-
Swiss Medical Weekly Jun 2019The clinical efficacy and safety of combination therapy with acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (AChEI) and memantine compared to AChEI or memantine alone in patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The clinical efficacy and safety of combination therapy with acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (AChEI) and memantine compared to AChEI or memantine alone in patients with Alzheimer’s disease is inconclusive.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of combination therapy of AChEI and memantine to monotherapy with either substance in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease (Mini-Mental State Examination score is <20).
METHODS
We systematically searched EMBASE, Medline and CENTRAL until February 2018 for eligible RCTs. We pooled the outcome data using inverse variance weighting models assuming random effects, and assessed the quality of evidence (QoE) according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
RESULTS
We included nine RCTs (2604 patients). At short-term follow-up (closest to 6 months), combination therapy compared to AChEI monotherapy had a significantly greater effect on cognition than AChEI monotherapy (standardised mean difference [SMD] 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05 to 0.35, 7 RCTs, low QoE) and clinical global impression (SMD −0.15, 95% CI −0.28 to −0.01, 4 RCTs, moderate QoE), but not on activities of daily living (SMD 0.09, 95% CI −0.01 to 0.18, 5 RCTs, moderate QoE) or behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (mean difference −3.07, 95% CI −6.53 to 0.38, 6 RCT, low QoE). There was no significant difference in adverse events (relative risk ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12, 4 RCTs, low QoE). Evidence for long-term follow-up (≥ 9 months) or nursing home placement was sparse. Only two studies compared combination therapy with memantine monotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS
Combination therapy had statistically significant effects on cognition and clinical global impression. The clinical relevance of these effects is uncertain. The overall QoE was very low. With the current evidence, it remains unclear whether combination therapy adds any benefit. Large pragmatic RCTs with long-term follow-up and focus on functional outcomes, delay in nursing home placement and adverse events are needed.  .
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Alzheimer Disease; Antiparkinson Agents; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Cognition; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Memantine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31269225
DOI: 10.4414/smw.2019.20093 -
Brain Injury 2019: To systematically review literature on efficacy of amantadine on behavior (irritability/aggression/agitation, emotional lability, apathy, impairment of executive...
: To systematically review literature on efficacy of amantadine on behavior (irritability/aggression/agitation, emotional lability, apathy, impairment of executive functioning), participation, quality-of-life (QoL), and safety, in patients with acquired brain injury (ABI). Amantadine is widely used clinically, so comprehensive information on efficacy, participation, QoL and safety is relevant. : We used PRISMA Guidelines. We searched PubMed/EMBASE/CINAHL (last search 28-8-2018) Two independent reviewers performed selection and data-extraction. Quality of studies was assessed, using CONSORT and Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (QATFQS). : Eleven out of 500 studies were included. Of five RCTs, two reported significant effects on irritability/aggression, and one no effect. One RCT on cognition no effect. One prospective cohort study showed a significant effect on executive functioning. One retrospective study was inconclusive. One single-case experimental design (SCED) study reported significant effect on apathy and three case-reports indicated effects on behavior. QoL and societal participation were not measured. No safety issues emerged. : Amantadine may be efficacious on irritability and aggression after ABI. Amantadine is a safe drug in the presence of adequate creatinine clearance. Future studies should use designs, suitable for the heterogeneous ABI population, like randomized SCEDs, and should include the effect on societal participation and QoL.
Topics: Aggression; Amantadine; Apathy; Brain Injuries; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dopamine Agents; Executive Function; Humans; Irritable Mood; Problem Behavior; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31250669
DOI: 10.1080/02699052.2019.1631482 -
Schizophrenia Research Jul 2019As a non-competitive N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist, memantine has been used to treat major mental disorders including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
As a non-competitive N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist, memantine has been used to treat major mental disorders including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder (MDD). This meta-analysis systematically investigated the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive memantine for patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and MDD.
METHODS
Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the study. Data of the three disorders were separately synthesized using the RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
Fifteen RCTs (n = 988) examining memantine (5-20 mg/day) as an adjunct treatment for schizophrenia (9 trials with 512 patients), bipolar disorder (3 trials with 319 patients), and MDD (3 trials with 157 patients) were analyzed. Memantine outperformed the comparator regarding total psychopathology with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.56 [95% confidence interval (CI): -1.01, -0.11; I = 76%, P = 0.01] and negative symptoms with an SMD of -0.71 (95% CI: -1.09, -0.33; I = 74%, P = 0.0003) in schizophrenia, but no significant effects were found with regard to positive symptoms and general psychopathology in schizophrenia, or depressive and manic symptoms in bipolar disorder or depressive symptoms in MDD. Memantine outperformed the comparator in improving cognitive performance in schizophrenia with an SMD of 1.07 (95% CI: 0.53, 1.61; P < 0.0001, I = 29%). No group differences were found in the rates of adverse drug reactions and discontinuation due to any reason in the three major mental disorders.
