-
Pituitary Feb 2023This systematic literature review investigated whether extended dosing intervals (EDIs) of pharmacological acromegaly treatments reduce patient burden and costs compared...
PURPOSE
This systematic literature review investigated whether extended dosing intervals (EDIs) of pharmacological acromegaly treatments reduce patient burden and costs compared with standard dosing, while maintaining effectiveness.
METHODS
MEDLINE/Embase/the Cochrane Library (2001-June 2021) and key congresses (2018-2021) were searched and identified systematic literature review bibliographies reviewed. Included publications reported on efficacy/effectiveness, safety and tolerability, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and patient-reported and economic outcomes in longitudinal/cross-sectional studies in adults with acromegaly. Interventions included EDIs of pegvisomant, cabergoline, and somatostatin receptor ligands (SRLs): lanreotide autogel/depot (LAN), octreotide long-acting release (OCT), pasireotide long-acting release (PAS), and oral octreotide; no comparator was required.
RESULTS
In total, 35 publications reported on 27 studies: 3 pegvisomant monotherapy, 11 pegvisomant combination therapy with SRLs, 9 LAN, and 4 OCT; no studies reported on cabergoline, PAS, or oral octreotide at EDIs. Maintenance of normal insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) was observed in ≥ 70% of patients with LAN (1 study), OCT (1 study), and pegvisomant monotherapy (1 study). Achievement of normal IGF-I was observed in ≥ 70% of patients with LAN (3 studies) and pegvisomant in combination with SRLs (4 studies). Safety profiles were similar across EDI and standard regimens. Patients preferred and were satisfied with EDIs. HRQoL was maintained and cost savings were provided with EDIs versus standard regimens.
CONCLUSIONS
Clinical efficacy/effectiveness, safety, and HRQoL outcomes in adults with acromegaly were similar and costs lower with EDIs versus standard regimens. Physicians may consider acromegaly treatment at EDIs, especially for patients with good disease control.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Acromegaly; Octreotide; Insulin-Like Growth Factor I; Cabergoline; Cross-Sectional Studies; Quality of Life; Peptides, Cyclic; Human Growth Hormone
PubMed: 36447058
DOI: 10.1007/s11102-022-01285-1 -
CNS Drugs Dec 2022Research comparing levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI) for advanced... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative Effectiveness of Device-Aided Therapies on Quality of Life and Off-Time in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Research comparing levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI) for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) is lacking. This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the comparative effectiveness of LCIG, DBS, CSAI and best medical therapy (BMT) in reducing off-time and improving quality of life (QoL) in patients with advanced PD.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational and interventional studies from January 2003 to September 2019. Data extracted at baseline and 6 months were off-time, as reported by diary or Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part IV item 39, and QoL, as reported by Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39/PDQ-8). Bayesian NMA was performed to estimate pooled treatment effect sizes and to rank treatments in order of effectiveness.
RESULTS
A total of 22 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (n = 2063 patients): four RCTs, and 16 single-armed, one 2-armed and one 3-armed prospective studies. Baseline mean age was between 55.5-70.9 years, duration of PD was 9.1-15.3 years, off-time ranged from 5.4 to 8.7 h/day in 9 studies, and PDQ scores ranged from 28.8 to 67.0 in 19 studies. Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel and DBS demonstrated significantly greater improvement in off-time and QoL at 6 months compared with CSAI and BMT (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the effects of LCIG and DBS, but DBS was ranked first for reduction in off-time, and LCIG was ranked first for improvement in QoL.
CONCLUSIONS
This NMA found that LCIG and DBS were associated with superior improvement in off-time and PD-related QoL compared with CSAI and BMT at 6 months after treatment initiation. This comparative effectiveness research may assist providers, patients, and caregivers in the selection of the optimal device-aided therapy.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; Carbidopa; Levodopa; Quality of Life; Network Meta-Analysis; Parkinson Disease; Apomorphine
PubMed: 36414908
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-022-00963-9 -
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive... 2018Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) and memantine are commonly used in the management of dementia. In routine clinical practice, dementia is often monitored via the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) and memantine are commonly used in the management of dementia. In routine clinical practice, dementia is often monitored via the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of these drugs on MMSE scores.
