Krista L Lanctôt1, Sarah A Chau1, Nathan Herrmann1, Lea T Drye2, Paul B Rosenberg3, Roberta W Scherer2, Sandra E Black1, Vijay Vaidya2, David L Bachman4, Jacobo E Mintzer4. 1. Departments of Psychiatry and Medicine (Neurology), and Brain Sciences Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Departments of Psychiatry, Pharmacology/Toxicology and Medicine (Neurology), University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department of Neurosciences, Alzheimer's Research and Clinical Programs, Medical University of South Carolina, SC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effect of methylphenidate (MPH) on attention in Alzheimer's disease (AD). MPH has shown to improve apathy in AD, and both apathy and attention have been related to dopaminergic function. The goal was to investigate MPH effects on attention in AD and assess the relationship between attention and apathy responses. METHODS:MPH (10 mg PO twice daily) or placebo was administered for six weeks in a randomized, double-blind trial in mild-to-moderate AD outpatients with apathy (Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Apathy ≥ 4). Attention was measured with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale--Digit Span (DS) subtest (DS forward, selective attention) and apathy with the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). A mixed effects linear regression estimated the difference in change from baseline between treatment groups, defined as δ (MPH (DS week 6-DS baseline)) - (placebo (DS week 6-DS baseline)). RESULTS: In 60 patients (37 females, age = 76 ± 8, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) = 20 ± 5, NPI Apathy = 7 ± 2), the change in DS forward (δ = 0.87 (95% CI: 0.06-1.68), p = 0.03) and DS total (δ = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.09-1.93), p = 0.03) favored MPH over placebo. Of 57 completers, 17 patients had improved apathy (≥3.3 points on the AES from baseline to end point) and 40 did not. There were no significant associations between AES and NPI Apathy with DS change scores in the MPH, placebo, AES responder, or non-responder groups. DS scores did not predict apathy response to MPH treatment. CONCLUSION: These results suggest MPH can improve attention and apathy in AD; however, the effects appear independent in this population.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effect of methylphenidate (MPH) on attention in Alzheimer's disease (AD). MPH has shown to improve apathy in AD, and both apathy and attention have been related to dopaminergic function. The goal was to investigate MPH effects on attention in AD and assess the relationship between attention and apathy responses. METHODS:MPH (10 mg PO twice daily) or placebo was administered for six weeks in a randomized, double-blind trial in mild-to-moderate AD outpatients with apathy (Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Apathy ≥ 4). Attention was measured with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale--Digit Span (DS) subtest (DS forward, selective attention) and apathy with the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). A mixed effects linear regression estimated the difference in change from baseline between treatment groups, defined as δ (MPH (DS week 6-DS baseline)) - (placebo (DS week 6-DS baseline)). RESULTS: In 60 patients (37 females, age = 76 ± 8, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) = 20 ± 5, NPI Apathy = 7 ± 2), the change in DS forward (δ = 0.87 (95% CI: 0.06-1.68), p = 0.03) and DS total (δ = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.09-1.93), p = 0.03) favored MPH over placebo. Of 57 completers, 17 patients had improved apathy (≥3.3 points on the AES from baseline to end point) and 40 did not. There were no significant associations between AES and NPI Apathy with DS change scores in the MPH, placebo, AES responder, or non-responder groups. DS scores did not predict apathy response to MPH treatment. CONCLUSION: These results suggest MPH can improve attention and apathy in AD; however, the effects appear independent in this population.
Authors: Bernadette McGuinness; Suzanne L Barrett; David Craig; John Lawson; A Peter Passmore Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Prasad R Padala; William J Burke; Valerie K Shostrom; Subhash C Bhatia; Steven P Wengel; Jane F Potter; Frederick Petty Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Krista L Lanctôt; Nathan Herrmann; Sandra E Black; Michelle Ryan; Lana S Rothenburg; Barbara A Liu; Usoa E Busto Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Prasad R Padala; Kalpana P Padala; Shelly Y Lensing; Andrea N Jackson; Cassandra R Hunter; Christopher M Parkes; Richard A Dennis; Melinda M Bopp; Ricardo Caceda; Mark S Mennemeier; Paula K Roberson; Dennis H Sullivan Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Elizabeth Finger; Scott Berry; Jeffrey Cummings; Kristy Coleman; Robin Hsiung; Howard H Feldman; Adam Boxer Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2018-09-27 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Jolien F Leijenaar; Geert Jan Groeneveld; Erica S Klaassen; Anna E Leeuwis; Philip Scheltens; Henry C Weinstein; Joop M A van Gerven; Frederik Barkhof; Wiesje M van der Flier; Niels D Prins Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Prasad R Padala; Kalpana P Padala; Anusha S Majagi; Kimberly K Garner; Richard A Dennis; Dennis H Sullivan Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-08-14 Impact factor: 1.817