-
Current Neuropharmacology 2020To systematically review the literature on the therapeutic use of amphetamine, lisdexamfetamine and methylphenidate in elderly population with and without dementia.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the literature on the therapeutic use of amphetamine, lisdexamfetamine and methylphenidate in elderly population with and without dementia.
METHODS
We conducted two researches on the PubMed, Scopus and Embase using the keywords ("elderly") AND ("amphetamine" OR "methylphenidate" OR "lisdexamfetamine") and then ("Alzheimer" OR "dementia") AND ("amphetamine" OR "methylphenidate" OR "lisdexamfetamine").
RESULTS
Twenty-nine papers met all the eligibility criteria. The results are encouraging as 81.5% of the studies showed clinical improvement of the investigated condition.
CONCLUSION
Amphetamines and methylphenidate are probably effective strategies for different conditions in the elderly population. However, further studies are needed to provide more robust evidence on efficacy, dosage and safety for this population.
Topics: Aged; Amphetamine; Dementia; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate; Methylphenidate
PubMed: 31660835
DOI: 10.2174/1570159X17666191010093021 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Sep 2020Modafinil, methyphenidate (MPH) and d-amphetamine (d-amph) are putative cognitive enhancers. However, efficacy of cognitive enhancement has yet to be fully established.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
How effective are pharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement in healthy adults? A series of meta-analyses of cognitive performance during acute administration of modafinil, methylphenidate and D-amphetamine.
Modafinil, methyphenidate (MPH) and d-amphetamine (d-amph) are putative cognitive enhancers. However, efficacy of cognitive enhancement has yet to be fully established. We examined cognitive performance in healthy non-sleep-deprived adults following modafinil, MPH, or d-amph vs placebo in 3 meta-analyses, using subgroup analysis by cognitive domain; executive functions (updating, switching, inhibitory control, access to semantic/long term memory), spatial working memory, recall, selective attention, and sustained attention. We adhered to PRISMA. We identified k = 47 studies for analysis; k = 14 studies (64 effect sizes) for modafinil, k = 24 studies (47 effect sizes) for Methylphenidate, and k = 10 (27 effect sizes) for d-amph. There was an overall effect of modafinil (SMD=0.12, p=.01). Modafinil improved memory updating (SMD=0.28, p=.03). There was an overall effect of MPH (SMD=0.21, p=.0004) driven by improvements in recall (SMD=0.43, p=.0002), sustained attention (SMD=0.42, p=.0004), and inhibitory control (SMD=0.27, p=.03). There were no effects for d-amph. MPH and modafinil show enhancing effects in specific sub-domains of cognition. However, data with these stimulants is far from positive if we consider that effects are small, in experiments that do not accurately reflect their actual use in the wider population. There is a user perception that these drugs are effective cognitive enhancers, but this is not supported by the evidence so far.
Topics: Adult; Cognition; Dextroamphetamine; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Male; Mental Recall; Methylphenidate; Modafinil; Nootropic Agents; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 32709551
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2020.07.002