Memantine Treatment of Cognitive Symptoms in Mild to Moderate Alzheimer Disease: Secondary Analyses From a Placebo-controlled Randomized Trial

Extrasynaptic NMDA receptors in acute and chronic excitotoxicity: implications for preventive treatments of ischemic stroke and late-onset Alzheimer's disease

Stroke and late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) are risk factors for each other; the comorbidity of these brain disorders in aging individuals represents a significant challenge in basic research and clinical practice. The similarities and differences between stroke and AD in terms of pathogenesis and pathophysiology, however, have rarely been comparably reviewed. Here, we discuss the research background and recent progresses that are important and informative for the comorbidity of stroke and late-onset AD and related dementia (ADRD). Glutamatergic NMDA receptor (NMDAR) activity and NMDAR-mediated Ca²⁺ influx are essential for neuronal function and cell survival. An ischemic insult, however, can cause rapid increases in glutamate concentration and excessive activation of NMDARs, leading to swift Ca²⁺ overload in neuronal cells and acute excitotoxicity within hours and days. On the other hand, mild upregulation of NMDAR activity, commonly seen in AD animal models and patients, is not immediately cytotoxic. Sustained NMDAR hyperactivity and Ca²⁺ dysregulation lasting from months to years, nevertheless, can be pathogenic for slowly evolving events, i.e. degenerative excitotoxicity, in the development of AD/ADRD. Specifically, Ca²⁺ influx mediated by extrasynaptic NMDARs (eNMDARs) and a downstream pathway mediated by transient receptor potential cation channel subfamily M member (TRPM) are primarily responsible for excitotoxicity. On the other hand, the NMDAR subunit GluN3A plays a "gatekeeper" role in NMDAR activity and a neuroprotective role against both acute and chronic excitotoxicity. Thus, ischemic stroke and AD share an NMDAR- and Ca²⁺-mediated pathogenic mechanism that provides a common receptor target for preventive and possibly disease-modifying therapies. Memantine (MEM) preferentially blocks eNMDARs and was approved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) for symptomatic treatment of moderate-to-severe AD with variable efficacy. According to the pathogenic role of eNMDARs, it is conceivable that MEM and other eNMDAR antagonists should be administered much earlier, preferably during the presymptomatic phases of AD/ADRD. This anti-AD treatment could simultaneously serve as a preconditioning strategy against stroke that attacks ≥ 50% of AD patients. Future research on the regulation of NMDARs, enduring control of eNMDARs, Ca²⁺ homeostasis, and downstream events will provide a promising opportunity to understand and treat the comorbidity of AD/ADRD and stroke.

Pathogenesis of sporadic Alzheimer's disease by deficiency of NMDA receptor subunit GluN3A

The Ca²⁺ hypothesis for Alzheimer's disease (AD) conceives Ca²⁺ dyshomeostasis as a common mechanism of AD; the cause of Ca²⁺ dysregulation, however, is obscure. Meanwhile, hyperactivities of N-Methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDARs), the primary mediator of Ca²⁺ influx, are reported in AD. GluN3A (NR3A) is an NMDAR inhibitory subunit. We hypothesize that GluN3A is critical for sustained Ca²⁺ homeostasis and its deficiency is pathogenic for AD. Cellular, molecular, and functional changes were examined in adult/aging GluN3A knockout (KO) mice. The GluN3A KO mouse brain displayed age-dependent moderate but persistent neuronal hyperactivity, elevated intracellular Ca²⁺ , neuroinflammation, impaired synaptic integrity/plasticity, and neuronal loss. GluN3A KO mice developed olfactory dysfunction followed by psychological/cognitive deficits prior to amyloid-β/tau pathology. Memantine at preclinical stage prevented/attenuated AD syndromes. AD patients' brains show reduced GluN3A expression. We propose that chronic "degenerative excitotoxicity" leads to sporadic AD, while GluN3A represents a primary pathogenic factor, an early biomarker, and an amyloid-independent therapeutic target.

Using Biomarkers to Predict Memantine Effects in Alzheimer's Disease: A Proposal and Proof-Of-Concept Demonstration

Memantine's benefits in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are modest and heterogeneous. We tested the feasibility of using sensitivity to acute memantine challenge to predict an individual's clinical response. Eight participants completed a double-blind challenge study of memantine (placebo versus 20 mg) effects on autonomic, subjective, cognitive, and neurophysiological measures, followed by a 24-week unblinded active-dose therapeutic trial (10 mg bid). Study participation was well tolerated. Subgroups based on memantine sensitivity on specific laboratory measures differed in their clinical response to memantine, some by large effect sizes. It appears feasible to use biomarkers to predict clinical sensitivity to memantine.

