This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

75/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 75 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Plain-language summary

Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors are approved drugs currently used for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. Basal forebrain cholinergic system (BFCS) atrophy is reported to precede both entorhinal cortex atrophy and memory impairment in AD, challenging the traditional model of the temporal sequence of topographical pathology associated with AD. We studied the effect of one-year Donepezil treatment on the rate of BFCS atrophy in prodromal AD patients using a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of Donepezil (10 mg/day). Reduced annual BFCS rates of atrophy were found in the Donepezil group compared to the Placebo treated arm. Secondary analyses on BFCS subregions demonstrated the largest treatment effects in the Nucleus Basalis of Meynert (NbM) and the medial septum/diagonal band (Ch1/2). Donepezil administered at a prodromal stage of AD seems to substantially reduce the rate of atrophy of the BFCS nuclei with highest concentration of cholinergic neurons projecting to the cortex (NbM), hippocampus and entorhinal cortex (Ch1/2).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Cavedo, E., Grothe, M. J., Colliot, O., Lista, S., Chupin, M., Dormont, D., et al. (2017). Reduced basal forebrain atrophy progression in a randomized Donepezil trial in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. Scientific reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09780-3

Vancouver

Cavedo E, Grothe MJ, Colliot O, Lista S, Chupin M, Dormont D, et al. Reduced basal forebrain atrophy progression in a randomized Donepezil trial in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. Scientific reports. 2017. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-09780-3. PMID: 28916821.

BibTeX

@article{cavedo2017-28916821,
  author  = {Cavedo, E. and Grothe, M. J. and Colliot, O. and Lista, S. and Chupin, M. and Dormont, D. and Houot, M. and Lehéricy, S. and others},
  title   = {{Reduced basal forebrain atrophy progression in a randomized Donepezil trial in prodromal Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Scientific reports},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1038/s41598-017-09780-3},
  pmid    = {28916821},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09780-3}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a trial. Participants are assigned to a treatment or a comparison, so the key questions are who was enrolled, whether the comparison group got a placebo or nothing, how long people were followed, and whether the result is on a measure that matters to patients or on a biomarker. Open-label and small trials can overstate benefit.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded high. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. High means the abstract mentions a randomized design, a meta-analysis or a systematic review. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Basal forebrain cholinergic system (BFCS) atrophy is reported to precede both entorhinal cortex atrophy and memory impairment in AD, challenging the traditional model of the temporal sequence of topographical pathology associated with AD.
Reduced annual BFCS rates of atrophy were found in the Donepezil group compared to the Placebo treated arm.
Secondary analyses on BFCS subregions demonstrated the largest treatment effects in the Nucleus Basalis of Meynert (NbM) and the medial septum/diagonal band (Ch1/2).

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 75/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomized controlled 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 46 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 75 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Scientific reports)
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	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 28916821)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	46 / 61	Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 46 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 75 out of 100.
Total	75 / 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.

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 “forebrain-atrophy”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “forebrain-atrophy”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Treatments

Where this led: Donepezil on the treatments page — its current status, approval date, side-effect rate and list price, kept up to date.

See all studies in Treatments →