Home › Research › Treatments
Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Efficacy and Safety of Donepezil, Galantamine, Rivastigmine, and Memantine for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease
Li DD, Zhang YH, Zhang W, Zhao P.. Frontiers in neuroscience, 2019-05-15
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
To study the impact of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine, and memantine on cognitive, functional, behavioral, global changes and adverse effects in patients with mild, moderate and severe Alzheimer's disease (AD), we screened the literature published before September 2017 in the Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library and Web of Science Electronic databases according to the inclusion criteria. Thirty-six studies were finally determined from 1560 preliminary screened articles. The AD Assessment Scale-cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog), AD Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input scale (CIBIC+) were used as valid endpoints. Of the 36 trials included, meta-analyses of these placebo-control trials showed that there were significant differences between the donepezil, rivastigmine and placebo groups using ADAS-cog, ADCS-ADL, and CIBIC+. Meta-analyses of these placebo-controlled trials showed that there were significant differences between the galantamine and placebo groups using ADAS-cog, ADCS-ADL, NPI, and CIBIC+. These observations suggest that memantine is beneficial for stabilizing or slowing the decline in ADAS-cog and ADCS-ADL 19 changes in AD patients. However, there was no significant effect according to the ADCS-ADL 23 , NPI, and CIBIC+ tests, which indicated that memantine treatment has no significant effect on these cognitive aspects of AD patients. Different effects of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine, or memantine on AD were found in this study. According to the results, we conclude that galantamine is effective in treating all aspects of AD and is the first choice for the treatment of AD. However, due to limited data, we should consider additional data to obtain more stable results.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Li, D. D., Zhang, Y. H., Zhang, W., & Zhao, P. (2019). Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Efficacy and Safety of Donepezil, Galantamine, Rivastigmine, and Memantine for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease. Frontiers in neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00472
Vancouver
Li DD, Zhang YH, Zhang W, Zhao P. Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Efficacy and Safety of Donepezil, Galantamine, Rivastigmine, and Memantine for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2019. doi:10.3389/fnins.2019.00472. PMID: 31156366.
BibTeX
@article{li2019-31156366,
author = {Li, D. D. and Zhang, Y. H. and Zhang, W. and Zhao, P.},
title = {{Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Efficacy and Safety of Donepezil, Galantamine, Rivastigmine, and Memantine for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease}},
journal = {Frontiers in neuroscience},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.3389/fnins.2019.00472},
pmid = {31156366},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00472}
}
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.
Key findings
- Of the 36 trials included, meta-analyses of these placebo-control trials showed that there were significant differences between the donepezil, rivastigmine and placebo groups using ADAS-cog, ADCS-ADL, and CIBIC+.
- Meta-analyses of these placebo-controlled trials showed that there were significant differences between the galantamine and placebo groups using ADAS-cog, ADCS-ADL, NPI, and CIBIC+.
- These observations suggest that memantine is beneficial for stabilizing or slowing the decline in ADAS-cog and ADCS-ADL 19 changes in AD patients.
- However, there was no significant effect according to the ADCS-ADL 23 , NPI, and CIBIC+ tests, which indicated that memantine treatment has no significant effect on these cognitive aspects of AD patients.
- According to the results, we conclude that galantamine is effective in treating all aspects of AD and is the first choice for the treatment of AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 69/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| 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 | 2019 — 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) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| 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 31156366) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 40 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 58 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
Also tagged “meta-analysis”
13 studies in the library carry the topic tag “meta-analysis”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 13 tagged studies.