given in recommended doses. We analyzed the characteristics, evaluation, treatment and outcomes in this challenging group of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following institutional review board approval, we conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients who presented with a diagnosis of urolithiasis, were on felbamate and had stone analysis consistent with a felbamate origin. RESULTS: All 4 patients had refractory seizures and 3 had severe developmental delay. Presentation ranged from an incidental finding to gross hematuria to agitation and pain. Stones were not visible on plain x-ray except in 1 case involving mixed stone composition. Decrease or cessation of the drug has not been feasible in 2 patients, and 3 patients have had recurrent stones. Initial stone analysis did not correctly identify the stone composition as felbamate in 2 cases, suggesting that the origin of these stones may not always be recognized. CONCLUSIONS: We report the occurrence of felbamate stones in a series of patients on high dose felbamate therapy. Accurate diagnosis is made more difficult by the clinical complexity of the patient population (including severe developmental delay), the radiolucent nature of the stones and the possibility of inaccurate analysis of stone composition.

Acute dystonic reaction with rivastigmine.

Dystonic reactions are adverse extrapyramidal side effects and are common to antipsychotics, antiemetics, and a variety of other drugs. Rivastigmine, an anticholinesterase of carbamate variety, is well tolerated. A case of acute dystonic reaction with rivastigmine patch is being reported.

Drugs for cognitive loss and dementia.

The drugs currently available for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias can provide limited symptomatic improvement. The acetylcholinesterase inhibitors donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine and the NMDA-receptor antagonist memantine have produced modest but apparently persistent improvements in cognition, activities of daily living, and behavior in patients with disease severity ranging from mild to severe. Among the acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, transdermal rivastigmine causes fewer gastrointestinal side effects than the oral formulation. Whether adding memantine to an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor is more effective than an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor alone remains to be established; clinical trial results have been mixed. None of these agents have been shown to stop or reverse the underlying neurodegenerative process.

Rivastigmine patch for treatment of Alzheimer's disease in clinical practice in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Rivastigmine is a cholinesterase inhibitor for treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia associated with Parkinson's disease. The new patch formulation was recently made available. We assessed the safety, tolerability, and cognitive outcome of rivastigmine patch in treatment of mild to moderate AD in clinical practice in Thailand. METHODS: A multicentre, hospital-based, prospective observational study was conducted in nine hospitals across Thailand. Patients with probable mild to moderate AD who received the rivastigmine patch were enrolled. Data were collected data at baseline, weeks 4-8 and after week16. RESULTS: A total of 116 AD patients were screened, and three were excluded. Of 113 patients, 62.8% were women with a mean age of 73.3 ± 9.2 years; 79.7% were newly diagnosed. One-third of all patients had been using antipsychotic or antidepressant medication. Common comorbidities were hypertension and dyslipidemia. The Thai Mental State Examination score significantly increased from 18.6 to 20.3 (weeks 4-8) and 20.4 (week 16+) (P < 0.001). Scores based on physicians' (Clinical Global Impression) and caregivers' (Patients' Caregiver Global Impression of Change) impressions of improvement suggested minimal improvement. Because of adverse events, seven patients's dosages were reduced 10 cm(2) to 5 cm(2) or from 5 cm(2) to nothing. Itching was the most common adverse symptom. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 16 weeks after initiation of rivastigmine patch therapy, patients with probable mild to moderate AD had statistically significant improvement in cognitive function, but clinically marginal benefit. Rivastigmine was safe and well tolerated.

[Effectiveness and limitation of newly approved drugs for Alzheimer's disease].

Galantamine, rivastigmine, and memantine, for the treatment of Alzheimer-type dementia, became covered by national health insurance last year in Japan. Galantamine and rivastigmine are choline esterase inhibitors, and memantine is a glutamate NMDA receptor antagonist. Galantamine also acts on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, in addition to ChEI, and it has an APL action and modulates the receptor function by inducing a structural change of the receptor, as its characteristics. Rivastigmine is used only in patch form, and exhibits an inhibitory effect on butyryl choline esterase. Memantine protects nerve cells by inhibiting excess actions of glutamate. These drugs are also effective for BPSD accompanying dementia. Particularly, memantine exhibits an inhibitory effect on aggressiveness and excitement, as its characteristic. The administration of these 3 drugs for diseases other than Alzheimer-type dementia is not covered by national health insurance. These are expected to be effective for dementia with Lewy bodies, but there has been no evidence reported of an effect on frontotemporal dementia. Dementia manifests diverse symptoms in the course, and consideration of the physical symptoms is indispensable. The thoughtless continuation of anti-dementia and psychiatric agents without consideration of temporary changes and diversity and changes in needs for medical care impair a patient's vital functions and QOL. Those who are involved in the treatment of dementia should always consider the clinical course and changes in needs for psychiatric and physical medical care, and novel anti-dementia drugs should be used based on these.