SUMMARY
Eighty trials were identified. Pooled effect estimates were in favour of both AChEIs and memantine at 6 months. Meta-regression indicated that dementia subtype was a moderator of AChEI treatment effect, with the effect of treatment versus control twice as high for patients with Parkinson disease dementia/ dementia with Lewy bodies (2.11 MMSE points at 6 months) as for patients with Alzheimer disease/vascular dementia (0.91 MMSE points at 6 months). Key Messages: AChEIs demonstrate a modest effect versus control on MMSE scores which is moderated by dementia subtype. For memantine the effect is smaller.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Cognition; Dementia, Vascular; Dopamine Agents; Humans; Memantine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29734182
DOI: 10.1159/000486546 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023Three dopamine agonists [bromocriptine, cabergoline, and quinagolide (CV)] have been used for hyperprolactinemia treatment for decades. Several studies have reviewed the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Three dopamine agonists [bromocriptine, cabergoline, and quinagolide (CV)] have been used for hyperprolactinemia treatment for decades. Several studies have reviewed the efficacy and safety of bromocriptine and cabergoline. However, no systematic review or meta-analysis has discussed the efficacy and safety of CV in hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma treatment.
METHODS
Five medical databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) were searched up to 9 May 2022 to identify studies related to CV and hyperprolactinemia. A meta-analysis was implemented by using a forest plot, funnel plot, sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, and Egger's test software R 4.0 and STATA 12.
RESULTS
A total of 1,211 studies were retrieved from the five medical databases, and 33 studies consisting of 827 patients were finally included in the analysis. The pooled proportions of patients with prolactin concentration normalization and tumor reduction (>50%) under CV treatment were 69% and 20%, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals of 61%-76% and 15%-28%, respectively. The pooled proportion of adverse effects was 13%, with a 95% confidence interval of 11%-16%.
CONCLUSION
Our study showed that CV is not less effective than cabergoline and bromocriptine in treating hyperprolactinemia, and the side effects were not significant. Hence, this drug could be considered an alternative first-line or rescue treatment in treating hyperprolactinemia in the future.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022347750.
Topics: Humans; Bromocriptine; Cabergoline; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Hyperprolactinemia; Pituitary Neoplasms; Aminoquinolines
PubMed: 36761195
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1027905 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2016There is accumulating evidence that progressive changes in brain structure and function take place as schizophrenia unfolds. Among many possible candidates, oxidative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is accumulating evidence that progressive changes in brain structure and function take place as schizophrenia unfolds. Among many possible candidates, oxidative stress may be one of the mediators of neuroprogression, grey matter loss and subsequent cognitive and functional impairment. Antioxidants are exogenous or endogenous molecules that mitigate any form of oxidative stress or its consequences. They may act from directly scavenging free radicals to increasing anti-oxidative defences. There is evidence that current treatments impact oxidative pathways and may to some extent reverse pro-oxidative states in schizophrenia. The existing literature, however, indicates that these treatments do not fully restore the deficits in antioxidant levels or restore levels of oxidants in schizophrenia. As such, there has been interest in developing interventions aimed at restoring this oxidative balance beyond the benefits of antipsychotics in this direction. If antioxidants are to have a place in the treatment of this serious condition, the relevant and up-to-date information should be available to clinicians and investigators.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of antioxidants as add-on treatments to standard antipsychotic medication for improving acute psychotic episodes and core symptoms, and preventing relapse in people with schizophrenia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials. There are no language, time, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register. We ran this search in November 2010, and again on 8 January 2015. We also inspected references of all identified studies for further trials and contacted authors of trials for additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included reports if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with schizophrenia who had been allocated to either a substance with antioxidant potential or to a placebo as an adjunct to standard antipsychotic treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently extracted data from these trials and we estimated risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
