-
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 -
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics Feb 2019Success in treating patients with atypical parkinsonian syndromes, namely progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), cortico-basal degeneration (CBD), multiple system atrophy...
AIMS
Success in treating patients with atypical parkinsonian syndromes, namely progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), cortico-basal degeneration (CBD), multiple system atrophy (MSA), Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD), and Lewy body dementia with (LBD), remains exceedingly low. The present work overviews the most influential research literature collected on MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus for available treatment in atypical parkinsonisms without time restriction.
DISCUSSION
Transdermal rotigotine, autologous mesenchymal stem cells, tideglusib, and coenzyme Q10 along with donepezil, rivastigmine, memantine, and the deep brain stimulation have shown some benefits in alleviating symptoms in APS. Moreover, many new clinical trials are ongoing testing microtubule stabilizer, antitau monoclonal antibody, tau acetylation inhibition, cell replacement, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, active immunization, inhibition of toxic α-synuclein oligomers formation, and inhibition of microglia.
CONCLUSION
A detailed knowledge of the pathological mechanism underlying the disorders is needed, and disease-modifying therapies are required to offer better therapeutic options to physician and caregivers of APS patients.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antiparkinson Agents; Child; Humans; Parkinsonian Disorders
PubMed: 30294976
DOI: 10.1111/cns.13068 -
BMC Geriatrics Jul 2018The risk-benefit relationship of memantine treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains unclear. In addition, variability between the results of clinical trials has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Predictors of discontinuation, efficacy, and safety of memantine treatment for Alzheimer's disease: meta-analysis and meta-regression of 18 randomized clinical trials involving 5004 patients.
BACKGROUND
The risk-benefit relationship of memantine treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains unclear. In addition, variability between the results of clinical trials has been observed. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk-benefit relationship of memantine treatment in patients with AD and to determine the predictor effect of patient, intervention, and study design related covariates.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials was performed. Primary outcomes were all-cause discontinuation, discontinuation due to adverse events (AE) and efficacy on cognitive function. Odds ratio (OR) and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Meta-regression was conducted to identify related covariates. Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included trials.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies involving 5004 patients were included. No differences between memantine and placebo were found for all-cause treatment discontinuation (OR=0.97 [0.82, 1.14]) and discontinuation due to AE (OR=1.18 [0.91, 1.53]). Memantine showed small improvement on cognitive function (SMD=0.15 [0.08, 0.22]). Baseline functional ability was positively associated with all-cause treatment discontinuation and discontinuation due to AE.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study suggests that memantine has a very small efficacy on AD symptomatology and its safety profile is similar to that of placebo. No evidence of treatment discontinuation improvement with memantine is found, indicating a dubious risk-benefit relationship. No intervention characteristic or subgroup of patients clearly shows a significantly better risk-benefit relationship.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42014015696 .
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Alzheimer Disease; Dopamine Agents; Double-Blind Method; Forecasting; Humans; Memantine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regression Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 30041625
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-018-0857-5 -
Scandinavian Journal of Pain Jan 2018Treatment of pain following major limb amputations is often a clinical challenge in a patient population consisting mainly of elderly with underlying diseases....
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Treatment of pain following major limb amputations is often a clinical challenge in a patient population consisting mainly of elderly with underlying diseases. Literature on management of acute post-amputation pain is scarce. We performed a systematic review on this topic to evaluate the efficacy and safety of analgesic interventions for acute pain following major limb amputation.
METHODS
A literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the following key words: [(amputation) AND (pain OR analgesi* OR pain relief)] AND (acute OR postoperative). Randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational studies investigating treatment of acute pain following major amputations for any indication (peripheral vascular disease, malignant disease, trauma) were included. The review was performed according to the standards described in the PRISMA statement. The Cochrane quality assessment tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias in the RCTs.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies with total of 949 patients were included. The studies were generally small and heterogeneous on outcomes, study designs and quality. There were 16 studies on epidural or continuous perineural analgesia (CPI). Based on five RCTs (n=268) and two observational studies (n=49), epidural analgesia decreased the intensity of acute stump pain as compared to systemic analgesics, during the first 24 h after the operation. Based on one study epidural analgesia caused more adverse effects like sedation, nausea and motor block than continuous perineural local anesthetic infusion. Based on one RCT (n=21) and eight observational studies (n=501) CPI seemed to decrease opioid consumption as compared to systemic analgesics only, on the first three postoperative days, and was well tolerated. Only three trials investigated systemic analgesics (oral memantine, oral gabapentine, iv ketamine). Ketamine did not decrease acute pain or opioid consumption after amputation as compared to other systemic analgesics. Gabapentin did not decrease acute pain when combined to epidural analgesia as compared to epidural analgesia and opioid treatment, and caused adverse effects.