Psychiatric Adverse Events of Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors in Alzheimer's Disease and Parkinson's Dementia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine are commonly used in the management of various forms of dementia. OBJECTIVES: While these drugs are known to induce classic cholinergic adverse events such as diarrhea, their potential to cause psychiatric adverse events has yet to be thoroughly examined. METHODS: We sought to determine the risk of psychiatric adverse events associated with the use of AChEIs through a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials involving patients with Alzheimer's dementia and Parkinson's dementia. RESULTS: A total of 48 trials encompassing 22,845 patients were included in our analysis. Anorexia was the most commonly reported psychiatric adverse event, followed by agitation, insomnia, and depression. Individuals exposed to AChEIs had a greater risk of experiencing appetite disorders, insomnia, or depression compared with those who received placebo (anorexia: odds ratio [OR] 2.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.29-3.75; p < 0.00001; decreased appetite: OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.33-2.82; p = 0.0006; insomnia: OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.25-1.93; p < 0.0001; and depression: OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.23-2.06, p = 0.0004). Appetite disorders were also more frequent with high-dose versus low-dose therapy. A subgroup analysis revealed that the risk of insomnia was higher for donepezil than for galantamine. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that AChEI therapy may negatively impact psychological health, and careful monitoring of new psychiatric symptoms is warranted. Lowering the dose may resolve some psychiatric adverse events, as may switching to galantamine in the case of insomnia. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021258376).

Do local meteorological conditions influence skin irritation caused by transdermal rivastigmine? A retroprospective, pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the incidence of transdermal rivastigmine treatment withdrawal secondary to adverse skin reactions among the patients from our Memory Clinic. In addition, we tested whether climatic conditions might have an influence on skin irritations leading to eventual treatment disruption. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients from the Brugmann University Hospital Memory Clinic having started transdermal rivastigmine between June 2008 and December 2010. Local meteorological data were provided by the Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium. RESULTS: A total of 26.9% of the patients experienced adverse skin reactions at the rivastigmine application site, leading to treatment discontinuation in 19.2% of the cases. Rivastigmine cutaneous tolerability was not found to be related to demographic parameters, Mini Mental Status Examination score, or type of dementia. High temperature and low air humidity during the first month of treatment were found to be associated with a higher incidence of skin reactions and secondary treatment disruption. CONCLUSIONS: Transdermal rivastigmine induced a higher incidence of cutaneous adverse events than previously reported in a prospective clinical trial. Moreover, it seems that meteorological conditions favoring skin perspiration (high temperature and low air humidity) during the first month of treatment might have an influence on transdermal rivastigmine skin tolerability.

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.

A rivastigmine-precipitated manic episode in a patient with Alzheimer-type dementia.

The occurrence of mania in the geriatric population is rare. Furthermore, there were only six case reports of elderly patients with secondary mania resulting from treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors. In all cases, patients had a prior psychiatric history. We report the case of an elderly patient with no prior history of psychiatric or other organic disorders who experienced first episode mania following treatment with rivastigmine. We discuss the possible mechanism of mania in this patient.

Safety and tolerability of rivastigmine transdermal patch formulation in newly diagnosed patients with Alzheimer's dementia in naturalistic conditions.

AIM: The majority of available data on safety and tolerability issues regarding cholinesterase inhibitors used for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease has been available for orally administered formulations. The objective of this prospective, 24 week, observational, non-interventional post-marketing surveillance study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability, as well as the efficacy, of the rivastigmine transdermal patch formulation in newly diagnosed patients with Alzheimer's dementia in naturalistic conditions. METHODS: Safety and tolerability assessment included the monitoring and recording of adverse events and withdrawals at any time during the study. The efficacy parameter was determined based on the score of the Mini-Mental State Examination. RESULTS: Out of the 433 patients, 11 patients (2.54%) suffered serious adverse events. Non-serious adverse events were reported in 179 patients (41.34%). As adverse event is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that may present during treatment with a pharmaceutical product but that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. The most common adverse event in the present study was a decline in the Mini-Mental State Examination score in 97 patients (22.40%). The second most common non-serious adverse event was a skin reaction in 61 patients (14.09%). Treatment with rivastigmine continued in 139 cases (32.10%) and was discontinued in 40 cases (9.24%). The median Mini-Mental State Examination score observed at the time of inclusion was 21.0, and after 6 months, it was 22.0 (W 63441; P < 0.001). Because of several limitations, the open-label design of the present study necessitates caution when interpreting the results. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the rivastigmine transdermal patch is safe and tolerable for Alzheimer's dementia patients in naturalistic conditions.