Alzheimer Disease: Bullock R

McGuinness B, Craig D, Bullock R, Passmore P. · Department of Geriatric Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Whitla Medical Building, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, UK, BT9 7BL. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #19370582 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001. At that stage there was insufficient evidence to recommend statins for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The scope of this review has been expanded to include all forms of dementia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of statins in the prevention of dementia. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 10 October 2007 using the terms statin*, lovastatin*, pravastatin*, simvastatin*, fluvastatin*, atorvastatin* and rosuvastatin*. The CDCIG Register contains records from many healthcare databases, SIGLE, LILACS as well as many trials databases and is updated regularly. SELECTION CRITERIA: Double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials of statins in people at risk of AD and dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers extracted and assessed data independently and agreement was reached after discussion. Adverse effects were noted. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials were identified with 26,340 participants; HPS 2002 and PROSPER 2002. Age range was 40-82 years across the two studies, PROSPER 2002 included 5804 patients aged 70-82 years and HPS included 20,536 patients with 5806 at least 70 years old at study entry. Mean total cholesterol 5.9 mmol/l, LDL cholesterol 3.4 mmol/l at study entry with mean reduction in LDL cholesterol of 1.0 mmol/l in simvastatin treated patients compared to placebo in HPS 2002. Mean total cholesterol 5.7 mmol/l, LDL cholesterol 3.8 mmol/l at study entry with mean reduction in LDL cholesterol of 1.02 mmol/l in pravastatin treated patients compared to placebo in PROSPER 2002. Mean follow-up 3.2 years in PROSPER, 5 years in HPS 2002. Cognition was measured at different times and with different scales so could not be combined in a meta-analysis. There was no difference in incidence of dementia in HPS 2002 (31 cases in simvastatin group, 31 cases in placebo group) nor in performance on the modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status at final follow-up (23.7% simvastatin group cognitively impaired vs 24.2% in placebo group). There was no difference in cognition between groups either in relation to age at study entry or previous history of cerebrovascular disease. Cognitive function declined at the same rate in both treatment groups in PROSPER 2002, there was no significant difference between pravastatin treated and placebo groups in performance on letter digit codes, picture word learning test, Stroop and Mini Mental State Examination. There was no evidence that statins were detrimental to cognition. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is good evidence from RCTs that statins given in late life to individuals at risk of vascular disease have no effect in preventing AD or dementia. Biologically it seems feasible that statins could prevent dementia due to their role in cholesterol reduction and initial evidence from observational studies was very promising. Indication bias may have been a factor in these studies however and the evidence from subsequent RCTs has been negative.

Aalten P, Verhey FR, Boziki M, Brugnolo A, Bullock R, Byrne EJ, Camus V, Caputo M, Collins D, De Deyn PP, Elina K, Frisoni G, Holmes C, Hurt C, Marriott A, Mecocci P, Nobili F, Ousset PJ, Reynish E, Salmon E, Tsolaki M, Vellas B, Robert PH. · Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Centre Limburg, Maastricht University Hospital, Maastricht, The Netherlands. · Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. · Pubmed #18025783 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the consistency of neuropsychiatric subsyndromes of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory across several clinical and demographic subgroups (e.g. dementia subtypes, dementia severity, medication use, age and gender) in a large sample of outpatients with dementia. METHODS: Cross-sectional data of 2,808 patients with dementia from 12 centres from the European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium were collected. Principal component analysis was used for factor analysis. Subanalyses were performed for dementia subtypes, dementia severity, medication use, age and gender. RESULTS: The results showed the relatively consistent presence of the 4 neuropsychiatric subsyndromes 'hyperactivity', 'psychosis', 'affective symptoms' and 'apathy' across the subanalyses. The factor structure was not dependent on dementia subtypes, age and gender but was dependent on dementia severity and cholinesterase use. The factors hyperactivity and affective symptoms were present in all subanalyses, but the presence of the factors apathy and psychosis was dependent on use of cholinesterase inhibitors and dementia severity, respectively. CONCLUSION: The present study provided evidence of the relative consistency of neuropsychiatric subsyndromes across dementia subtypes, age and gender, thereby stressing the importance of thinking about neuropsychiatric subsyndromes instead of separate symptoms. However, the subsyndromes apathy and psychosis were dependent on use of cholinesterase inhibitors and dementia severity.

Aalten P, Verhey FR, Boziki M, Bullock R, Byrne EJ, Camus V, Caputo M, Collins D, De Deyn PP, Elina K, Frisoni G, Girtler N, Holmes C, Hurt C, Marriott A, Mecocci P, Nobili F, Ousset PJ, Reynish E, Salmon E, Tsolaki M, Vellas B, Robert PH. · Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Centre Limburg, Maastricht University Hospital, Maastricht, The Netherlands. · Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. · Pubmed #17986816 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to identify neuropsychiatric subsyndromes of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory in a large sample of outpatients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Cross-sectional data of 2,354 patients with AD from 12 centres from the European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium were collected. Principal component analysis was used for factor analysis. RESULTS: The results showed the presence of 4 neuropsychiatric subsyndromes: hyperactivity, psychosis, affective symptoms and apathy. The subsyndrome apathy was the most common, occurring in almost 65% of the patients. CONCLUSION: This large study has provided additional robust evidence for the existence of neuropsychiatric subsyndromes in AD.