CONCLUSIONS
The main finding of this systematic review is that evidence regarding pain management after major limb amputation is very limited. Epidural analgesia may be effective, but firm evidence is lacking. Epidural causes more adverse effects than CPI. The results on efficacy of CPI are indecisive. The data on adjuvant medications combined to epidural analgesia or CPI is limited. Studies on efficacy and adverse effects of systemic analgesics for amputation pain, especially concentrating on elderly patients, are needed.
Topics: Acute Pain; Amputation, Surgical; Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesics; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 29794290
DOI: 10.1515/sjpain-2017-0170 -
The International Journal of... Aug 2018We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of anti-dementia drugs plus antipsychotics for schizophrenia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of anti-dementia drugs plus antipsychotics for schizophrenia.
METHODS
Primary outcomes of efficacy and safety included improving overall symptoms (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale scores) and all-cause discontinuation, respectively. Other outcomes included psychopathology subscales (positive, negative, general, and anxiety/depressive symptoms), cognitive function (attention/vigilance, reasoning/problem solving, social cognition, speed of processing, verbal learning, visual learning, working memory, and cognitive control/executive function), Mini-Mental State Examination scores, treatment discontinuation due to adverse events and inefficacy, and individual adverse events. We evaluated the effect size using a random effects model.
RESULTS
We identified 37 studies (n=1574): 14 donepezil-based (n=568), 10 galantamine-based (n=371), 4 rivastigmine-based (n=146), and 9 memantine-based (n=489) studies. Pooled anti-dementia drugs plus antipsychotics treatments were superior to placebo plus antipsychotics in improving the overall symptoms (24 studies, 1069 patients: standardized mean difference=-0.34, 95% CI=-0.61 to -0.08, P=.01), negative symptoms (24 studies, 1077 patients: standardized mean difference =-0.62, 95% CI=-0.92 to -0.32, Pcorrected=.00018), and Mini-Mental State Examination scores (7 studies, 225 patients: standardized mean difference=-0.79, 95% CI=-1.23 to -0.34, P=.0006). No significant differences were found between anti-dementia drugs plus antipsychotics and placebo plus antipsychotics regarding other outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the results suggest that anti-dementia drugs plus antipsychotics treatment improves negative symptoms and Mini-Mental State Examination scores in schizophrenia patients, they possibly were influenced by a small-study effect and some bias. However, it was not superior to placebo plus antipsychotics in improving composite cognitive test score, which more systematically evaluates cognitive impairment than the Mini-Mental State Examination score. Overall, the anti-dementia drugs plus antipsychotics treatment was well tolerated.
Topics: Cognition; Cognitive Dysfunction; Humans; Nootropic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Schizophrenic Psychology; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29762677
DOI: 10.1093/ijnp/pyy045 -
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 -
Zeitschrift Fur Kinder- Und... May 2018Research has implicated glutamatergic projections between the various frontal subregions in the pathogenesis of compulsivity and impulsivity. Reducing striatal glutamate... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Research has implicated glutamatergic projections between the various frontal subregions in the pathogenesis of compulsivity and impulsivity. Reducing striatal glutamate release, or antagonising the action of glutamate at its receptors, may therefore represent viable treatment strategies. Several glutamatergic agents with regulatory approval for other indications are available and may be of potential benefit in the treatment of compulsivity/impulsivity in psychiatric disorders in paediatric patients.
METHOD
This review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines and evaluates available scientific literature concerning the use of glutamatergic agents in these patients, in order to determine their reported effectiveness/efficacy and tolerability/safety.
RESULTS
Out of a total of 1,426 publications, 21 trials examining six glutamatergic substances in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder, autism spectrum disorders, and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder were included.
CONCLUSIONS
Trial designs as well as results were heterogeneous and thus comparability was limited. Available data support the hypothesis that glutamatergic agents are of potential value in the treatment of compulsivity/impulsivity in children and adolescents. Based on the data reviewed, memantine and N-acetylcysteine suggest the best risk-benefit profile for future trials. Riluzole should primarily be further investigated in adults. Clinical research of this nature is a key element of the TACTICS Consortium project funded by the European Union (FP7).