Memantine for dementia

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.

The Effect of Memantine on Cognitive Function and Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms in Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease Patients

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Memantine has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the effect of memantine on patients with mild-to-moderate AD is unclear.

METHODS

This study is a post hoc analysis of a double-blind clinical trial. Donepezil was used as the standard control treatment. Outcomes included score changes from baseline to week 24 on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog), a modified 20-item Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADL), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) as well as the score of the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-Plus).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-seven AD patients with an MMSE score of 10-24 were analyzed. No significant differences in the score changes from baseline to week 24 on all outcomes or the four subscales of the ADAS-cog were observed between the two treatment groups. Donepezil resulted in an improved score for naming ability on the ADAS-cog compared to memantine (p = 0.036), whereas memantine more effectively reduced agitation as measured by the NPI compared to donepezil (p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

These findings support the efficacy of memantine for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD, especially in patients with agitation.

Aspects of communication in Alzheimer's disease: clinical features and treatment options

BACKGROUND

During the course of Alzheimer's disease (AD), cognitive processes, including language and communication, become increasingly impaired. The aim of this review was to highlight the impact of communication deficits in AD, and discuss the need for effective treatments.

METHOD

PubMed was searched for studies relating to language and communication in AD. The publications identified were used as a basis for the commentary in this paper. Studies relating to the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological treatment for language and communication issues were identified systematically.

RESULTS

Communication deficits are common in AD. From the earliest disease stage, the patient's capacity for communication declines as problems develop with the use of language and all aspects of functional communication. There is a loss of the ability to communicate thoughts and needs, and it becomes increasingly difficult to interact socially and sustain personal relationships with caregivers, family, and friends. It is unsurprising that patients become frustrated at their loss of self-expression, and studies have demonstrated that impaired communication is strongly linked with the development of significant behavioral concerns. Overall, poor communication contributes to caregiver strain, and adds notably to the burden of disease. Clinical data and post-hoc analyses provide preliminary indications that anti-AD therapies (memantine and the cholinesterase inhibitors, ChEIs) and non-pharmacological cognitive-linguistic stimulation techniques may be helpful in addressing communication difficulties.

CONCLUSIONS

The capacity to treat or slow the progression of communication deficits in AD would prolong patient independence, and have a profound impact on the quality of life of patients and caregivers. The use of pharmacological (anti-AD therapies) and non-pharmacological (cognitive-linguistic stimulation) treatments may be useful management methods and warrant further investigation.

Recommended measures for the assessment of cognitive and physical performance in older patients with dementia: a systematic review

Aim/Goal

To recommend a set of neuropsychological and physical exercise tests for researchers to assess cognition and physical fitness in clinical trials with older patients with dementia; to create consensus, decrease heterogeneity, and improve research quality.

Methods

A literature search (2005–2011) yielded 89 randomized controlled trials. To provide information on test recommendations the frequency of test use, effect size of the test outcome, study quality, and psychometric properties of tests were analyzed.

Results

Fifty-nine neuropsychological tests (cognitive domains: global cognition, executive functioning, memory, and attention) and 10 exercise tests (physical domains: endurance capacity, muscle strength, balance, and mobility) were found.

Conclusion

The Severe Impairment Battery, Mini Mental State Examination, and Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale – cognitive subscale were recommended to measure global cognition. The Verbal Fluency Test Category/Letters, Clock Drawing Test, and Trail Making Test-B were recommended to measure executive functioning. No specific memory test could be recommended. The Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward, and Trail Making Test-A were recommended to measure attention. As physical exercise tests, the Timed Up and Go and Six Meter Walk for mobility, the Six Minute Walk Distance for endurance capacity, and the Tinetti Balance Scale were recommended.

Psychopathological dimensions of tinnitus and psychopharmacologic approaches in its treatment

BACKGROUND

The aim of this review to investigate presence of psychopathological states and efficacy of psychopharmacological drugs in the treatment of tinnitus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An extensive Internet search has been performed for this aim through PubMed by using related key words in English.

