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.

58/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Objective To estimate the treatment effects of SB-742457 and donepezil in Alzheimer disease (AD) in a contemporary clinical trial. Method Randomized, controlled, parallel-group, exploratory study with a 4-week, single-blind, placebo run-in phase and 24-week, double-blind treatment phase. Primary endpoints were Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change with caregiver input (CIBIC+) and the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog). Results One hundred ninety eight subjects with mild-to-moderate probable AD (MMSE scores 12-26) were randomized; 196 were included in the intent-to-treat population (placebo, n = 61; SB-742457 35 mg/day, n = 68; donepezil 10 mg/day, n = 67), and 161 completed. Drug-placebo treatment differences in CIBIC+ score at week 24 were -0.17 (90% confidence interval [CI]: -0.50, 0.16) for SB-742457 and -0.28 (90% CI: -0.61, 0.05) for donepezil. Drug-placebo treatment differences (90% CI) in change from baseline ADAS-Cog score at Week 24 were -0.4 (-2.2, 1.4) for SB-742457 and -1.2 (-3.0, 0.6) for donepezil. All treatments were generally safe and well tolerated. Conclusions In this exploratory study, SB-742457 and donepezil were associated with improvements in global function. Treatment effect on cognition for both SB-742457 and donepezil was smaller than those previously observed in previous clinical studies with donepezil.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: High

This is a trial of 61 participants. All treatments were generally safe and well tolerated.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

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

APA 7th

Maher-Edwards, G., Dixon, R., Hunter, J., Gold, M., Hopton, G., Jacobs, G., et al. (2011). SB-742457 and donepezil in Alzheimer disease: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.2562

Vancouver

Maher-Edwards G, Dixon R, Hunter J, Gold M, Hopton G, Jacobs G, et al. SB-742457 and donepezil in Alzheimer disease: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. 2011. doi:10.1002/gps.2562. PMID: 20872778.

BibTeX

@article{maheredwards2011-20872778,
  author  = {Maher-Edwards, G. and Dixon, R. and Hunter, J. and Gold, M. and Hopton, G. and Jacobs, G. and Williams, P.},
  title   = {{SB-742457 and donepezil in Alzheimer disease: a randomized, placebo-controlled study}},
  journal = {International journal of geriatric psychiatry},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1002/gps.2562},
  pmid    = {20872778},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.2562}
}

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 7 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 lists 61 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
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

Results One hundred ninety eight subjects with mild-to-moderate probable AD (MMSE scores 12-26) were randomized; 196 were included in the intent-to-treat population (placebo, n = 61; SB-742457 35 mg/day, n = 68; donepezil 10 mg/day, n = 67), and 161 completed.
Conclusions In this exploratory study, SB-742457 and donepezil were associated with improvements in global function.

Why it matters

In this exploratory 24-week study of 196 participants with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease, both SB-742457 and donepezil were associated with improvements in global function, but treatment effects on cognition for both were smaller than those previously observed in earlier donepezil studies. All treatments were generally safe and well tolerated.

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

Study details

Participants61
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 58/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of geriatric psychiatry)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry: journal h-index 190 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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	1 / 5	2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	61 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	2 / 2	Randomized and blinded or placebo-controlled (as stated in the record)
Times cited	5 / 7	Cited 106 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	2 / 5	6.2 citations a year over 17 year(s) since 2011
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 3.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 8 other studies in this library
Still being cited	1 / 4	Cited 10 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	1 / 4	Last-listed author Pauline M. Williams: h-index 15 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	0 / 3	GlaxoSmithKline (United Kingdom): institution h-index 611 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	0 / 3	OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20872778)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	58 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 10 Oct 2026), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

8 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Treatments from nearby years

Also tagged “trial”

783 studies in the library carry the topic tag “trial”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 783 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 →