Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Design and rationale of the EBBINGHAUS trial: A phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study to assess the effect of evolocumab on cognitive function in patients with clinically evident cardiovascular disease and receiving statin background lipid-lowering therapy-A cognitive study of patients enrolled in the FOURIER trial
Giugliano RP, Mach F, Zavitz K, Kurtz C, Schneider J, Wang H, Keech A, Pedersen TR et al.. Clinical cardiology, 2017-02-16
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Plain-language summary
Some observational studies raised concern that statins may cause memory impairment, leading to a US Food and Drug Administration warning. Similar questions were raised regarding proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) and neurocognitive function. No prospectively designed study has evaluated the relationship between long-term PCSK9i use and cognition changes. Patients with prior cardiovascular disease treated with maximally tolerated statin enrolled in FOURIER (the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cardiovascular outcome study of the PCSK9i evolocumab) could participate in this prospective assessment of cognitive function (EBBINGHAUS). Key additional exclusion criteria for EBBINGHAUS were dementia, cognitive impairment, or other significant mental or neurological disorder. Cognitive testing was performed using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery, a tablet-based tool assessing executive function, working memory, memory function, and psychomotor speed at baseline, weeks 24 and 48, every 48 weeks thereafter, and study end. The primary endpoint was spatial working memory strategy index of executive function (SWMSI). The primary hypothesis was that evolocumab would be noninferior to placebo in the mean change from baseline over time in SWMSI. Fifteen hundred cognitively normal patients completing the assessments provided approximately 97% power to demonstrate that the upper 95% confidence interval for the treatment difference in mean change from baseline in SWMSI over time is <20% of the SD of the mean change in the placebo group. An exploratory analysis will compare neurocognitive function in patients with post-baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <25 mg/dL. EBBINGHAUS will evaluate whether the addition of evolocumab to statin therapy affects cognitive function over time in patients with stable cardiovascular disease.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Giugliano, R. P., Mach, F., Zavitz, K., Kurtz, C., Schneider, J., Wang, H., et al. (2017). Design and rationale of the EBBINGHAUS trial: A phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study to assess the effect of evolocumab on cognitive function in patients with clinically evident cardiovascular disease and receiving statin background lipid-lowering therapy-A cognitive study of patients enrolled in the FOURIER trial. Clinical cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.22678
Vancouver
Giugliano RP, Mach F, Zavitz K, Kurtz C, Schneider J, Wang H, et al. Design and rationale of the EBBINGHAUS trial: A phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study to assess the effect of evolocumab on cognitive function in patients with clinically evident cardiovascular disease and receiving statin background lipid-lowering therapy-A cognitive study of patients enrolled in the FOURIER trial. Clinical cardiology. 2017. doi:10.1002/clc.22678. PMID: 28207168.
BibTeX
@article{giugliano2017-28207168,
author = {Giugliano, R. P. and Mach, F. and Zavitz, K. and Kurtz, C. and Schneider, J. and Wang, H. and Keech, A. and Pedersen, T. R. and others},
title = {{Design and rationale of the EBBINGHAUS trial: A phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study to assess the effect of evolocumab on cognitive function in patients with clinically evident cardiovascular disease and receiving statin background lipid-lowering therapy-A cognitive study of patients enrolled in the FOURIER trial}},
journal = {Clinical cardiology},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1002/clc.22678},
pmid = {28207168},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.22678}
}
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
- Key additional exclusion criteria for EBBINGHAUS were dementia, cognitive impairment, or other significant mental or neurological disorder.
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 72/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a large phase 3 trial. Scored zero for sample size and effect reported 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 and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 44 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 72 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Clinical cardiology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A large phase 3 trial (from PubMed type “Clinical Trial, Phase III”) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2017 — 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 | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| 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 28207168) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 44 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 44 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 72 out of 100. |
| Total | 72 / 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 Cognitive tests and assessment from nearby years
Also tagged “metabolic-syndrome”
306 studies in the library carry the topic tag “metabolic-syndrome”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 306 tagged studies.