Burns A, O'Brien J, Anonymous00334, Auriacombe S, Ballard C, Broich K, Bullock R, Feldman H, Ford G, Knapp M, McCaddon A, Iliffe S, Jacova C, Jones R, Lennon S, McKeith I, Orgogozo JM, Purandare N, Richardson M, Ritchie C, Thomas A, Warner J, Wilcock G, Wilkinson D, Anonymous00335. · University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. · J Psychopharmacol. · Pubmed #17060346 No free full text.

Abstract: The British Association for Psychopharmacology (BAP) coordinated a meeting of experts to review the evidence on the drug treatment for dementia. The level of evidence (types) was rated using a standard system: Types 1a and 1b (evidence from meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials or at least one controlled trial respectively); types 2a and 2b (one well-designed study or one other type of quasi experimental study respectively); type 3 (non-experimental descriptive studies); and type 4 (expert opinion). There is type 1a evidence for cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine) for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease; memantine for moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease; and for the use of bright light therapy and aromatherapy. There is type 1a evidence of no effect of anti inflammatory drugs or statins. There is conflicting evidence regarding oestrogens, with type 2a evidence of a protective effect of oestrogens but 1b evidence of a harmful effect. Type 1a evidence for any effect of B12 and folate will be forthcoming when current trials report. There is type 1b evidence for gingko biloba in producing a modest benefit of cognitive function; cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of people with Lewy body disease (particularly neuropsychiatric symptoms); cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in treatment cognitive impairment associated with vascular dementia; and the effect of metal collating agents (although these should not be prescribed until more data on safety and efficacy are available). There is type 1b evidence to show that neither cholinesterase inhibitors nor vitamin E reduce the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease in people with mild cognitive impairment; and there is no evidence that there is any intervention that can prevent the onset of dementia. There is type 1b evidence for the beneficial effects of adding memantine to cholinesterase inhibitors, and type 2b evidence of positive switching outcomes from one cholinesterase inhibitor to another. There is type 2a evidence for a positive effect of reminiscence therapy, and type 2a evidence that cognitive training does not work. There is type 3 evidence to support the use of psychological interventions in dementia. There is type 2 evidence that a clinical diagnosis of dementia can be made accurately and that brain imaging increases that accuracy.Although the consensus statement dealt largely with medication, the role of dementia care in secondary services (geriatric medicine and old age psychiatry) and primary care, along with health economics, was discussed. There is ample evidence that there are effective treatments for people with dementia, and Alzheimer's disease in particular. Patients, their carers, and clinicians deserve to be optimistic in a field which often attracts therapeutic nihilism.

McGuinness B, Todd S, Passmore P, Bullock R. · Department of Geriatric Medicine, Whitla Medical Building, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, UK, BT9 5 HP. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #16625595 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Hypertension and cognitive impairment are prevalent in older people. It is known that hypertension is a direct risk factor for vascular dementia and recent studies have suggested hypertension also impacts upon prevalence of Alzheimer's disease. The question is therefore whether treatment of hypertension lowers the rate of cognitive decline. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of blood pressure lowering treatments for the prevention of dementia and cognitive decline in patients with hypertension but no history of cerebrovascular disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: The trials were identified through a search of CDCIG's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL on 27 April 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials in which pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure were given for at least six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The following outcomes were assessed: incidence of dementia, cognitive change from baseline, blood pressure level, incidence and severity of side effects and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials including 12,091 hypertensive subjects were identified. Average age was 72.8 years. Participants were recruited from industrialised countries. Mean blood pressure at entry across the studies was 170/84 mmHg. All trials instituted a stepped care approach to hypertension treatment, starting with a calcium-channel blocker, a diuretic or an angiotensin receptor blocker. The combined result of the three trials reporting incidence of dementia indicated no significant difference between treatment and placebo (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% CI 0.69, 1.16). Blood pressure reduction resulted in a 11% relative risk reduction of dementia in patients with no prior cerebrovascular disease but this effect was not statistically significant (p = 0.38) and there was considerable heterogeneity between the trials. The combined results from the two trials reporting change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) did not indicate a benefit from treatment (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) = 0.10, 95% CI -0.03, 0.23). Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were reduced significantly in the two trials assessing this outcome (WMD = -7.53, 95% CI -8.28, -6.77 for systolic blood pressure, WMD = -3.87, 95% CI -4.25, -3.50 for diastolic blood pressure).Two trials reported adverse effects requiring discontinuation of treatment and the combined results indicated a significant benefit from placebo (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.06, 1.30). When analysed separately, however, more patients on placebo in SCOPE were likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects; the converse was true in SHEP 1991. Quality of life data could not be analysed in the three studies. There was difficulty with the control group in this review as many of the control subjects received antihypertensive treatment because their blood pressures exceeded pre-set values. In most cases the study became a comparison between the study drug against a usual antihypertensive regimen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no convincing evidence from the trials identified that blood pressure lowering prevents the development of dementia or cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients with no apparent prior cerebrovascular disease. There were significant problems identified with analysing the data, however, due to the number of patients lost to follow-up and the number of placebo patients given active treatment. This introduced bias. More robust results may be obtained by analysing one year data to reduce differential drop-out or by conducting a meta-analysis using individual patient data.

