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.

41/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Plain-language summary

Donepezil and rivastigmine are acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors used to improve cholinergic neurotransmission and cognitive function in Alzheimer's disease (AD). This study examined direct effects of these drugs on AChE activity in the frontal, temporal, and parietal cortices in AD. Six AD patients were scanned with positron emission tomography before and after 3 months of treatment with donepezil (10 mg/day), and five AD patients were scanned before and after 3 to 5 months of treatment with rivastigmine (9 mg/day). Healthy unmedicated controls were imaged twice to evaluate the reproducibility of the method. A specific AChE tracer, [methyl-11C]N-methyl-piperidyl-4-acetate, and a 3D positron emission tomography system with MRI coregistration were used for imaging. Treatment with donepezil reduced the AChE activity (k3 values) in the AD brain by 39% in the frontal (p < 0.001, Bonferroni corrected), 29% in the temporal (p = 0.02, corrected) and 28% in the parietal cortex (p = 0.05, corrected). The corresponding levels of inhibition for rivastigmine were 37% (p = 0.003, corrected), 28% (p = 0.03, uncorrected) and 28% (p = 0.05, corrected). When the treatment groups were combined, the level of AChE inhibition was significantly greater in the frontal cortex compared to the temporal cortex (p = 0.03, corrected). The test-retest analysis with healthy subjects indicated good reproducibility for the method, with a nonsignificant 0% to 7% intrasubject variability between scans. The present study provides first evidence for the effect of rivastigmine on cortical AChE activity. Our results indicate that the pooled effects of donepezil and rivastigmine on brain AChE are greater in the frontal cortex compared to the temporal cortex in AD. This regional difference is probably related to the prominent temporoparietal reduction of AChE in AD. We hypothesize that the clinical improvement in behavioral and attentional symptoms of AD due to AChE inhibitors is associated with the frontal AChE inhibition.

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

APA 7th

Kaasinen, V., Någren, K., Järvenpää, T., Roivainen, A., Yu, M., Oikonen, V., et al. (2002). Regional effects of donepezil and rivastigmine on cortical acetylcholinesterase activity in Alzheimer's disease. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004714-200212000-00012

Vancouver

Kaasinen V, Någren K, Järvenpää T, Roivainen A, Yu M, Oikonen V, et al. Regional effects of donepezil and rivastigmine on cortical acetylcholinesterase activity in Alzheimer's disease. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology. 2002. doi:10.1097/00004714-200212000-00012. PMID: 12454562.

BibTeX

@article{kaasinen2002-12454562,
  author  = {Kaasinen, V. and Någren, K. and Järvenpää, T. and Roivainen, A. and Yu, M. and Oikonen, V. and Kurki, T. and Rinne, J. O.},
  title   = {{Regional effects of donepezil and rivastigmine on cortical acetylcholinesterase activity in Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Journal of clinical psychopharmacology},
  year    = {2002},
  doi     = {10.1097/00004714-200212000-00012},
  pmid    = {12454562},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1097/00004714-200212000-00012}
}

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 names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. 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 low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. 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

When the treatment groups were combined, the level of AChE inhibition was significantly greater in the frontal cortex compared to the temporal cortex (p = 0.03, corrected).
Our results indicate that the pooled effects of donepezil and rivastigmine on brain AChE are greater in the frontal cortex compared to the temporal cortex in AD.
We hypothesize that the clinical improvement in behavioral and attentional symptoms of AD due to AChE inhibitors is associated with the frontal AChE inhibition.

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

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 41/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, 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 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical psychopharmacology)
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	1 / 5	2002 — older than 20 years, still counted
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	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 12454562)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	24 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100.
Total	41 / 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 “acetylcholinesterase-activity”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “acetylcholinesterase-activity”; 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: Rivastigmine on the treatments page — its current status, approval date, side-effect rate and list price, kept up to date.

See all studies in Treatments →