CONCLUSIONS
Memantine as an adjunct treatment appears to have significant efficacy in improving negative symptoms in schizophrenia. The efficacy and safety of adjunctive memantine for bipolar disorder or MDD needs to be further examined.
REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO: 42018099045.
Topics: Bipolar Disorder; Cognition; Depressive Disorder, Major; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; Humans; Memantine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Schizophrenic Psychology
PubMed: 31164254
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2019.05.019 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2019Memantine is a moderate affinity uncompetitive antagonist of glutamate NMDA receptors. It is licensed for use in moderate and severe Alzheimer's disease (AD); in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Memantine is a moderate affinity uncompetitive antagonist of glutamate NMDA receptors. It is licensed for use in moderate and severe Alzheimer's disease (AD); in the USA, it is also widely used off-label for mild AD.
OBJECTIVES
To determine efficacy and safety of memantine for people with dementia. To assess whether memantine adds benefit for people already taking cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register of trials (http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois/) up to 25 March 2018. We examined clinical trials registries, press releases and posters of memantine manufacturers; and the web sites of the FDA, EMEA and NICE. We contacted authors and companies for missing information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled, randomised trials of memantine in people with dementia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We pooled and analysed data from four clinical domains across different aetiologies and severities of dementia and for AD with agitation. We assessed the impact of study duration, severity and concomitant use of ChEIs. Consequently, we restricted analyses to the licensed dose (20 mg/day or 28 mg extended release) and data at six to seven months duration of follow-up, and analysed separately results for mild and moderate-to-severe AD.We transformed results for efficacy outcomes into the difference in points on particular outcome scales.
MAIN RESULTS
Across all types of dementia, data were available from almost 10,000 participants in 44 included trials, most of which were at low or unclear risk of bias. For nearly half the studies, relevant data were obtained from unpublished sources. The majority of trials (29 in 7885 participants) were conducted in people with AD.1. Moderate-to-severe AD (with or without concomitant ChEIs). High-certainty evidence from up to 14 studies in around 3700 participants consistently shows a small clinical benefit for memantine versus placebo: clinical global rating (CGR): 0.21 CIBIC+ points (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.30); cognitive function (CF): 3.11 Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) points (95% CI 2.42 to 3.92); performance on activities of daily living (ADL): 1.09 ADL19 points (95% CI 0.62 to 1.64); and behaviour and mood (BM): 1.84 Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) points (95% CI 1.05 to 2.76). There may be no difference in the number of people discontinuing memantine compared to placebo: risk ratio (RR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.04) corresponding to 13 fewer people per 1000 (95% CI 31 fewer to 7 more). Although there is moderate-certainty evidence that fewer people taking memantine experience agitation as an adverse event: RR 0.81 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.99) (25 fewer people per 1000, 95% CI 1 to 44 fewer), there is also moderate-certainty evidence, from three additional studies, suggesting that memantine is not beneficial as a treatment for agitation (e.g. Cohen Mansfield Agitation Inventory: clinical benefit of 0.50 CMAI points, 95% CI -3.71 to 4.71) .The presence of concomitant ChEI does not impact on the difference between memantine and placebo, with the possible exceptions of the BM outcome (larger effect in people taking ChEIs) and the CF outcome (smaller effect).2. Mild AD (Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) 20 to 23): mainly moderate-certainty evidence based on post-hoc subgroups from up to four studies in around 600 participants suggests there is probably no difference between memantine and placebo for CF: 0.21 ADAS-Cog points (95% CI -0.95 to 1.38); performance on ADL: -0.07 ADL 23 points (95% CI -1.80 to 1.66); and BM: -0.29 NPI points (95% CI -2.16 to 1.58). There is less certainty in the CGR evidence, which also suggests there may be no difference: 0.09 CIBIC+ points (95% CI -0.12 to 0.30). Memantine (compared with placebo) may increase the numbers of people discontinuing treatment because of adverse events (RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.39).3. Mild-to-moderate vascular dementia. Moderate- and low-certainty evidence from two studies in around 750 participants indicates there is probably a small clinical benefit for CF: 2.15 ADAS-Cog points (95% CI 1.05 to 3.25); there may be a small clinical benefit for BM: 0.47 NOSGER disturbing behaviour points (95% CI 0.07 to 0.87); there is probably no difference in CGR: 0.03 CIBIC+ points (95% CI -0.28 to 0.34); and there may be no difference in ADL: 0.11 NOSGER II self-care subscale points (95% CI -0.35 to 0.54) or in the numbers of people discontinuing treatment: RR 1.05 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.34).There is limited, mainly low- or very low-certainty efficacy evidence for other types of dementia (Parkinson's disease and dementia Lewy bodies (for which CGR may show a small clinical benefit; four studies in 319 people); frontotemporal dementia (two studies in 133 people); and AIDS-related Dementia Complex (one study in 140 people)).There is high-certainty evidence showing no difference between memantine and placebo in the proportion experiencing at least one adverse event: RR 1.03 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.06); the RR does not differ between aetiologies or severities of dementia. Combining available data from all trials, there is moderate-certainty evidence that memantine is 1.6 times more likely than placebo to result in dizziness (6.1% versus 3.9%), low-certainty evidence of a 1.3-fold increased risk of headache (5.5% versus 4.3%), but high-certainty evidence of no difference in falls.