Bullock R. · Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. · Pubmed #16493232 No free full text.

Abstract: Memantine, a moderate-affinity, uncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, is currently the only agent approved for moderately severe to severe Alzheimer disease (AD) in Europe and for moderate-to-severe Alzheimer disease in the United States. In clinical trials, memantine has consistently demonstrated a reduced rate of deterioration on global, cognitive, functional, and behavioral measures, across a range of outcome measures compared with usual care. Notably, improvements versus placebo were seen in individual activities of daily living and behavior, particularly agitation. Efficacy was demonstrated in patients with newly diagnosed Alzheimer disease, patients previously or currently receiving acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, and both institutionalized and community-dwelling Alzheimer disease patients. Memantine has a tolerability profile similar to placebo. This review presents the results of key clinical trials, and includes clinically relevant analyses, such as numbers-needed-to-treat and effect sizes. Increased dependency and institutionalization are significant cost drivers in Alzheimer disease. Memantine is able to reduce dependency, caregiver time required, and mean monthly caregiver and societal costs. Recent studies of the relationship between Alzheimer disease progression, caregiver burden, and healthcare costs emphasize the need for treatments such as memantine that can slow the rate of decline in Alzheimer disease.

Bullock R, Dengiz A. · Kingshill Research Centre,Victoria Hospital, Okus Road, Swindon, UK. · Int J Clin Pract. · Pubmed #15963209 No free full text.

Abstract: The cholinesterase inhibitors (ChE-Is)--rivastigmine, donepezil and galantamine--demonstrated efficacy in large, 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, and are widely used for the symptomatic treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Over the past few years, data have emerged, suggesting that these agents may have long-term benefits. These data have been summarized in this study, followed by an interpretation of clinical relevance. Data were identified by searches of Medline((R)) and references from relevant English-language articles. The search words 'Alzheimer', 'donepezil', 'rivastigmine', 'galantamine' and 'long term' were used. In addition, recent data presented at international congresses and/or provided by colleagues in this field of research were included in order to ensure maximum topicality. Data are available showing cognitive performance in patients remaining on rivastigmine for up to 5 years (n = 83), donepezil for up to 4.9 years (n = 18) and galantamine for up to 4 years (n = 185). Most of these data come from open-label studies and need to be interpreted with caution. The data appear to suggest that patients, caregivers and physicians will still see some decline on ChE-Is after a period of stabilization, but this may be slower and later than expected if the patients were left untreated. This applies across all domains of AD - not simply cognition - and function can be relatively preserved, even if cognitive scores are falling. Despite the limitations of current data, the information reviewed in this study may help practising doctors assess the long-term value of ChE-Is in this consistently progressive disease.

Bullock R. · Kingshill Research Center, Department of Old Age Psychiatry, Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Trust, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, SNI 4HZ, UK. · Expert Rev Neurother. · Pubmed #15853556 No free full text.

Abstract: Galantamine (Reminyl) has long been used as a traditional medicine and has an interesting pharmacology as it is both a reversible acetylcholinesterase inhibitor and an allosteric potentiator of nicotinic cholinergic receptors. The efficacy of galantamine has been studied in an extensive development program in Alzheimer's disease, and mixed and vascular dementia. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of up to 6 months duration and subsequent open-label follow-up studies have produced a broad spectrum of beneficial effects on cognitive and noncognitive disease symptoms. Apparent benefits for caregivers paralleled these, with a potentially reduced burden and cost. It appears that early and continued treatment maximizes the observed effects, which translate into economic terms, when applied to cost-effectiveness models. Overall, galantamine has a broad ranging efficacy and tolerability across an increasing range of conditions.

Bullock R. · The Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · Curr Opin Investig Drugs. · Pubmed #15675610 No free full text.

Abstract: SGS-742, a GABA(B) antagonist, is being developed by Saegis, under license from Novartis, for the potential treatment of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease (AD). In May 2004, Saegis began enrollment in a phase II trial of SGS-742 in mild-to-moderate AD patients.

Bullock R. · Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. · Pubmed #15249844 No free full text.

Abstract: The long-term well-being of caregivers should be included as part of the treatment of patients with Alzheimer disease (AD). Throughout the process of caring for patients with AD, caregivers frequently experience social, emotional, physical, and financial losses, which become more significant as the disease progresses. Minimizing these losses is a goal in the overall management of AD. Successful treatment of the patient has been shown to positively impact quality of life for the caregiver. Randomized, controlled studies of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) have demonstrated the effectiveness of these agents in stabilizing cognitive function and delaying behavioral symptoms. Moreover, a decrease in the incidence of nursing home placement has been associated with this therapy. The growing burden of AD on families and society as a whole warrants the investigation of ways to minimize the impact of AD. AChEIs play an important role in this effort. Further studies are needed to more closely examine the impact of specific AChEIs on caregiver burden.