The review includes 22 RCTs of varying quality and sample size studying Ginkgo biloba, N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), allopurinol, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), vitamin C, vitamin E or selegiline. Median follow-up was eight weeks. Only three studies including a minority of the participants reported our a priori selected primary outcome of clinically important response. Short-term data for this outcome (measured as at least 20% improvement in scores on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)) were similar (3 RCTs, n = 229, RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.12, low quality evidence). Studies usually reported only endpoint psychopathology rating scale scores. Psychotic symptoms were lower in those using an adjunctive antioxidant according to the PANSS ( 7 RCTS, n = 584, MD -6.00, 95% CI -10.35 to -1.65, very low quality evidence) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) (8 RCTS, n = 843, MD -3.20, 95% CI -5.63 to -0.78, low quality evidence). There was no overall short-term difference in leaving the study early (16 RCTs, n = 1584, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.11, moderate quality evidence), or in general functioning (2 RCTs, n = 52, MD -1.11, 95% CI -8.07 to 5.86, low quality evidence). Adverse events were generally poorly reported. Three studies reported useable data for 'any serious adverse effect', results were equivocal (3 RCTs, n = 234, RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.27, low quality evidence). No evidence was available for relapse, quality of life or service use.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although 22 trials could be included in this review, the evidence provided is limited and mostly not relevant to clinicians or consumers. Overall, although there was low risk of attrition and selective data reporting bias within the trials, the trials themselves were not adequately powered and need more substantial follow-up periods. There is a need for larger trials with longer periods of follow-up to be conducted. Outcomes should be meaningful for those with schizophrenia, and include measures of improvement and relapse (not just rating scale scores), functioning and quality of life and acceptability and, importantly, safety data.
Topics: Acetylcysteine; Allopurinol; Antioxidants; Antipsychotic Agents; Ascorbic Acid; Dehydroepiandrosterone; Drug Therapy, Combination; Free Radical Scavengers; Ginkgo biloba; Humans; Oxidative Stress; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Selegiline; Vitamin E; Vitamins
PubMed: 26848926
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008919.pub2 -
Journal of Translational Medicine Sep 2023Cell-based strategies focusing on replacement or protection of dopaminergic neurons have been considered as a potential approach to treat Parkinson's disease (PD) for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cell-based strategies focusing on replacement or protection of dopaminergic neurons have been considered as a potential approach to treat Parkinson's disease (PD) for decades. However, despite promising preclinical results, clinical trials on cell-therapy for PD reported mixed outcomes and a thorough synthesis of these findings is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate cell-therapy for PD patients.
METHODS
We systematically identified all clinical trials investigating cell- or tissue-based therapies for PD published before July 2023. Out of those, studies reporting transplantation of homogenous cells (containing one cell type) were included in meta-analysis. The mean difference or standardized mean difference in quantitative neurological scale scores before and after cell-therapy was analyzed to evaluate treatment effects.
RESULTS
The systematic literature search revealed 106 articles. Eleven studies reporting data from 11 independent trials (210 patients) were eligible for meta-analysis. Disease severity and motor function evaluation indicated beneficial effects of homogenous cell-therapy in the 'off' state at 3-, 6-, 12-, or 24-month follow-ups, and for motor function even after 36 months. Most of the patients were levodopa responders (61.6-100% in different follow-ups). Cell-therapy was also effective in improving the daily living activities in the 'off' state of PD patients. Cells from diverse sources were used and multiple transplantation modes were applied. Autografts did not improve functional outcomes, while allografts exhibited beneficial effects. Encouragingly, both transplantation into basal ganglia and to areas outside the basal ganglia were effective to reduce disease severity. Some trials reported adverse events potentially related to the surgical procedure. One confirmed and four possible cases of graft-induced dyskinesia were reported in two trials included in this meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis provides preliminary evidence for the beneficial effects of homogenous cell-therapy for PD, potentially to the levodopa responders. Allogeneic cells were superior to autologous cells, and the effective transplantation sites are not limited to the basal ganglia. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022369760.