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found important differences in the efficacy of memantine in mild AD compared to that in moderate-to-severe AD. There is a small clinical benefit of memantine in people with moderate-to-severe AD, which occurs irrespective of whether they are also taking a ChEI, but no benefit in people with mild AD.Clinical heterogeneity in AD makes it unlikely that any single drug will have a large effect size, and means that the optimal drug treatment may involve multiple drugs, each having an effect size that may be less than the minimum clinically important difference.A definitive long-duration trial in mild AD is needed to establish whether starting memantine earlier would be beneficial over the long term and safe: at present the evidence is against this, despite it being common practice. A long-duration trial in moderate-to-severe AD is needed to establish whether the benefit persists beyond six months.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Akathisia, Drug-Induced; Alzheimer Disease; Cognition Disorders; Dementia; Dementia, Vascular; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; Humans; Memantine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 30891742
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003154.pub6 -
European Journal of Pain (London,... Aug 2019N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors are involved in pain signalling and neuroplasticity. Memantine has been shown to have analgesic properties in pre-clinical and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors are involved in pain signalling and neuroplasticity. Memantine has been shown to have analgesic properties in pre-clinical and small clinical studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of memantine to prevent or reduce chronic pain.
DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT
MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched for comparative trials using memantine, either against placebo or active medications, for chronic pain in adults. Pain relief was considered our primary outcome. Meta-analyses were conducted if outcomes were reported in two or more studies. Outcomes were reported as mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Quality was assessed using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
Among 454 citations, 15 studies were included with populations predominantly consisting of neuropathic conditions and fibromyalgia. Overall, we observed unclear reporting of randomization and allocation methods, apart from potential for publication bias. Among the 11 studies looking at chronic pain treatment, the difference in end pain score with memantine was not significant: MD = -0.58 units (95% CI -1.31, 0.14); I = 82% (low quality). In two surgical studies using memantine for pain prevention, memantine decreased pain intensity: MD = -1.02 units (95% CI -1.38, -0.66); I = 0%. Dizziness was significantly more common with memantine: RR = 4.90 (95% CI 1.26, 18.99); I = 52% (moderate quality).
CONCLUSION
The current evidence regarding the use of memantine for chronic pain is limited and uncertain. Despite its potential, pain relief achieved in clinical studies is small and is associated with an increase in dizziness.
SIGNIFICANCE
Despite a sound rationale, the benefit of using memantine for chronic pain is unclear. Our systematic review and meta-analysis show that memantine may have the potential to decrease pain. However, it can also increase common adverse effects. Considering the small number of studies with potential for bias and inconclusive evidence, there was low to very low certainty. Hence, no clear recommendations can be made about its routine clinical use until larger and more definitive studies are conducted.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics; Chronic Pain; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Memantine; Receptors, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate
PubMed: 30848504
DOI: 10.1002/ejp.1393 -
Psychosomatics 2019Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an increasingly common cause of behavioral and emotional dysregulation among hospitalized patients. While consultation-liaison...
BACKGROUND
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an increasingly common cause of behavioral and emotional dysregulation among hospitalized patients. While consultation-liaison psychiatrists are often called to help manage these behaviors, acute pharmacological management guidelines are limited.
OBJECTIVE
Conduct a systematic review to determine which pharmacological measures are supported by the literature for targeting agitation and aggression in the acute time period following a TBI.
METHODS
In a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library, we identified and then analyzed publications that investigated the pharmacological management of behavioral and emotional dysregulation following a TBI during the acute time period following injury.
RESULTS
There were a limited number of high quality studies that met our inclusion criteria, including only five randomized controlled trials. The majority of the literature identified consisted of case reports or case series. Trends identified in the literature reviewed suggested that amantadine, propranolol, and anti-epileptics were the best supported medications to consider. For many medication classes, the time of medication initiation and duration of treatment, relative to the time of injury, may impact the effect observed.