Topics: Acetylcysteine; Adolescent; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Brain; Child; Corpus Striatum; Excitatory Amino Acid Agents; Glutamic Acid; Humans; Memantine; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Glutamate; Risk Assessment; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28922069
DOI: 10.1024/1422-4917/a000546 -
Journal of Amino Acids 2017Several evidences support the hypothesis that glutamatergic dysfunction may be implicated in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia and in the last few years great interest... (Review)
Review
Several evidences support the hypothesis that glutamatergic dysfunction may be implicated in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia and in the last few years great interest has been focused on the role of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR). Glutamate is the main excitatory neurotransmitter in human CNS and it plays a prominent role in synaptic plasticity, learning, and memory and other cognitive functions. Increasing interest in memantine add-on therapy in schizophrenic patients with negative and cognitive symptoms may suggest that memantine could be a new promising treatment in schizophrenia. The aim of this update was to evaluate clinical data about the memantine effectiveness in schizophrenic patients. Our systematic review of the literature highlights that memantine therapy in schizophrenic patients seems to improve mainly negative symptoms while positive symptoms and cognitive symptoms did not improve significantly.
PubMed: 28243470
DOI: 10.1155/2017/7021071 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2017Glaucoma is a heterogeneous group of conditions involving progressive damage to the optic nerve, deterioration of retinal ganglion cells, and ultimately visual field... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Glaucoma is a heterogeneous group of conditions involving progressive damage to the optic nerve, deterioration of retinal ganglion cells, and ultimately visual field loss. It is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. Open angle glaucoma (OAG), the most common form of glaucoma, is a chronic condition that may or may not present with increased intraocular pressure (IOP). Neuroprotection for glaucoma refers to any intervention intended to prevent optic nerve damage or cell death.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to systematically examine the evidence regarding the effectiveness of neuroprotective agents for slowing the progression of OAG in adults compared with no neuroprotective agent, placebo, or other glaucoma treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily (January 1946 to August 2016), Embase (January 1980 to August 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to August 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 16 August 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which topical or oral treatments were used for neuroprotection in adults with OAG. Minimum follow-up time was four years.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts from the literature searches. We obtained full-text copies of potentially relevant studies and re-evaluated for inclusion. Two review authors independently extracted data related to study characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes. We identified one trial for this review, thus we performed no meta-analysis. Two studies comparing memantine to placebo are currently awaiting classification until study investigators provide additional study details. We documented reasons for excluding studies from the review.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one multicenter RCT of adults with low-pressure glaucoma (Low-pressure Glaucoma Treatment Study, LoGTS) conducted in the USA. The primary outcome was progression of visual field loss after four years of treatment with either brimonidine or timolol. Of the 190 adults enrolled in the study, the investigators excluded 12 (6.3%) after randomization; 77 participants (40.5%) did not complete four years of follow-up. The rate of attrition was unbalanced between groups with more participants dropping out of the brimonidine group (55%) than the timolol group (29%).Of those remaining in the study at four years, participants assigned to brimonidine showed less progression of visual field loss than participants assigned to timolol (risk ratio (RR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.86; 101 participants). Because of high risk of attrition bias and potential selective outcome reporting, we graded the certainty of evidence for this outcome as very low. At the four-year follow-up, the mean IOP was similar in both groups among those for whom data were available (mean difference 0.20 mmHg, 95% CI -0.73 to 1.13; 91 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study authors did not report analyzable data for visual acuity or any data related to vertical cup-disc ratio, quality of life, or economic outcomes. The most frequent adverse event was ocular allergy to the study drug, which affected more participants in the brimonidine group than the timolol group (RR 5.32, 95% CI 1.64 to 17.26; 178 participants; very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although the only trial we included in this review found less visual field loss in the brimonidine-treated group, the evidence was of such low certainty that we can draw no conclusions from this finding. Further clinical research is needed to determine whether neuroprotective agents may be beneficial for individuals with OAG. Such research should focus on outcomes important to patients, such as preservation of vision, and how these outcomes relate to cell death and optic nerve damage. As OAG is a chronic, progressive disease with variability in symptoms, RCTs designed to measure the effectiveness of neuroprotective agents require a long-term follow-up of five years or longer to detect clinically meaningful effects.
Topics: Adult; Antihypertensive Agents; Brimonidine Tartrate; Disease Progression; Glaucoma, Open-Angle; Humans; Neuroprotective Agents; Optic Nerve; Optic Nerve Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retinal Ganglion Cells; Timolol
PubMed: 28122126
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006539.pub4