Bullock R. · Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · Expert Opin Investig Drugs. · Pubmed #15102582 No free full text.

Abstract: Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains the most common of the neurodegenerative disorders. In the elderly, it represents the most frequently occurring form of dementia, especially if considered alongside concomitant cerebrovascular disease. Current treatment involves the use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, which have shown symptomatic benefits in the recognised domains of cognition, function and behaviour. While they may have intrinsic disease-modifying activity, this is yet to be proven, and strategies to alter the fundamental neuropathological changes in AD continue to be sought. Much of the evidence suggests that the accumulation of amyloid-beta may play a pivotal role, therefore the bulk of current research is focused on possible intervention along the amyloid pathways. However, the abnormal phosphorylation of tau is also a reasonable target and as the molecular basis of AD is better delineated, more targeted treatment approaches are being proposed. This paper reports on the current data that is setting the future directions for research into AD.

Bullock R. · Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · CNS Drugs. · Pubmed #14728055 No free full text.

Abstract: Two of the four licensed cholinesterase inhibitors, galantamine and donepezil, have recently featured in published work showing how they act in dementia associated with cerebrovascular disease (CVD). It is timely to review this new evidence and place it within the current consensus understanding of what makes up a clearly heterogeneous dementia population. To do this, the current review explores the relationship between Alzheimer's disease, for which this group of compounds originally received licensing approval, and vascular pathology within the brain, highlighting the significant overlap in risk factors and the frequent coexistence of the two conditions in the patients that are studied. Whether they are inter-related or separate entities is discussed, followed by a description of the current classifications of Alzheimer's disease with CVD, and the three subtypes of 'pure' vascular dementia - subcortical, cortical and strategic infarct. Understanding these entities allows more accurate diagnostic and prognostic information to be given to patients, and leads towards matching the published clinical evidence discussed with more predictable clinical syndromes. This distinction is particularly relevant in terms of the studies conducted thus far.Galantamine has been studied in a placebo-controlled study of patients with Alzheimer's disease and CVD as well as patients with vascular dementia, whereas donepezil was studied exclusively in patients with vascular dementia. Differences in the way the placebo groups acted in these studies confirmed the fact that these actually are two distinct groups. Galantamine showed efficacy across the combined groups studied, with placebo deterioration similar to previous Alzheimer's disease studies, while donepezil produced a positive effect in vascular dementia - with this placebo group relatively unchanged. The symptomatic improvements seen were not really surprising, as cholinergic deficits are a common factor across all of these syndromes. Wherever this is the predominant biological finding, it would be expected that cholinesterase inhibitors would have a similar effect, whatever the condition causing it.

Gauthier S, Emre M, Farlow MR, Bullock R, Grossberg GT, Potkin SG. · McGill Centre for Studies in Aging, Verdun, Quebec, Canada. · Curr Med Res Opin. · Pubmed #14687441 No free full text.

Abstract: Cholinesterase (ChE) inhibitors represent the standard therapeutic approach to the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, a proportion of patients experience lack or loss of therapeutic benefit with an initial agent, or discontinue due to safety/tolerability issues. In many instances, no alternative treatment is offered once the initial agent has been stopped. Thus, for many patients, the total duration of treatment is relatively short in comparison with the chronic nature of AD. Switching medications is a common therapeutic strategy within many drug classes across many clinical areas following a lack/loss of efficacy or safety/tolerability problems, and is also an increasingly important concept in the management of AD with ChE inhibitors. A number of open-label studies, where patients were switched from donepezil to rivastigmine, have indicated that approximately 50% of patients experiencing a lack/loss of efficacy with donepezil (a selective acetylcholinesterase [AChE] inhibitor) respond to subsequent treatment with rivastigmine (a dual AChE and butyrylcholinesterase inhibitor). In these studies, rivastigmine was well tolerated, and the occurrence of safety/tolerability problems with donepezil was not predictive of similar problems with rivastigmine. In the summer of 2002, leading neurologists and psychiatrists attended a medical experts meeting to discuss the clinical importance of switching ChE inhibitors in AD. The expert panel examined available clinical data, shared clinical experiences, and discussed current clinical guidelines for switching. The panel also aimed to reach consensus on 'whom to switch', 'when to switch' and 'how to switch'. The key findings from that meeting are reported in this review.

Bullock R, Hammond G. · Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. · Pubmed #14512821 No free full text.

Abstract: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by a loss of memory and cognition, a decline in ability to perform activities of daily living, changes in personality and behavior, and an increase in resource utilization and medical care. The natural course of AD can be viewed as a gradual loss of independence divided into several stages (mild, moderate, and severe) that ultimately leaves the patient under the supervision of a caregiver. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors are the most widely accepted and proven approach to the treatment of mild to moderate AD. However, management of patients with severe AD poses challenges to physicians because there are only limited treatment options for these patients. This article provides overviews of the natural history, current therapy, and diagnostic scales of AD, focusing on management of patients with severe AD. In addition, a brief summary of the existing clinical trials conducted in severe AD is presented.