Topics: Humans; Parkinson Disease; Levodopa; Transplantation, Autologous; Transplantation, Homologous; Allogeneic Cells
PubMed: 37679754
DOI: 10.1186/s12967-023-04484-x -
Journal of Neural Transmission (Vienna,... Sep 2022The trajectory of the use of dopamine replacement therapy (DRT) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is variable and doses may need to be increased, but also tapered. The plan... (Review)
Review
The trajectory of the use of dopamine replacement therapy (DRT) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is variable and doses may need to be increased, but also tapered. The plan for dose adjustment is usually done as per drug information recommendations from the licensing bodies, but there are no clear guidelines with regards to the best practice regarding the tapering off schedule given sudden dose reductions of drugs such as dopamine agonists may have serious adverse consequences. A systematic literature search was, therefore, performed to derive recommendations and the data show that there are no controlled studies or evidence-based recommendations how to taper or discontinue PD medication in a systematic manner. Most of the data were available on the dopamine agonist withdrawal syndrome (DAWS) and we found only two instructions on how to reduce pramipexole and rotigotine published by the EMA. We suggest that based on the available data, levodopa, dopamine agonists (DA), and amantadine should not be discontinued abruptly. Abrupt or sudden reduction of DA or amantadine in particular can lead to severe life-threatening withdrawal symptoms. Tapering off levodopa, COMT inhibitors, and MAO-B inhibitors may worsen motor and non-motor symptoms. Based on our clinical experience, we have proposed how to reduce PD medication and this work will form the basis of a future Delphi panel to define the recommendations in a consensus.
Topics: Amantadine; Dopamine; Dopamine Agonists; Humans; Levodopa; Parkinson Disease; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 34324057
DOI: 10.1007/s00702-021-02389-x -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021Dementia is a progressive syndrome characterised by deterioration in memory, thinking and behaviour, and by impaired ability to perform daily activities. Two classes of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dementia is a progressive syndrome characterised by deterioration in memory, thinking and behaviour, and by impaired ability to perform daily activities. Two classes of drug - cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine) and memantine - are widely licensed for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, and rivastigmine is also licensed for Parkinson's disease dementia. These drugs are prescribed to alleviate symptoms and delay disease progression in these and sometimes in other forms of dementia. There are uncertainties about the benefits and adverse effects of these drugs in the long term and in severe dementia, about effects of withdrawal, and about the most appropriate time to discontinue treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of withdrawal or continuation of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine, or both, in people with dementia on: cognitive, neuropsychiatric and functional outcomes, rates of institutionalisation, adverse events, dropout from trials, mortality, quality of life and carer-related outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register up to 17 October 2020 using terms appropriate for the retrieval of studies of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine. The Specialised Register contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases, numerous trial registries and grey literature sources.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) which compared withdrawal of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine, or both, with continuation of the same drug or drugs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed citations and full-text articles for inclusion, extracted data from included trials and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Where trials were sufficiently similar, we pooled data for outcomes in the short term (up to 2 months after randomisation), medium term (3-11 months) and long term (12 months or more). We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six trials investigating cholinesterase inhibitor withdrawal, and one trial investigating withdrawal of either donepezil or memantine. No trials assessed withdrawal of memantine only. Drugs were withdrawn abruptly in five trials and stepwise in two trials. All participants had dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, with severities ranging from mild to very severe, and were taking cholinesterase inhibitors without known adverse effects at baseline. The included trials randomised 759 participants to treatment groups relevant to this review. Study duration ranged from 6 weeks to 12 months. There were too few included studies to allow planned subgroup analyses. We considered some studies to be at unclear or high risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition or reporting bias. Compared to continuing cholinesterase inhibitors, discontinuing treatment may be associated with worse cognitive function in