| 1 |
Clinical Conference Efficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with more severe Alzheimer's disease: a subgroup analysis from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. 2005
Feldman H, Gauthier S, Hecker J, Vellas B, Xu Y, Ieni JR, Schwam EM, Anonymous00304. · Division of Neurology, University of British Columbia, Clinic for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders, Vancouver, BC, Canada. · Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. · Pubmed #15920715 No free full text.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: There have been very limited investigations of cholinesterase inhibitor therapy in more advanced stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The efficacy and safety of donepezil were evaluated in post hoc analyses of a subgroup of patients with more severe AD (standardized Mini-Mental State Examination [sMMSE] score 5-12) within a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in moderate to severe AD (MSAD study). Additional analyses examined whether donepezil's treatment effects were consistent across the full range of baseline AD severity studied (sMMSE score 5-17). METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe AD (n = 290) who were living in the community or in assisted living facilities received donepezil or placebo for 24 weeks; n = 145 in the more severe AD subgroup. The primary outcome measure was the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change (CIBIC-plus) with secondary outcomes including the sMMSE, Severe Impairment Battery, Neuropsychiatric Inventory, and Disability Assessment for Dementia. Analysis of Variance and Analysis of Covariance models tested for treatment x disease severity interaction in the full MSAD study sample. RESULTS: CIBIC-plus scores for donepezil patients were significantly improved compared with placebo for each time-point, with a 0.70 mean treatment difference at Week 24 last observation carried forward (LOCF; p = 0.0002). Significant differences favoring donepezil were noted at Week 24 LOCF for all secondary measures. There were no treatment x severity interactions for any of the efficacy measures. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, donepezil had significant benefits over placebo on global, cognitive, functional, and behavioral measures in a subgroup of patients with more severe AD. Furthermore, the treatment effects of donepezil were not driven by a particular stratum within the moderate to severe dementia range.
|
| 2 |
Clinical Conference Economic evaluation of donepezil in moderate to severe Alzheimer disease. 2004
Feldman H, Gauthier S, Hecker J, Vellas B, Hux M, Xu Y, Schwam EM, Shah S, Mastey V, Anonymous00082. · Division of Neurology, UBC Hospital, Clinic for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders, Vancouver, BC, Canada. · Neurology. · Pubmed #15326236 No free full text.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To investigate the costs to society of Alzheimer disease (AD) care in a multinational, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil in patients with moderate to severe AD. METHODS: A total of 290 patients with AD (screening standardized Mini-Mental State Examination score 5 to 17) were randomized to receive either donepezil (n = 144; 5 mg/day for 28 days, followed by 10 mg/day as per clinician's judgment) or placebo (n = 146) for 24 weeks. The authors collected data on patient and caregiver health resource utilization prospectively using the Canadian Utilization of Services Tracking questionnaire. Costs were calculated for patients and caregivers in each group based on resource utilization multiplied by the unit prices for each resource. A cost (the average Ontario minimum wage for 1998 [Can 6.85 dollars per hour]) was assigned to unpaid time that caregivers spent assisting the patient with activities of daily living (ADL). RESULTS: Patient and caregiver demographics at baseline were similar across the two groups. After adjusting for baseline total cost per patient, the mean total societal cost per patient for the 24-week period was donepezil, Can 9,904 dollars (US 6,686 dollars) and placebo, Can 10,236 dollars (US 6,910 dollars). This net cost saving of Can 332 dollars (US 224 dollars) included the average 24-week cost of donepezil treatment. Most of the cost-saving with donepezil treatment was due to less use of residential care by patients, and caregivers spending less time assisting patients with ADL. CONCLUSION: This cost-consequence analysis reveals economic benefits of treatment of moderate to severe AD with donepezil.
|
| 3 |
Clinical Conference A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with Alzheimer's disease in the nursing home setting. 2001
Tariot PN, Cummings JL, Katz IR, Mintzer J, Perdomo CA, Schwam EM, Whalen E. · Department of Psychiatry, University of Rochester Medical Center, Monroe Community Hospital, Rochester, New York 14620, USA. · J Am Geriatr Soc. · Pubmed #11843990 No free full text.
Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of donepezil in the management of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) residing in nursing home facilities. DESIGN: Twenty-four-week, randomized, multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-seven nursing homes across the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eight nursing home patients with a diagnosis of probable or possible AD, or AD with cerebrovascular disease; mean Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score 14.4; mean age 85.7. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version (NPI-NH). Secondary efficacy measures were the Clinical Dementia Rating (Nursing Home Version)-Sum of the Boxes (CDR-SB), MMSE, and the Physical Self-Maintenance Scale (PSMS). Safety was monitored by physical examinations, vital signs, clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Eighty-two percent of donepezil- and 74% of placebo-treated patients completed the trial. Eleven percent of donepezil- and 18% of placebo-treated patients withdrew because of AEs. Mean NPI-NH 12-item total scores improved relative to baseline for both groups, with no significant differences observed between the groups at any assessment. Mean change from baseline CDR-SB total score improved significantly with donepezil compared with placebo at Week 24 (P < .05). The change in CDR-SB total score was not influenced by age. Differences in mean change from baseline on the MMSE favored donepezil over placebo at Weeks 8, 16, and 20 (P < .05). No significant differences were observed between the groups on the PSMS. Overall rates of occurrence and severity of AEs were similar between the two groups (97% placebo, 96% donepezil). Gastrointestinal AEs occurred more frequently in donepezil-treated patients. In general, AEs were similar in older and younger donepezil-treated patients, with the majority of patients experiencing only AEs that were transient and mild or moderate in severity. Weight loss was reported as an AE more frequently in older patients, although a loss at last visit of >or=7% of screening weight occurred at the same rate in older and younger patients (9% of donepezil- and 6% of placebo-treated patients). No significant differences between groups in vital sign changes, bradycardia, or rates of clinically significant laboratory or ECG abnormalities were observed. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with donepezil maintained or improved in cognition and overall dementia severity in contrast to placebo-treated patients who declined during the 6-month treatment period. The safety and tolerability profile was comparable with that reported in outpatient studies of donepezil. These findings also suggest that advanced age, comorbid illnesses, and high concomitant medication usage should not be barriers to donepezil treatment. Given the apparent improvement in behavior in the placebo group, and the high use of concomitant medications in both groups, the impact of donepezil on behavior in the nursing home setting is unresolved and merits further investigation. In summary, effects on cognition, overall dementia severity, and safety and tolerability findings are consistent with previous findings in outpatients and support the use of donepezil in patients with AD who reside in nursing homes.
|
| 4 |
Article Defining treatment response to donepezil in Alzheimer's disease: responder analysis of patient-level data from randomized, placebo-controlled studies. 2008
Burns A, Yeates A, Akintade L, Del Valle M, Zhang RY, Schwam EM, Perdomo CA. · University of Manchester, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK. · Drugs Aging. · Pubmed #18665662 No free full text.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Defining treatment success in progressive diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), can be challenging. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of employing different criteria to define a treatment 'responder' using analyses of patient-level data from randomized, placebo-controlled studies of donepezil in AD. METHODS: Trials were included in the analysis if they met several criteria, including the following: randomized, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil 10 mg/day in mild-to-moderate AD; cognition measured by the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) or Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); and a 24-week endpoint and outcomes that included global assessments. Definitions of response were: improvements in cognition plus one other domain; improvement in cognition only; improvement or improvement/no change in global response; and improvement/stabilization/less than expected decline by < or = 2 or < or = 4 or < or = 6 points on the ADAS-cog. RESULTS: Five studies identified from the literature search met the specified criteria for inclusion. The response to donepezil measured by ADAS-cog varied from 26% to 63% and that of placebo from 14% to 47%, depending on the definition of improvement used. For definitions that included a less than expected decline on ADAS-cog, the more modest the effect defined, the less the drug versus placebo difference and the higher the percentage of patients meeting this definition. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of treatment 'response' in a progressive neurodegenerative disease can encompass a variety of outcomes, including short-term improvement, longer-term stabilization and a slowed decline in one or more clinically relevant symptoms or symptom domains. The ability to identify groups of people who respond to donepezil underscores the clinical utility of the medication and may contribute to more focused assessments of the cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors.
|
| 5 |
Minor Comments on Efficacy and safety of rivastigmine in patients with Alzheimer's disease who failed to benefit from treatment with donepezil. 2002
McRae TD, Schwam EM. · No affiliation provided · Curr Med Res Opin. · Pubmed #12442885 No free full text.
This publication has no abstract.
|
| 6 |
Minor Unsafe prescription medication switching recommendations. 2001
Subbiah P, Schwam EM. · No affiliation provided · Clin Ther. · Pubmed #11813938 No free full text.
This publication has no abstract.
|
|
|