Home › Research › Treatments
A randomized, placebo-controlled study of memantine as adjunctive treatment in patients with schizophrenia
Lieberman JA, Papadakis K, Csernansky J, Litman R, Volavka J, Jia XD, Gage A, MEM-MD-29 Study Group.. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2008-11-12
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Plain-language summary
Memantine, an uncompetitive antagonist of glutamate receptors of the N-methyl-D-aspartate type is approved for the treatment of moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease. A growing body of evidence supports a link between the glutamatergic neurotransmission and schizophrenia. The purpose of this study (MEM-MD-29) was to examine the efficacy and safety of memantine as an adjunctive treatment to atypical antipsychotics in patients with persistent residual psychopathology of schizophrenia. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, participants were assigned to receive 20 mg/day memantine (n=70) or placebo (n=68), in addition to continuing treatment with atypical antipsychotics, for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was the total score on the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS). Secondary measures were positive and negative PANSS scores, PANSS responders, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S), Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I), and Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS). Missing data were imputed using the last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach. Safety was assessed by means of physical examination, clinical laboratory evaluation, recording of adverse events (AEs), and measures of extrapyramidal symptoms. At end point, total PANSS scores did not differ between the memantine and the placebo group (p=0.570, LOCF). A similar outcome was observed for all secondary measures. The frequency of serious AEs in the memantine vs placebo group was 8.7 vs 6.0%; treatment discontinuations because of AEs occurred in 11.6 and 3.0% of patients in these groups, respectively. Memantine showed no efficacy as an adjunctive therapy in schizophrenia patients with residual psychopathology and was associated with a higher incidence of AEs than placebo.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Lieberman, J. A., Papadakis, K., Csernansky, J., Litman, R., Volavka, J., Jia, X. D., et al. (2009). A randomized, placebo-controlled study of memantine as adjunctive treatment in patients with schizophrenia. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2008.200
Vancouver
Lieberman JA, Papadakis K, Csernansky J, Litman R, Volavka J, Jia XD, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled study of memantine as adjunctive treatment in patients with schizophrenia. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology. 2009. doi:10.1038/npp.2008.200. PMID: 19005465.
BibTeX
@article{lieberman2009-19005465,
author = {Lieberman, J. A. and Papadakis, K. and Csernansky, J. and Litman, R. and Volavka, J. and Jia, X. D. and Gage, A. and {MEM-MD-29 Study Group}},
title = {{A randomized, placebo-controlled study of memantine as adjunctive treatment in patients with schizophrenia}},
journal = {Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology},
year = {2009},
doi = {10.1038/npp.2008.200},
pmid = {19005465},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2008.200}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Memantine showed no efficacy as an adjunctive therapy in schizophrenia patients with residual psychopathology and was associated with a higher incidence of AEs than placebo.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Participants70
- Effect size6.0%; 3.0%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 69/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 42 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomized controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2009 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 70 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 2 / 2 | Randomized and blinded or placebo-controlled (as stated in the record) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 19005465) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 42 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 42 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100. |
| Total | 69 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Treatments from nearby years
Also tagged “treatment”
15 studies in the library carry the topic tag “treatment”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 15 tagged studies.