Shinji Matsunaga1, Hiroshige Fujishiro2, Hajime Takechi1. 1. Department of Geriatrics and Cognitive Disorders, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Kutsukake, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Kawasaki Memorial Hospital, Miyamae, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy/safety of ChEIs on subjects with MCI. METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ChEIs in subjects with MCI, using cognitive function scores as a primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs (six using donepezil, four using galantamine, and four using rivastigmine) with 5,278 subjects were included. We found no significant difference in cognitive function scores between the ChEIs and placebo groups [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.06, p = 0.38, I2 = 76% ]. However, in the secondary outcomes, ChEIs were associated with a lower incidence of progression to dementia compared with placebo (risk ratio = 0.76, the number needed to treat = 20). For safety outcomes, ChEIs were associated with a lower prevalence of fall than placebo. On the other hand, compared with placebo, ChEIs were associated with a higher incidence of discontinuation due to all causes, discontinuation due to adverse events, at least one adverse event, abnormal dreams, diarrhea, dizziness, headache, insomnia, loose stools, muscle cramps, nausea, vomiting, and weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Although ChEIs have a slight efficacy in the treatment of MCI, there are many safety issues. Therefore, ChEIs are difficult to recommend for MCI. However, the efficacy and safety of ChEIs on MCI with a biomarker-based diagnosis is unclear. Further RCTs are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of ChEIs when used for individual neuropathological classifications of MCI.
BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy/safety of ChEIs on subjects with MCI. METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ChEIs in subjects with MCI, using cognitive function scores as a primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs (six using donepezil, four using galantamine, and four using rivastigmine) with 5,278 subjects were included. We found no significant difference in cognitive function scores between the ChEIs and placebo groups [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.06, p = 0.38, I2 = 76% ]. However, in the secondary outcomes, ChEIs were associated with a lower incidence of progression to dementia compared with placebo (risk ratio = 0.76, the number needed to treat = 20). For safety outcomes, ChEIs were associated with a lower prevalence of fall than placebo. On the other hand, compared with placebo, ChEIs were associated with a higher incidence of discontinuation due to all causes, discontinuation due to adverse events, at least one adverse event, abnormal dreams, diarrhea, dizziness, headache, insomnia, loose stools, muscle cramps, nausea, vomiting, and weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Although ChEIs have a slight efficacy in the treatment of MCI, there are many safety issues. Therefore, ChEIs are difficult to recommend for MCI. However, the efficacy and safety of ChEIs on MCI with a biomarker-based diagnosis is unclear. Further RCTs are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of ChEIs when used for individual neuropathological classifications of MCI.
Authors: David Q Beversdorf; Haikady N Nagaraja; Robert A Bornstein; Douglas W Scharre Journal: Cogn Behav Neurol Date: 2021-09-02 Impact factor: 1.590
Authors: Prajakta P Masurkar; Satabdi Chatterjee; Jeffrey T Sherer; Hua Chen; Michael L Johnson; Rajender R Aparasu Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 4.271
Authors: Oreoluwa O Coker-Ayo; Samuel I Nathaniel; Nicolas Poupore; Melissa J Bailey-Taylor; Laurie Theriot Roley; Richard L Goodwin; Brooks McPhail; Rebecca Russ-Sellers; Thomas I Nathaniel Journal: Front Behav Neurosci Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 3.617
Authors: Johanna C Badcock; Frank Larøi; Karina Kamp; India Kelsall-Foreman; Romola S Bucks; Michael Weinborn; Marieke Begemann; John-Paul Taylor; Daniel Collerton; John T O'Brien; Mohamad El Haj; Dominic Ffytche; Iris E Sommer Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Zijun Xu; Wen Sun; Dexing Zhang; Vincent Chi-Ho Chung; Regina Wing-Shan Sit; Samuel Yeung-Shan Wong Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2021-06-18 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Kadine Cabey; Dani M Long; Alexander Law; Nora E Gray; Christine McClure; Maya Caruso; Parnian Lak; Kirsten M Wright; Jan F Stevens; Claudia S Maier; Amala Soumyanath; Doris Kretzschmar Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) Date: 2022-01-06