RESULTS

Higher anxiety and depression levels and somatoform disorder clusters are defined in patients with tinnitus. Additionally, impulsivity, hostility, demanding, physical discomfort, anxiety for health, emotionality and suicidal tendency are also defined in these people. Personality characteristics in these patients are depression, hysteria and hypochondriac features. Besides these symptom clusters, more severe psychopathologies like personality disorders may be encountered in these patients. Sertraline, paroxetine and nortriptyline can be considered as the first-line antidepressants in the psychopharmacological treatment of tinnitus. There are studies which have reported the efficacy of sulpiride. Carbamazepine, valproate and gabapentin can be effective as mood stabilizers. Short-acting benzodiazepines like alprazolam and midazolam are effective in signs of anxiety. Clonazepam and diazepam can be evaluated as other options. However, some glutamate receptor antagonists also can be used in the treatment of tinnitus. Disturbed sleep is frequently associated with tinnitus. Sleep disturbance can disrupt the quality of life in the patients with tinnitus. These patients might benefit from cognitive-behavioral therapy, which offers the promise of relief from tinnitus-related distress and insomnia.

CONCLUSION

When pathophysiologic reasons are excluded, it should be at least considered that tinnitus is exaggerated by psychopathological symptoms. Life quality of patients can be increased by treating these symptoms.

Use of memantine for the treatment of dementia

The term 'dementia' encompasses a number of neurodegenerative diseases of which Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common. Prior to 2003, cholinesterase inhibitors, such as donezepil, were the only class of drugs approved to treat mild-to-moderate AD. In 2003, memantine became the first drug approved by the US FDA to treat moderate-to-severe AD. Currently, both memantine and donepezil are FDA approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD. This article examines the pharmacologic profile of memantine, evidence for memantine's efficacy in moderate-to-severe AD and other dementias, its novel use in other neuropsychiatric disorders and future implications and research directions for memantine.

Detecting treatment effects with combinations of the ADAS-cog items in patients with mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease

OBJECTIVE

When complex cognitive functions are measured with multi-item scales like the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), it seems valuable information can be lost due to combination of the ADAS-cog items results into a total score. We hypothesized, that an analysis of the results of different ADAS-cog item combinations may reveal drug treatment effects in distinct cognitive domains and/or enhance the sensitivity to detect such treatment effects. Here, we present a novel approach called 'subsetting analysis' for assessment of drug treatment effects with multi-item scales, like the ADAS-cog.

METHODS

The subsetting approach is a mathematical algorithm designed to select and group scale items in a subset detecting drug treatment effects in a particular study population. The approach was applied in a post-hoc analysis of ADAS-cog results from two randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blind clinical trials with memantine in mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). The subsetting analysis of the ADAS-cog combined database aimed at selecting the scale items showing no worsening at study end compared to baseline due to memantine treatment in mild AD (Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE >19)) patients.

RESULTS

Two ADAS-cog subsets were finally revealed by the analysis: a subset of five ADAS-cog items, identified as most sensitive to memantine effects in mild AD patients, and a subset of six ADAS-cog items shown to detect significant memantine effects in moderate AD patients.

CONCLUSION

The subsetting approach of analyzing ADAS-cog data is a powerful alternative for gaining information about drug effects on cognitive performance in mild and moderate AD patients.

Magnetic resonance imaging and neuropsychological results from a trial of memantine in Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to assess changes in brain volume and cognitive abilities in memantine-treated patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) by using an exploratory, single-arm, delayed-start design.

METHODS

Cholinesterase inhibitor-treated patients with AD (N = 47; Mini-Mental State Examination score range: 15-23) were enrolled in an observational lead-in period (weeks: 1-24), followed by an open-label period of add-on memantine treatment (weeks: 25-48). The patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging at weeks 0 (baseline), 24 (immediately before memantine initiation), and 48 (endpoint), and a battery of neuropsychological tests at weeks 0, 24, 28, 36, and 48. The primary outcome measure was the annualized rate of change (%) in total brain volume (TBV) between the two study periods. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of change in TBV, ventricular volume, or left hippocampal volume between the study periods; however, the memantine treatment period was associated with a significantly slower right hippocampal atrophy (-5.5% ± 12.0% vs -10.8% ± 7.2%; P = .038). Memantine treatment was also associated with superior performances on the Boston Naming Test (P = .034) and the Trail Making Test, Part B (P = .001), but also with a higher number of errors (i.e., repetitions and intrusions) on the California Verbal Learning Test. Memantine was found to be safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, no difference in the rates of TBV change between the two periods was observed; however, memantine treatment was found to be associated with slowing of right hippocampal atrophy, and with improvement on one test of executive functioning as well as a test of confrontation naming ability. Trials using structural magnetic resonance imaging and a delayed-start design may be a feasible option for the assessment of treatments for AD.