CONCLUSIONS
The pharmacological management of agitated patients immediately following a TBI is still an area of much-needed research, as there is limited data-driven guidance in the literature.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Aggression; Amantadine; Anticonvulsants; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Dopamine Agents; Emotional Regulation; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Problem Behavior; Propranolol
PubMed: 30665668
DOI: 10.1016/j.psym.2018.11.009 -
Turk Psikiyatri Dergisi = Turkish... 2019Many patients with schizophrenia respond partially to treatment with antipsychotic medications. A wide range of pharmaceutical agents are utilized as augmentation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Many patients with schizophrenia respond partially to treatment with antipsychotic medications. A wide range of pharmaceutical agents are utilized as augmentation therapy in order to increase the efficacy of antipsychotic medication treatment. Memantine which is a noncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist is one such agent among these. In this study, by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis we aimed to assess the efficacy of memantine augmentation on psychopathology in patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotic medication.
METHOD
We analyzed double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of memantine add-on treatment in schizophrenia patients receiving antipsychotic medications. The primary outcome measure was amelioration of negative symptoms and the secondary outcome measures were amelioration of positive, total and general psychopathology symptoms. Publication bias was evaluated by Funnel plot and Egger test.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (n=570) were included. Although memantine add-on treatment was superior to placebo for ameliorating negative symptoms (SMD=0.596, 95% CI=0.075-1.118, p=0.025), there were no statistically significant differences in the amelioration of general psychopathology (SMD=0.034, 95% CI=0.419-0.488, p=0.883), positive (SMD=-0.041, 95% CI=0.217-0.135, p=0.650) and overall (SMD=0.315, 95% CI=0.256-0.887, p=0.280) symptoms. No publication bias was observed between studies according to Funnel plots and Egger test results.
CONCLUSION
Memantine augmentation treatment seems to be beneficial for particularly treating negative symptoms in schizophrenia patients. Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up durations are needed.
Topics: Antiparkinson Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Memantine; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 32594486
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Interventions in Aging 2018The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) demands more effective drugs, which are still unclear. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of six...
PURPOSE
The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) demands more effective drugs, which are still unclear. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of six drugs, such as donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine, memantine, huperzine-A, and tacrine, in senior AD patients and identify the most effective one to improve patients' cognitive function.
METHODS
A system of search strategies was used to identify relevant studies including randomized controlled trials and clinical controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of six drugs in patients with AD. We updated relevant studies that were published before March 2018 as full-text articles. Using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), we ranked cognitive ability objectively based on Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Pairwise and NMAs were sequentially performed for the efficacy of drugs compared to each drug or control group through the trials included.
RESULTS
Among the 35 trials included, no obvious heterogeneity ( =0.0%, =0.583) was revealed according to the pooled data for cognition in NMA and the mean difference (MD) of memantine (MD=1.7, 95% CI: 0.73, 2.8) showed that the memantine was significantly efficacious in the treatment group in terms of MMSE. Followed by galantamine, huperzine-A, rivastigmine, tacrine, and donepezil.
CONCLUSION
As the first NMA comparing the major drugs in market for AD, our study suggests that memantine might have a more significant benefit on cognition than other five drugs available.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Antiparkinson Agents; Bayes Theorem; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Cognition; Donepezil; Galantamine; Humans; Memantine; Neuroprotective Agents; Nootropic Agents; Rivastigmine
PubMed: 30425461
DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S184968 -
Der Nervenarzt May 2019The treatment of schizophrenic psychoses with antipsychotic drugs (AP) is often associated with an increased risk of delayed occurrence of antipsychotic-associated...
The treatment of schizophrenic psychoses with antipsychotic drugs (AP) is often associated with an increased risk of delayed occurrence of antipsychotic-associated movement disorders. Persistence and chronicity of such symptoms are very frequent. The risk of developing tardive dyskinesia (TD) is associated with the pharmacological effect profile of a particular AP, with treatment duration and age. This systematic review article summarizes the current study situation on prevalence, risk factors, prevention and treatment options and instruments for early prediction of TD in schizophrenic psychoses. The current data situation on treatment strategies for TD is very heterogeneous. For the treatment of TD there is preliminary evidence for reduction or discontinuation of the AP, switching to clozapine, administration of benzodiazepines (clonazepam) and treatment with vesicular monoamine transporter (VMAT2) inhibitors, ginkgo biloba, amantadine or vitamin E. Although TD can be precisely diagnosed it cannot always be effectively treated. Early detection and early treatment of TD can have a favorable influence on the prognosis and the clinical outcome.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Tardive Dyskinesia
PubMed: 30341543
DOI: 10.1007/s00115-018-0629-7 -
Movement Disorders : Official Journal... Oct 2018
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Amantadine; Animals; Databases, Bibliographic; Dopamine Agents; Drug Evaluation, Preclinical; Humans; Parkinson Disease
PubMed: 30288778
DOI: 10.1002/mds.27486