Home › Research › Treatments
Clinical efficacy and safety of donepezil in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease in Chinese patients
Nan Zhang, Marc L Gordon. Clinical interventions in aging, 2018-10-11
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Donepezil, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (AChEI), has been widely used to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD) in China. However, there are few studies focusing on the efficacy and safety of donepezil in Chinese patients. In this review, we discuss 1) the efficacy of donepezil and its comparison with other AChEIs or memantine, 2) the therapeutic responses to donepezil and its influencing factors, and 3) the safety and tolerability of donepezil in Chinese patients with different stages of AD and amnestic mild cognitive impairment, and further compare the similarities and differences of the results between Chinese studies and previous Western studies that predominantly enrolled Caucasian subjects. We include Chinese clinical trials and other well-designed studies investigating donepezil or using donepezil as a positive control, in which the efficacy and/or safety of donepezil have been analyzed. Based on these studies, donepezil has been shown to be effective and safe in Chinese AD patients and may impact AD biomarkers, such as hippocampal atrophy, Aβ, and tau. In addition, the therapeutic response to donepezil may be influenced by apolipoprotein E or cytochrome P450 2D6 polymorphism.
Key findings
- In this review, we discuss 1) the efficacy of donepezil and its comparison with other AChEIs or memantine, 2) the therapeutic responses to donepezil and its influencing factors, and 3) the safety and tolerability of donepezil in Chinese patients with different stages of AD and amnestic mild cognitive impairment, and further compare the similarities and differences of the results between Chinese studies and previous Western studies that predominantly enrolled Caucasian subjects.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 39/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. 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, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Clinical interventions in aging) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30349215) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 22 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100. |
| Total | 39 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Zhang, N., & Gordon, M. L. (2018). Clinical efficacy and safety of donepezil in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease in Chinese patients. Clinical interventions in aging. https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s159920
Vancouver
Zhang N, Gordon ML. Clinical efficacy and safety of donepezil in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease in Chinese patients. Clinical interventions in aging. 2018. doi:10.2147/cia.s159920. PMID: 30349215.
BibTeX
@article{zhang2018-30349215,
author = {Zhang, Nan and Gordon, Marc L},
title = {{Clinical efficacy and safety of donepezil in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease in Chinese patients}},
journal = {Clinical interventions in aging},
year = {2018},
doi = {10.2147/cia.s159920},
pmid = {30349215},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s159920}
}
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “cholinesterase”
271 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cholinesterase”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 271 tagged studies.