Memantine: a treatment for Alzheimer’s disease with a new formulation

In nearly 20 years, aside from cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine is the only drug approved for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Memantine is an uncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist that blocks pathological glutamate activity while permitting normal physiological function, thus preventing glutamate-induced excitotoxicity. Three Phase III pivotal trials demonstrated memantine’s efficacy in treating moderate-to-severe AD, which led to its initial approval by the EMA in 2002 and US FDA in 2003. The recommended target dose is 10 mg twice daily. The US FDA recently approved an extended-release (ER) formulation of memantine for once-daily 28-mg dosing. Memantine ER was evaluated in a 24-week placebo-controlled trial of patients with moderate-to-severe AD, which found significant benefits for cognition, global assessment, behavior and caregiver burden, but not function. The most common adverse events were headache, dizziness, diarrhea, hypertension, anxiety and influenza. Overall, memantine in all formulations has a favorable safety/tolerability profile and is safe to use with cholinesterase inhibitors. Memantine ER has yet to be evaluated against conventionally dosed immediate-release memantine.

Clinic visits and prescribing patterns among Veterans Affairs Maryland Health Care System dementia patients

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine how patient demographics and outpatient referrals to specialized dementia (DEM) or mental health (MH) clinics influence receipt of anti-dementia (AD), antidepressant (ADEP), antipsychotic (APSY) and sedative-hypnotic (SEDH) medications among veterans with dementia.

DESIGN

Retrospective, cross-sectional observational study.

SETTING

Veterans Affairs Maryland Health Care System (VAMHCS).

PARTICIPANTS

Veterans aged ≥ 60 years with Alzheimer's or related dementia diagnosis after 1999 with minimum of one-year follow-up or death were included.

MEASUREMENTS

Retrospective analysis of VAMHCS electronic medical records were used to determine predictors of AD, ADEP, APSY, and SEDH prescribing using logistic regression models that examined visits to DEM or MH clinics, patient age, follow-up time, race/ethnicity and marital status.

RESULTS

Among 1209 veterans with average follow-up of 3.2 (SD 1.9) years, 36% percent had MH visits, 38% had DEM visits and 19% visited both clinics. DEM visits were associated with AD and ADEP but not APSY medication receipt (OR(AD:DEM) = 1.47, 95% CI = (1.052, 2.051); OR(ADEP:DEM) = 1.66, 95% CI = (1.193, 2.302); OR(APSY:DEM) = 1.35, 95% CI = (0.941, 1.929)). MH visit was associated with ADEP and APSY medication receipt (OR(AD:MH)\ = 1.16, 95% CI = (0.821, 1.631); OR(ADEP:MH) = 2.83, 95% CI = (2.005, 4.005); OR (APSY:MH) = 4.41, 95% CI = (3.109, 6.255)).

CONCLUSION

In the VAMHCS dementia population, visits to DEM or MH specialty clinics increase the odds of receiving AD, ADEP, and APSY medications.

Tinnitus psychopharmacology: A comprehensive review of its pathomechanisms and management

BACKGROUND

Subjective tinnitus is a frequent, impairing condition, which may also cause neurotransmitter imbalance at the cochlea. Psychopharmacologic agents, although not being the first-line treatment for tinnitus, may modulate cochlear neurotransmission, thereby influencing the subjective tinnitus experience.

METHOD

A comprehensive review of MEDLINE literature (from January 1990-January 2010) was performed searching for: "tinnitus", major classes of psychopharmacological agents, and psychiatric disorders. The most relevant clinical evidence is reported briefly along with a concise description of the main neurotransmitters purported to be involved in tinnitus, in order to provide the reader with a rational evaluation of tinnitus therapy with psychopharmacological agents.