the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to -0.21; 4 studies; low certainty), but the effect in the medium term is very uncertain (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.87 to 0.07; 3 studies; very low certainty). In a sensitivity analysis omitting data from a study which only included participants who had shown a relatively poor prior response to donepezil, inconsistency was reduced and we found that cognitive function may be worse in the discontinuation group in the medium term (SMD -0.62; 95% CI -0.94 to -0.31). Data from one longer-term study suggest that discontinuing a cholinesterase inhibitor is probably associated with worse cognitive function at 12 months (mean difference (MD) -2.09 Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE) points, 95% CI -3.43 to -0.75; moderate certainty). Discontinuation may make little or no difference to functional status in the short term (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.04; 2 studies; low certainty), and its effect in the medium term is uncertain (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.01; 2 studies; very low certainty). After 12 months, discontinuing a cholinesterase inhibitor probably results in greater functional impairment than continuing treatment (MD -3.38 Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) points, 95% CI -6.67 to -0.10; one study; moderate certainty). Discontinuation may be associated with a worsening of neuropsychiatric symptoms over the short term and medium term, although we cannot exclude a minimal effect (SMD - 0.48, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.13; 2 studies; low certainty; and SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.08; 3 studies; low certainty, respectively). Data from one study suggest that discontinuing a cholinesterase inhibitor may result in little to no change in neuropsychiatric status at 12 months (MD -0.87 Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) points; 95% CI -8.42 to 6.68; moderate certainty). We found no clear evidence of an effect of discontinuation on dropout due to lack of medication efficacy or deterioration in overall medical condition (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.76; 4 studies; low certainty), on number of adverse events (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.27; 4 studies; low certainty) or serious adverse events (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.39; 4 studies; low certainty), and on mortality (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.55; 5 studies; low certainty). Institutionalisation was reported in one trial, but it was not possible to extract data for the groups relevant to this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that discontinuing cholinesterase inhibitors may result in worse cognitive, neuropsychiatric and functional status than continuing treatment, although this is supported by limited evidence, almost all of low or very low certainty. As all participants had dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, our findings are not transferable to other dementia types. We were unable to determine whether the effects of discontinuing cholinesterase inhibitors differed with baseline dementia severity. There is currently no evidence to guide decisions about discontinuing memantine. There is a need for further well-designed RCTs, across a range of dementia severities and settings. We are aware of two ongoing registered trials. In making decisions about discontinuing these drugs, clinicians should exercise caution, considering the evidence from existing trials along with other factors important to patients and their carers.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Alzheimer Disease; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Dementia; Donepezil; Humans; Memantine; Parkinson Disease; Quality of Life; Rivastigmine
PubMed: 35608903
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009081.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Cognitive deficits are common in people who have received cranial irradiation and have a serious impact on daily functioning and quality of life. The benefit of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cognitive deficits are common in people who have received cranial irradiation and have a serious impact on daily functioning and quality of life. The benefit of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of cognitive deficits in this population is unclear. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 12, 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of interventions for preventing or ameliorating cognitive deficits in adults treated with cranial irradiation.
SEARCH METHODS
For this review update we searched the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, and PsycInfo via Ovid to 12 September 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled (RCTs) trials that evaluated pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions in cranial irradiated adults, with objective cognitive functioning as a primary or secondary outcome measure.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (MK, JD) independently extracted data from selected studies and carried out a risk of bias assessment. Cognitive function, fatigue and mood outcomes were reported. No data were pooled.