Bullock R. · Department of Old Age Psychiatry, Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, Wilts, UK. · Int J Clin Pract. · Pubmed #12018828 No free full text.

Abstract: Recent health technology assessments have given us the go-ahead to use cholinesterase inhibitors, which, in combination with community services, are currently the most appropriate treatment for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Initial research focused upon acetylcholinesterase (AChE)-selective agents, but it is now thought that dual inhibitors of AChE and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE) may provide more sustained efficacy over the course of AD and may help to slow disease progression. Rivastigmine is a potent inhibitor of AChE and BuChE and has demonstrated broad benefits across the severity of AD and across the cognitive, functional and behavioural domains of AD. In addition, rivastigmine has shown cognitive and behavioural benefits in patients with dementia with the Lewy body variant of AD. These benefits may reflect the inhibition of both AChE and BuChE, as demonstrated by significant correlations between cognitive improvements and cholinesterase inhibition in rivastigmine-treated patients with AD. Rivastigmine shows a clear dose-response relationship, and physicians should aim to maintain patients on doses of 6 mg/day or higher, to a maximum of 12 mg/day. As with all cholinesterase inhibitors, rapid forced dose escalation may increase the incidence of typical cholinergic side-effects, resulting in lower maintenance doses. In a chronic disease such as AD, there is time to implement slow dose escalation and higher final maintenance doses. If used appropriately, the benefits of rivastigmine seen in clinical practice may prove to be even greater than those reported in clinical trials.

Bullock R. · Department of Old Age Psychiatry and Kingshill Research Centre, Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Trust, Victoria Hospital, Swindon SNI 4HZ, UK. · Br J Psychiatry. · Pubmed #11823323 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease management involves symptomatic drug treatments passed by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Disease modification is now the goal. AIMS: To review current and developmental drugs for Alzheimer's disease, their usage, and the clinical context of known facts and proposed specific models. METHOD: A brief evidence-based review was made, using literature where available, or evidence from consensus groups where it was absent. RESULTS: There is good evidence to support the use of cholinesterase inhibitors, and perhaps vitamin E. Oestrogen and anti-inflammatory agents show possibility, but there is not enough evidence to support routine use. CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic treatments exist for Alzheimer's disease. Observational studies and increasing knowledge of brain biology are leading towards further treatment options. Old age psychiatrists have valuable treatments they now have to learn to use.

Bayer AJ, Bullock R, Jones RW, Wilkinson D, Paterson KR, Jenkins L, Millais SB, Donoghue S. · University Department of Geriatric Medicine, Academic Centre, University of Wales College of Medicine, Llandough Hospital, Penarth Road, Cardiff, South Glamorgan, CF64 2XX, UK. · Neurology. · Pubmed #15642910 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Abeta42-immunization reduces plaque burden and improves cognition in transgenic mouse models of Alzheimer disease (AD). This phase 1 study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of AN1792 (human aggregated Abeta42) in patients with mild to moderate AD. METHODS: Twenty patients were enrolled into each of four dose groups and randomly assigned to receive IM AN1792 (50 or 225 microg) with QS-21 adjuvant (50 or 100 microg) or QS-21 only (control) in a 4:1 active:control ratio on day 0 and at weeks 4, 12, and 24. Patients could receive up to four additional injections of a polysorbate 80 modified formulation at weeks 36, 48, 60, and 72. Safety, tolerability, immunogenicity, and exploratory evidence of efficacy were evaluated. RESULTS: Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 19 (23.8%) patients, but no relationship was observed between AN1792 dose and incidence. One patient developed meningoencephalitis that was diagnosed after death (not directly related to study treatment) and 219 days after discontinuing from the study. Five deaths occurred during the study follow-up, but none was considered to be directly related to study treatment. During the period of the first four injections, 23.4% of AN1792-treated patients had a positive anti-AN1792 antibody titer (an anti-AN1792 antibody titer of > or =1:1,000). This increased to 58.8% after additional injections with the modified formulation. Disability Assessment for Dementia scores showed less decline among active compared with control patients at week 84 (p = 0.002). No treatment differences were observed in three other efficacy measures. CONCLUSIONS: AN1792 + QS-21 elicited a positive antibody response to Abeta42 in more than half of this elderly study population.

Bullock R, Erkinjuntti T, Lilienfeld S, Anonymous00005. · Kingshill Research Centre, Victoria Hospital, Swindon, UK. · Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. · Pubmed #14560062 No free full text.