RESULTS

Although strong methodological issues limit the reliability of the current results, a broad number of psychopharmacological agents have already been considered for tinnitus, both as candidate triggers or potential therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected psychopharmacological drugs may play a role in the clinical management of this disorder. While the rational use of these agents for the treatment of tinnitus should not be overlooked, research should be undertaken on their neuromodulating actions at the cochlea.

Follow-up for Alzheimer patients: European Alzheimer Disease Consortium position paper

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Alzheimer disease (AD) is one of the leading causes of dependence in the elderly. Providing care for patients with AD is complex and the type of care required depends on the stage of the disease and varies over time. The aim of this article is to discuss available care strategies once the AD diagnosis has been made and to propose a follow-up plan as standard of care at a European level.

METHODS

The proposals developed in this article stem from the collaborative work of a panel of multidisciplinary experts involved in the care of AD patients (European Alzheimer Disease Consortium) based on the results of published scientific studies and on their experience from clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

Suggestions for follow-up frequency and easily administered and scored assessment tools are provided, thereby increasing efficiency and quality of care for patients with Alzheimer disease.

Memantine and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor treatment in cases of CDR 0.5 or questionable impairment

The biological meaning of uncertain dementia ratings (CDR 0.5) and its treatment implications are unclear. Our study examines the frequency of anti-dementia medication use in individuals with CDR 0.5 and the cognitive, behavioral, and demographic factors associated with memantine and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (AChEI) use. Subjects were drawn from the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center database, which collects data from 30 Alzheimer Disease Centers. There were 2,512 subjects with the following diagnoses: Normal, 11.8%; Mild cognitive impairment, 44.6%; Alzheimer's disease, 34.9%; and other dementias, 8.7%. Overall, 35% used AChEIs and 13% used memantine. AChEI and memantine use was greater in subjects who were referred by clinics and diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease. AChEI use was associated with being married, younger, male, and more educated while memantine use was associated with less severe apathy and other dementia diagnosis. Non-Hispanic whites were more likely to use AChEI and memantine than non-Hispanic blacks (OR = 2.2, 2.5). Hispanics were more likely to use AChEI than non-Hispanic blacks. It appears anti-dementia medication use in CDR 0.5 is frequent and represents evidence for extensive off label usage. Diagnosis, severity of impairment, and race, among other variables, affect the likelihood of AChEI and memantine use in this population.

Pharmacological Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: Is it Progressing Adequately?

INTRODUCTION

Between 1993 and 2000 four acetylcholinesterase inhibitors were marketed as a symptomatic treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD), as well as memantine in 2003. Current research is focused on finding drugs that favorably modify the course of the disease. However, their entrance into the market does not seem to be imminent.

RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT

The aim of AD research is to find substances that inhibit certain elements of the AD pathogenic chain (beta- and gamma-secretase inhibitors, alpha-secretase stimulants, beta-amyloid aggregability reducers or disaggregation and elimination inductors, as well as tau-hyperphosphorylation, glutamate excitotoxicity, oxidative stress and mitochondrial damage reducers, among other action mechanisms). Demonstrating a disease's retarding effect demands longer trials than those necessary to ascertain symptomatic improvement. Besides, a high number of patients (thousands of them) is necessary, all of which turns out to be difficult and costly. Furthermore, it would be necessary to count on diagnosis and progression markers in the disease's pre-clinical stage, markers for specific phenotypes, as well as high-selectivity molecules acting only where necessary. In order to compensate these difficulties, drugs acting on several defects of the pathogenic chain or showing both symptomatic and neuroprotective action simultaneously are being researched.

CONCLUSIONS

There are multiple molecules used in research to modify AD progression. Although it turns out to be difficult to obtain drugs with sufficient efficacy so that their marketing is approved, if they were achieved they would lead to a reduction of AD prevalence.

Cognitive effects of memantine in postmenopausal women at risk of dementia: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

To determine the effects of memantine on cognition in a normal population of postmenopausal women with putative risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD) using a built-in control for the genetic risk factor for AD (apoE-epsilon4 status).

METHODS

A prospective, open-label, 6-month pilot medication trial with memantine and follow-up after discontinuance conducted at the Center for Neuroscience in Women's Health, Stanford University School of Medicine. Neuropsychological data were collected on 22 community-dwelling postmenopausal women (11 apoE-epsilon4 carriers and 11 apoE-epsilon4 non-carriers) with at least one putative risk factor for AD.

