ABSTRACT Background: The management of disruptive neuropsychiatric symptom (NPS) such as agitation and aggression (A/A) is a major priority in caring for people with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Few effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological options are available. Results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of drugs for A/A have been disappointing. This may result from the absence of biological efficacy for medications tested in treating A/A. It may also be related to methodological issues such as the choice of outcomes. The aim of this review was to highlight key methodological issues pertaining to RCTs of current and emerging medications for the treatment of A/A in AD. Methods: We searched PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs comparing medications with either placebo or other drugs in the treatment of A/A in AD, between January 2008 and December 2013. Results: We identified a total of 18 RCTs; of these, 11 were completed and 7 ongoing. Of the ongoing RCTs, only one is in Phase III. Seven of 10 completed RCTs with reported results did not report greater benefit from drug than placebo. Each of the completed RCTs used a different definition of "clinically significant A/A." There was considerable heterogeneity in study design. The primary endpoints were largely proxy-based but a variety of scales were used. The definition of caregiver and scales used to assess caregiver outcomes were similarly heterogeneous. Placebo response was notable in all trials. Conclusions: This review highlights a great heterogeneity in RCTs design of drugs for A/A in AD and some key methodological issues such as definition of A/A, choice of outcome measures and caregiver participation that could be addressed by an expert consensus to optimize future trials design.
ABSTRACT Background: The management of disruptive neuropsychiatric symptom (NPS) such as agitation and aggression (A/A) is a major priority in caring for people with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Few effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological options are available. Results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of drugs for A/A have been disappointing. This may result from the absence of biological efficacy for medications tested in treating A/A. It may also be related to methodological issues such as the choice of outcomes. The aim of this review was to highlight key methodological issues pertaining to RCTs of current and emerging medications for the treatment of A/A in AD. Methods: We searched PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs comparing medications with either placebo or other drugs in the treatment of A/A in AD, between January 2008 and December 2013. Results: We identified a total of 18 RCTs; of these, 11 were completed and 7 ongoing. Of the ongoing RCTs, only one is in Phase III. Seven of 10 completed RCTs with reported results did not report greater benefit from drug than placebo. Each of the completed RCTs used a different definition of "clinically significant A/A." There was considerable heterogeneity in study design. The primary endpoints were largely proxy-based but a variety of scales were used. The definition of caregiver and scales used to assess caregiver outcomes were similarly heterogeneous. Placebo response was notable in all trials. Conclusions: This review highlights a great heterogeneity in RCTs design of drugs for A/A in AD and some key methodological issues such as definition of A/A, choice of outcome measures and caregiver participation that could be addressed by an expert consensus to optimize future trials design.
Authors: Helen C Kales; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Kara Zivin; Marcia Valenstein; Lisa S Seyfried; Claire Chiang; Francesca Cunningham; Lon S Schneider; Frederic C Blow Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2011-10-31 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Mitchell K P Lai; Shirley W Y Tsang; Paul T Francis; Margaret M Esiri; Janet Keene; Tony Hope; Christopher P L-H Chen Journal: Brain Res Date: 2003-06-06 Impact factor: 3.252
Authors: Carl Salzman; Dilip V Jeste; Roger E Meyer; Jiska Cohen-Mansfield; Jeffrey Cummings; George T Grossberg; Lissy Jarvik; Helena C Kraemer; Barry D Lebowitz; Katie Maslow; Bruce G Pollock; Murray Raskind; Susan K Schultz; Philip Wang; Julie M Zito; George S Zubenko Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Yonas E Geda; Lon S Schneider; Laura N Gitlin; David S Miller; Gwenn S Smith; Joanne Bell; Jovier Evans; Michael Lee; Anton Porsteinsson; Krista L Lanctôt; Paul B Rosenberg; David L Sultzer; Paul T Francis; Henry Brodaty; Prasad P Padala; Chiadikaobi U Onyike; Luis Agüera Ortiz; Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Donald L Bliwise; Jennifer L Martin; Michael V Vitiello; Kristine Yaffe; Phyllis C Zee; Nathan Herrmann; Robert A Sweet; Clive Ballard; Ni A Khin; Cara Alfaro; Patrick S Murray; Susan Schultz; Constantine G Lyketsos Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Chris Fox; Monica Crugel; Ian Maidment; Bjorn Henrik Auestad; Simon Coulton; Adrian Treloar; Clive Ballard; Malaz Boustani; Cornelius Katona; Gill Livingston Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-05-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jeffery Newell; Jerome A Yesavage; Joy L Taylor; Helena C Kraemer; Cynthia A Munro; Leah Friedman; Paul B Rosenberg; Michelle Madore; Steven Z Chao; D P Devanand; Lea T Drye; Jacobo E Mintzer; Bruce G Pollock; Anton P Porsteinsson; Lon S Schneider; David M Shade; Daniel Weintraub; Constantine G Lyketsos; Art Noda Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2015-12-12 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Esther S Oh; Paul B Rosenberg; Gail B Rattinger; Elizabeth A Stuart; Constantine G Lyketsos; Jeannie-Marie S Leoutsakos Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-12-31 Impact factor: 5.562