Abstract: We evaluated the long-term cognitive effects and safety of galantamine 24 mg/day in patients with Alzheimer's disease plus cerebrovascular disease (AD + CVD or mixed dementia). Subgroup analysis was performed of patients with AD + CVD who participated in a 6-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study and a 6-month, open-label, active-treatment extension. METHOD: Two hundred and eighty-five patients with AD + CVD were randomized to receive either placebo (n = 97) or galantamine 24 mg/day (n = 188) for 6 months. Two hundred and thirty-eight (84%) patients continued with the open-label phase of the study (86 from the placebo group, 152 from the galantamine group) and were treated with galantamine 24 mg/day. The primary efficacy measure was cognitive performance as assessed using the eleven-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog/11). Standard safety evaluations and adverse-event monitoring were performed throughout the 12-month study period. Patients with AD + CVD treated with galantamine experienced statistically and clinically significant improvement in cognition at month 6 (mean change in ADAS-cog/11 score -1.1; p < or = 0.05 vs. baseline) and maintained their cognitive function for the entire 12-month study (mean change in ADAS-cog/11 score +0.1). In contrast, the cognitive function deteriorated among those in the placebo group (mean change in ADAS-cog/11 at month 6 +2.0; p < or = 0.001 vs. baseline). Patients with AD + CVD who were switched from placebo to galantamine for the open-label phase of the trial did show improvement in cognitive function; however, they never attained the same cognitive level as patients who had been treated with galantamine for the entire 12 months [mean (+/- SE) ADAS-cog/11 scores in the placebo/galantamine group 25.7 +/- 1.32 and 24.2 +/- 1.57 at months 6 and 12, respectively, and in the galantamine/galantamine group 21.5 +/- 0.87 and 22.2 +/- 1.06 at months 6 and 12, respectively]. The results of this subgroup analysis indicate that galantamine is effective for long-term maintenance of the cognitive function in patients with AD + CVD and is safe and well tolerated in this patient population.

Wilcock G, Howe I, Coles H, Lilienfeld S, Truyen L, Zhu Y, Bullock R, Kershaw P, Anonymous00494. · Department of Care of the Elderly, University of Bristol, Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, UK. · Drugs Aging. · Pubmed #12875613 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of galantamine 24 mg/day and donepezil 10 mg/day in patients with Alzheimer's disease. PATIENTS AND STUDY DESIGN: This was a rater-blinded, randomised, parallel-group multicentre study (18 outpatient clinics) in the UK. 182 patients (69 male, 113 female) with Alzheimer's disease were randomised to galantamine (n = 94) or donepezil (n = 88) for 52 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The effects of galantamine and donepezil on function using the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BrADL); cognition using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog/11); behaviour using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI); caregiver burden using the Screen for Caregiver Burden; and safety were assessed. RESULTS: BrADL total scores showed no significant difference between treatment groups in mean change from baseline to week 52. In the total population, in terms of cognition, galantamine patients' scores on the MMSE at week 52 did not differ significantly from baseline (-0.52 +/- 0.39, p < 0.5 vs baseline), whereas donepezil patients' scores deteriorated significantly from baseline (-1.58 +/- 0.42, p < 0.0005 vs baseline). The between-group difference in MMSE change, which showed a trend for superiority of galantamine, did not reach statistical significance (p < or = 0.1). In the ADAS-cog/11 analysis, between-group differences for the total population were not significant, whereas galantamine-treated patients with MMSE scores of 12-18 demonstrated an increase (worsening) in the ADAS-cog/11 score of 1.61 +/- 0.80 versus baseline, compared with an increase of 4.08 +/- 0.84 for patients treated with donepezil, with a significant between-group difference in favour of galantamine (p < or = 0.05). More caregivers of patients receiving galantamine reported reductions in burden compared with donepezil. Changes from baseline in NPI were similar for both treatments.Both treatments were well tolerated; most adverse events were transient and of mild-to-moderate intensity, and were consistent with the findings of previous clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Significant advantages were found in the treatment response to galantamine (versus donepezil) on cognition as measured by response rates on the MMSE and ADAS-cog/11.

Erkinjuntti T, Kurz A, Small GW, Bullock R, Lilienfeld S, Damaraju CV, Anonymous00331. · Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. · Clin Ther. · Pubmed #12860497 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD) are the most common types of dementia worldwide. Galantamine, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor and allosteric nicotinic modulator, has shown broad clinical benefits in patients with mild to moderate dementia due to AD, probable VaD, or AD with cerebrovascular disease (CVD)-so-called mixed dementia. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of galantamine 24 mg/d in patients with VaD or AD with CVD over the longer term (>6 months). METHODS: This was an open-label extension of a 6-month double-blind study of galantamine. Patients who had been randomized to receive galantamine 24 mg/d or placebo in the double-blind phase were eligible to continue open-label treatment with galantamine 24 mg/d for 6 months. The primary efficacy end point was change in cognition, based on scores on the 11-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog/11). Secondary measures included changes in functional ability (as measured on the Disability Assessment for Dementia [DAD]) and behavior (as measured on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory [NPI]). Safety and tolerability were also monitored. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-nine patients (240 men, 219 women; mean [SE] age, 75.2 [0.33] years) entered the open-label phase. Of these patients, 195 (42.5%) had a diagnosis of probable VaD, and 238 (51.9%) had a diagnosis of AD with CVD; the remainder had an inconclusive diagnosis. At month 12 of the study, improvements from baseline (the start of the double-blind phase) in ADAS-cog/11 scores were observed in both the group that received placebo during the double-blind phase (placebo/galantamine group: -0.3 point; 95% CI, -1.64 to 1.06) and the group that received galantamine during the double-blind phase (galantamine/galantamine group: -0.9 point; 95% CI, -1.73 to 0.03). Improvement in functional ability was demonstrated by statistically significant mean (SE) changes from baseline in DAD score in both the placebo/galantamine group (-7.4 [1.68]; P < or = 0.001) and the galantamine/galantamine group (-3.6 [1.33]; P < or = 0.01). There was no significant change in mean (SE) NPI scores in either group (0.2 [0.98] and 0.1 [0.70], respectively). Galantamine treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In these patients with VaD and AD with CVD, galantamine treatment produced similar sustained benefits in terms of maintenance of or improvement in cognition (ADAS-cog/11), functional ability (DAD), and behavior (NPI) after 12 months.

