Home › Research › Clinical safety
Clinical Symptom Responses to Atypical Antipsychotic Medications in Alzheimer’s Disease: Phase 1 Outcomes From the CATIE-AD Effectiveness Trial
David L. Sultzer, Sonia Thomas, Pierre N. Tariot, Karen Dagerman, Barry D. Lebowitz, Constantine George Lyketsos, Robert Alan Rosenheck, John Hsiao et al.. American Journal of Psychiatry, 2008-06-02
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Plain-language summary
In relation to placebo, the last observation in phase 1 showed greater improvement with olanzapine or risperidone on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory total score, risperidone on the Clinical Global Impression of Changes, olanzapine and risperidone on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) hostile suspiciousness factor, and risperidone on the BPRS psychosis factor. There was worsening with olanzapine on the BPRS withdrawn depression factor. Among patients continuing phase 1 treatment at 12 weeks, there were no significant differences between antipsychotics and placebo on cognition, functioning, care needs, or quality of life, except for worsened functioning with olanzapine compared to placebo. In this descriptive analysis of outpatients with Alzheimer's disease in usual care settings, some clinical symptoms improved with atypical antipsychotics. Antipsychotics may be more effective for particular symptoms, such as anger, aggression, and paranoid ideas. They do not appear to improve functioning, care needs, or quality of life.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Sultzer, D. L., Thomas, S., Tariot, P. N., Dagerman, K., Lebowitz, B. D., Lyketsos, C. G., et al. (2008). Clinical Symptom Responses to Atypical Antipsychotic Medications in Alzheimer’s Disease: Phase 1 Outcomes From the CATIE-AD Effectiveness Trial. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111779
Vancouver
Sultzer DL, Thomas S, Tariot PN, Dagerman K, Lebowitz BD, Lyketsos CG, et al. Clinical Symptom Responses to Atypical Antipsychotic Medications in Alzheimer’s Disease: Phase 1 Outcomes From the CATIE-AD Effectiveness Trial. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2008. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111779. PMID: 18519523.
BibTeX
@article{sultzer2008-18519523,
author = {Sultzer, David L. and Thomas, Sonia and Tariot, Pierre N. and Dagerman, Karen and Lebowitz, Barry D. and Lyketsos, Constantine George and Rosenheck, Robert Alan and Hsiao, John and others},
title = {{Clinical Symptom Responses to Atypical Antipsychotic Medications in Alzheimer’s Disease: Phase 1 Outcomes From the CATIE-AD Effectiveness Trial}},
journal = {American Journal of Psychiatry},
year = {2008},
doi = {10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111779},
pmid = {18519523},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111779}
}
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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- In relation to placebo, the last observation in phase 1 showed greater improvement with olanzapine or risperidone on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory total score, risperidone on the Clinical Global Impression of Changes, olanzapine and risperidone on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) hostile suspiciousness factor, and risperidone on the BPRS psychosis factor.
- There was worsening with olanzapine on the BPRS withdrawn depression factor.
- Among patients continuing phase 1 treatment at 12 weeks, there were no significant differences between antipsychotics and placebo on cognition, functioning, care needs, or quality of life, except for worsened functioning with olanzapine compared to placebo.
- In this descriptive analysis of outpatients with Alzheimer's disease in usual care settings, some clinical symptoms improved with atypical antipsychotics.
- Antipsychotics may be more effective for particular symptoms, such as anger, aggression, and paranoid ideas.
Study details
- Study designclinical trial
- Participants421
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / 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 and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (American Journal of Psychiatry) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | Design recorded as “clinical trial”, which our rubric does not rank (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 | 1 / 5 | 2008 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 421 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 18519523) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 28 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 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 Clinical safety from nearby years
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.