MAIN RESULTS
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this updated review. Six were from the original version of the review, and two more were added when the search was updated. Nineteen further studies were assessed as part of this update but did not fulfil the inclusion criteria. Of the eight included studies, four studies investigated "prevention" of cognitive problems (during radiotherapy and follow-up) and four studies investigated "amelioration" (interventions to treat cognitive impairment as a late complication of radiotherapy). There were five pharmacological studies (two studies on prevention and three in amelioration) and three non-pharmacological studies (two on prevention and one in amelioration). Due to differences between studies in the interventions being evaluated, a meta-analysis was not possible. Studies in early radiotherapy treatment phase (five studies) Pharmacological studies in the "early radiotherapy treatment phase" were designed to prevent or ameliorate cognitive deficits and included drugs used in dementia (memantine) and fatigue (d-threo-methylphenidate hydrochloride). Non-pharmacological studies in the "early radiotherapy treatment phase" included a ketogenic diet and a two-week cognitive rehabilitation and problem-solving programme. In the memantine study, the primary cognitive outcome of memory at six months did not reach significance, but there was significant improvement in overall cognitive function compared to placebo, with similar adverse events across groups. The d-threo-methylphenidate hydrochloride study found no statistically significant difference between arms, with few adverse events. The study of a calorie-restricted ketogenic diet found no effect, although a lower than expected calorie intake in the control group complicates interpretation of the results. The study investigating the utility of a rehabilitation program did not carry out a statistical comparison of cognitive performance between groups. Studies in delayed radiation or late effect phase (four studies) The "amelioration" pharmacological studies to treat cognitive complications of radiotherapy included drugs used in dementia (donepezil) or psychostimulants (methylphenidate and modafinil). Non-pharmacological measures included cognitive rehabilitation and problem solving (Goal Management Training). These studies included patients with cognitive problems at entry who had "stable" brain cancer. The donepezil study did not find an improvement in the primary cognitive outcome of overall cognitive performance, but did find improvement in an individual test of memory, compared to placebo; adverse events were not reported. A study comparing methylphenidate with modafinil found improvements in cognitive function in both the methylphenidate and modafinil arms; few adverse events were reported. Another study comparing two different doses of modafinil combined treatment arms and found improvements across all cognitive tests, however, a number of adverse events were reported. Both studies were limited by a small sample size. The Goal Management Training study suggested a benefit of the intervention, a behavioural intervention that combined mindfulness and strategy training, on executive function and processing speed. There were a number of limitations across studies and few were without high risks of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In this update, limited additional evidence was found for the treatment or amelioration of cognitive deficits in adults treated with cranial irradiation. As concluded in the original review, there is supportive evidence that memantine may help prevent cognitive deficits for adults with brain metastases receiving cranial irradiation. There is supportive evidence that donepezil, methylphenidate and modafinil may have a role in treating cognitive deficits in adults with brain tumours who have been treated with cranial irradiation; patient withdrawal affected the statistical power of these studies. Further research that tries to minimise the withdrawal of consent, and subsequently reduce the requirement for imputation procedures, may offer a higher certainty of evidence. There is evidence from only a single small study to support non-pharmacological interventions in the amelioration of cognitive deficits. Further research is required.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Modafinil; Donepezil; Memantine; Quality of Life; Cognitive Dysfunction; Cranial Irradiation; Cognition; Methylphenidate; Brain Neoplasms; Fatigue; Dementia
PubMed: 36427235
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011335.pub3 -
Movement Disorders Clinical Practice Sep 2023Continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI) is one of the advanced therapies for Parkinson's disease (PD). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI) is one of the advanced therapies for Parkinson's disease (PD).
METHODS
A systematic review of all published articles in English on CSAI for PD till January 30, 2022 was conducted.
RESULTS
A total of 82 articles met the search criteria. Publications included retrospective or prospective open-label observational studies, with a limited number of randomized control trials (RCT). Publications were highly heterogeneous and focused on different aspects of CSAI and included clinical audits, effects on cognition/behavior, axial symptoms, nocturnal issues, adverse events/reasons for discontinuation and comparison with other continuous dopaminergic therapies. CSAI was used in patients who presented severe motor fluctuations not resolved by oral therapy, poor candidates for deep brain stimulation (DBS) due to cognitive/behavioral issues or in those with DBS weaning effect. Recent studies have also shown that CSAI was useful for nocturnal usage in advanced PD, in addition to daytime utilization. Adverse effects were common and include skin lesions, sedation and nausea. Pump management difficulties and patient decisions were common reasons for therapy dropout, predominantly during the initial stages of the CSAI.
CONCLUSION
There is consistent agreement on the benefits of CSAI in reducing OFF periods and improving ON periods without troublesome dyskinesia and specific motor and non-motor symptoms. Although there is a paucity of RCTs, current data from almost 30 years of use suggests CSAI to be beneficial in advanced cases of PD.
Topics: Apomorphine; Parkinson Disease; Humans; Infusions, Subcutaneous; Antiparkinson Agents; Dopamine Agonists; Deep Brain Stimulation
PubMed: 37772305
DOI: 10.1002/mdc3.13810