RESULTS

ApoE-epsilon4 status was not a significant predictor of change in neuropsychological performance. Changes associated with memantine treatment for entire sample included significant declines in some variables associated with verbal learning and memory that improved upon medication withdrawal. A positive medication effect was noted with executive functions and possibly category fluency. Trend-level improvements were seen in motor dexterity of the non-dominant hand and maintained even after drug discontinuance.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with memantine appeared to have differential effects on cognitive performance in a population of women with putative risk factors for AD. ApoE-epsilon4 carrier status did not account for observed changes in cognition.

Long-term treatment of l-3-n-butylphthalide attenuated neurodegenerative changes in aged rats

It is shown that l-3-n-butylphthalide (l-NBP), the isomer of dl-NBP (racemic 3-n-butylphthalide, a new anti-cerebral ischemic agent) significantly attenuated cerebral hypoperfusion-induced learning dysfunction and brain damage in rats. In the present study, l-NBP (10 and 30 mg/kg) long-term (3-month) treatment of aged rat (21-month-old) significantly improved the learning and memory capability measured by the Morris water maze test. Hematoxylin-eosin-stained slices showed that both l-NBP at 30 mg/kg, and memantine as control at 20 mg/kg, attenuated the neurodegenerative changes in aged rats. L: -NBP treatment significantly increased the choline acetyltransferase activity and dose-dependently decreased the acetylcholinesterases activity in the hippocampus of aged rats. The immunohistological study demonstrated that expressions of beta-secretase and hyperphosphorylated tau protein were significantly increased in the hippocampus CA1 subfield and parietal cortex in aged rats. However, they were decreased significantly by treatment of l-NBP and memantine for 3 months. Our results indicated that long-term treatment with l-NBP might prevent age-related neurodegenerative changes by modulation of cholinergic system, reduction of phosphorylated tau and maintain structure and morphology of neurons. Therefore, l-NBP might be a potential drug for treatment of senile dementia.

Update on the use of memantine in Alzheimer's disease

Memantine is a low to moderate affinity N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antagonist. The effects of memantine in Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been studied in 7 randomized controlled trials in many post-hoc analyses. Three out of four RCTs in patients with moderate to severe AD (Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE] <14) showed a statistically significant but clinically small positive effect of memantine on cognition, global functioning, activities of daily living (ADL) and neuropsychiatric symptoms. No effects on these outcome measures could be found in the three RCTs studying patients with mild to moderate AD (MMSE 14-24). Two of these studies evaluated the effect of addition of memantine to donepezil. Only the study in patients with mild to moderate AD showed a positive effect of addition of memantine on cognition, ADL, global functioning and neuropsychiatric functioning. Cost-effectiveness of memantine therapy remains controversial. Post-hoc analyses and observational studies suggest some effects on agitation/aggression, delusions or hallucinations. Side effects of memantine are usually mild and seem to be comparable with placebo. In this review, an oversight of pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of memantine is presented. Also, published data concerning efficacy and safety in patients with AD are presented.

Factors affecting usage patterns of memantine in Alzheimer disease

Memantine is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of moderate to severe Alzheimer disease (AD). We investigated the frequency and variables associated with its use in mild to moderate/severe AD as defined by criteria involving the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale. Consecutive possible and probable AD patients seen at our research center from November 2003 to December 2006 were included. Individuals were classified as mild dementia either by CDR=1 or MMSE >or=15, using criteria derived in part from the pivotal trials of memantine used for its approval by the Food and Drug Administration. Of 117 patients, 37% of those with mild AD by MMSE criterion (total N=94), and 38% of those with mild AD by CDR criterion (total N=86) used memantine. Logistic regression was used to simultaneously estimate the odds ratios (ORs) of the likelihood of memantine usage associated with a set of predictor variables. Lower MMSE was associated with a greater likelihood of using memantine independent of CDR [ORMMSE=7.45, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.50-37.05]; CDR was not significantly related to memantine use. Controlling both MMSE and CDR, Whites were more likely to use memantine than African Americans (OR=6.47, 95% CI=1.25-33.39). Patients who used other antidementia medications were more likely to use memantine than those who did not (OR=3.15, 95% CI=0.995-9.97). Eight other patient characteristics were not significant predictors. Use of memantine in mild AD was common. Patterns of memantine usage are complex and deserve further study in a larger sample because of their implications for medical system cost, equitable access to care, and risk of drug interactions.