Wilkinson DG, Passmore AP, Bullock R, Hopker SW, Smith R, Potocnik FC, Maud CM, Engelbrecht I, Hock C, Ieni JR, Bahra RS. · Memory Assessment and Research Centre, Moorgreen Hospital, Southampton, UK. · Int J Clin Pract. · Pubmed #12166542 No free full text.

Abstract: This 12-week, multinational study compared the tolerability and cognitive effects of donepezil (up to 10 mg once daily) and rivastigmine (up to 6 mg twice daily) in 111 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Both medications were administered open label according to recommended dosing regimens from the respective product labelling available during the conduct of the study. More patients in the donepezil group (89.3%) completed the study compared with the rivastigmine group (69.1%; p=0.009), and 10.7% of the donepezil group and 21.8% of the rivastigmine group discontinued due to adverse events (AEs); 87.5% of donepezil-treated patients and 47.3% of rivastigmine-treated patients remained on the maximum approved dose of each drug at the last study visit. Both groups showed comparable improvements on the ADAS-cog administered by raters blind to study medication at weeks 4 and 12. Thus, using the recommended dosing schedules, donepezil was better tolerated with fewer discontinuations due to AEs, and both agents improved cognition to a similar extent.

Erkinjuntti T, Kurz A, Gauthier S, Bullock R, Lilienfeld S, Damaraju CV. · Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. · Lancet. · Pubmed #11965273 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Vascular dementia is the second commonest form of dementia, and vascular factors contribute to the development of dementia in many patients with Alzheimer's disease. Galantamine amplifies the acetylcholine response by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase and modulating nicotinic receptors. It has shown broad, sustained benefits in patients with Alzheimer's disease. We investigated the effects of galantamine in patients with a diagnosis of probable vascular dementia or Alzheimer's disease combined with cerebrovascular disease. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned galantamine 24 mg/day (n=396) or placebo (n=196) in a multicentre, double-blind, 6-month trial. Primary endpoints were cognition (Alzheimer's disease assessment scale, cognitive subscale [ADAS-cog]) and global functioning (clinician's interview-based impression of change plus caregiver input [CIBIC-plus]). Secondary endpoints included assessments of activities of daily living and behavioural symptoms. Patients were monitored for adverse events. Analyses were on the basis of observed case or last observation carried forward. FINDINGS: Galantamine showed greater efficacy than placebo on ADAS-cog (galantamine change -1.7 [SE 0.4] vs placebo 1.0 [0.5]; treatment effect 2.7 points; p<0.0001) and CIBIC-plus (213 [74%] vs 95 [59%] patients remained stable or improved, p=0.0001). Activities of daily living and behavioural symptoms were also significantly improved compared with placebo (p=0.002 and p=0.016, respectively). Galantamine was well tolerated. INTERPRETATION: Galantamine showed a therapeutic effect on all key areas of cognitive and non-cognitive abilities in this group of dementia patients.

Okello A, Edison P, Archer HA, Turkheimer FE, Kennedy J, Bullock R, Walker Z, Kennedy A, Fox N, Rossor M, Brooks DJ. · Division of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK. · Neurology. · Pubmed #19122031 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Activated microglia may play a role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease (AD) as they cluster around beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques. They are, therefore, a potential therapeutic target in both AD and its prodrome amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI). OBJECTIVE: To characterize in vivo with (11)C-(R)-PK11195 and (11)C-PIB PET the distribution of microglial activation and amyloid deposition in patients with amnestic MCI. METHODS: Fourteen subjects with MCI had (11)C-(R)-PK11195 and (11)C-PIB PET with psychometric tests. RESULTS: Seven out of 14 (50%) patients with MCI had increased cortical (11)C-PIB retention (p < 0.001) while 5 out of 13 (38%) subjects with MCI showed increased (11)C-(R)-PK11195 uptake. The MCI subgroup with increased (11)C-PIB retention also showed increased cortical (11)C-(R)-PK11195 binding (p < 0.036) though this increase only remained significant in frontal cortex after a correction for multiple comparisons. There was no correlation between regional levels of (11)C-(R)-PK11195 and (11)C-PIB binding in individual patients with MCI: only three of the five MCI cases with increased (11)C-(R)-PK11195 binding had increased levels of (11)C-PIB retention. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that, while amyloid deposition and microglial activation can be detected in vivo in around 50% of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), these pathologies can occur independently. The detection of microglial activation in patients with MCI suggests that anti-inflammatory therapies may be relevant to the prevention of AD.

