Home › Research › Treatments
Symptomatic effect of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine on cognitive deficits in the APP23 model
Debby Van Dam, Dorothee Abramowski, Matthias Staufenbiel, Peter Paul De Deyn. Psychopharmacology, 2005-01-15
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
All cholinesterase inhibitors reduced cognitive deficits with the following optimal daily doses: galantamine 1.25 mg kg(-1), rivastigmine 0.5 mg kg(-1) and donepezil 0.3 mg kg(-1). Higher dosages often did not exert beneficial effects in accordance with inverted U-shaped dose-response curves described for cholinomimetics. Symptomatic efficacy of memantine on cognition was mild, with significant amelioration manifesting during probe trial. This is the first study to simultaneously evaluate the efficacy of therapeutically relevant doses of these four compounds in one particular learning and memory paradigm, being the Morris water maze. The fact that symptomatic intervention was able to diminish cognitive impairment, substantially adds to the validity of the APP23 model as a valuable tool to evaluate future therapeutic approaches.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Van Dam, D., Abramowski, D., Staufenbiel, M., & De Deyn, P. P. (2005). Symptomatic effect of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine on cognitive deficits in the APP23 model. Psychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-004-2132-z
Vancouver
Van Dam D, Abramowski D, Staufenbiel M, De Deyn PP. Symptomatic effect of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine on cognitive deficits in the APP23 model. Psychopharmacology. 2005. doi:10.1007/s00213-004-2132-z. PMID: 15654502.
BibTeX
@article{vandam2005-15654502,
author = {Van Dam, Debby and Abramowski, Dorothee and Staufenbiel, Matthias and De Deyn, Peter Paul},
title = {{Symptomatic effect of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine on cognitive deficits in the APP23 model}},
journal = {Psychopharmacology},
year = {2005},
doi = {10.1007/s00213-004-2132-z},
pmid = {15654502},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-004-2132-z}
}
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
- All cholinesterase inhibitors reduced cognitive deficits with the following optimal daily doses: galantamine 1.25 mg kg(-1), rivastigmine 0.5 mg kg(-1) and donepezil 0.3 mg kg(-1).
- Higher dosages often did not exert beneficial effects in accordance with inverted U-shaped dose-response curves described for cholinomimetics.
- Symptomatic efficacy of memantine on cognition was mild, with significant amelioration manifesting during probe trial.
- This is the first study to simultaneously evaluate the efficacy of therapeutically relevant doses of these four compounds in one particular learning and memory paradigm, being the Morris water maze.
- The fact that symptomatic intervention was able to diminish cognitive impairment, substantially adds to the validity of the APP23 model as a valuable tool to evaluate future therapeutic approaches.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Effect sizeor 0.6; or 1.0; or 2.5
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (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 | 2005 — 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 | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 15654502) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 23 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 56 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “repurposing”
234 studies in the library carry the topic tag “repurposing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 234 tagged studies.