Burns A, Bernabei R, Bullock R, Cruz Jentoft AJ, Frölich L, Hock C, Raivio M, Triau E, Vandewoude M, Wimo A, Came E, Van Baelen B, Hammond GL, van Oene JC, Schwalen S. · University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. · Lancet Neurol. · Pubmed #19042161 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The efficacy of galantamine has been shown in patients with mild, moderate, and advanced moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Here we report its efficacy in patients with severe AD. METHODS: Between December, 2003, and March, 2007, patients aged 84 (SD 6) years with severe AD (mini-mental state examination [MMSE] score 5-12 points), in a nursing home setting were randomly assigned to receive galantamine (n=207), titrated initially to 24 mg/day, or placebo (n=200). Co-primary efficacy measures for cognitive function and ability to undertake normal daily activities were the severe impairment battery (SIB) and the seven-item minimum data set-activities of daily living (MDS-ADL), respectively. Adverse events, vital signs, laboratory parameters, and electrocardiograms were monitored. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00216593. FINDINGS: 168 of 207 (81%) patients in the galantamine group and 161 of 200 (81%) in the placebo group completed the study. Mean SIB scores increased (improved) by 1.9 (95% CI -0.1 to 3.9) points with galantamine and decreased (worsened) by 3.0 (-5.6 to -0.5) points with placebo (between-group least squares mean difference 4.36, 1.3 to 7.5; p=0.006). Mean MDS-ADL self-performance score worsened by 1.2 (0.6 to 1.8) points and 1.6 (0.8 to 2.3) points, respectively (between-group least squares mean difference -0.41, -1.3 to 0.5; p=0.383). Nominally significant between-group differences in favour of galantamine occurred for the SIB domains of memory (p=0.006), praxis (p=0.010), and visuospatial ability (p=0.002), and for the MDS-ADL subitem locomotion on unit (p=0.021). 183 of 207 patients (88%) who received galantamine and 177 of 200 (89%) who received placebo had adverse events, which were mostly mild to moderate. Eight patients (4%) in the galantamine group and 21 patients (11%) in the placebo group died. ECG abnormalities were similar between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Galantamine can be started and used safely in elderly patients with severe AD. Galantamine improved cognitive function but failed to significantly improve the co-primary parameter of overall activities of daily living.

Holmes C, Boche D, Wilkinson D, Yadegarfar G, Hopkins V, Bayer A, Jones RW, Bullock R, Love S, Neal JW, Zotova E, Nicoll JA. · Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; Moorgreen Hospital, Hampshire Partnership Trust, Southampton, UK. · Lancet. · Pubmed #18640458 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Immunisation of patients with Alzheimer's disease with full-length amyloid-beta peptide (Abeta(42)) can clear amyloid plaques from the brain. Our aim was to assess the relation between Abeta(42) immune response, degree of plaque removal, and long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: In June, 2003, consent for long-term clinical follow-up, post-mortem neuropathological examination, or both, was sought from 80 patients (or their carers) who had entered a phase I randomised, placebo-controlled trial of immunisation with Abeta(42) (AN1792, Elan Pharmaceuticals) in September, 2000. The follow-up study was completed in September, 2006. Plaques were assessed in terms of the percentage area of the cortex with Abeta immunostaining (Abeta load) and in terms of characteristic histological features reflecting plaque removal. Survival of all 80 individuals until severe dementia or death was assessed with a Cox proportional hazard model. FINDINGS: 20 participants--15 in the AN1792 group, five in the placebo group--died before follow-up started. A further 22 patients--19 in the AN1792 group, three in the placebo group--died during follow-up. Nine of the deceased patients, all in the AN1792 group, had given consent for post-mortem analysis; one of these who did not die with Alzheimer's disease was excluded. In the remaining eight participants who received immunisation and who were examined neuropathologically, mean Abeta load was lower than in an unimmunised control group that was matched for age at death (2.1% [SE 0.7] in treated participants vs 5.1% [0.9] in controls; mean difference 3.0%, 95% CI 0.6-5.4; p=0.02). Although there was considerable variation in Abeta load and degree of plaque removal among immunised participants, the degree of plaque removal varied significantly with mean antibody response attained during the treatment study period (Kruskal-Wallis p=0.02). Seven of the eight immunised patients who underwent post-mortem assessment, including those with virtually complete plaque removal, had severe end stage dementia before death. In the whole cohort, there was no evidence of improved survival (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.43-3.11; p=0.86) or of an improvement in the time to severe dementia (1.18, 0.45-3.11; p=0.73) in the AN1792 group versus the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Although immunisation with Abeta(42) resulted in clearance of amyloid plaques in patients with Alzheimer's disease, this clearance did not prevent progressive neurodegeneration.