-
1.
Drug treatment for spinal muscular atrophy types II and III.
Wadman, RI, van der Pol, WL, Bosboom, WM, Asselman, FL, van den Berg, LH, Iannaccone, ST, Vrancken, AF
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;(1):CD006282
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by a homozygous deletion of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene on chromosome 5, or a heterozygous deletion in combination with a (point) mutation in the second SMN1 allele. This results in degeneration of anterior horn cells, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. Children with SMA type II do not develop the ability to walk without support and have a shortened life expectancy, whereas children with SMA type III develop the ability to walk and have a normal life expectancy. This is an update of a review first published in 2009 and previously updated in 2011. OBJECTIVES To evaluate if drug treatment is able to slow or arrest the disease progression of SMA types II and III, and to assess if such therapy can be given safely. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science conference proceedings in October 2018. In October 2018, we also searched two trials registries to identify unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA We sought all randomised or quasi-randomised trials that examined the efficacy of drug treatment for SMA types II and III. Participants had to fulfil the clinical criteria and have a homozygous deletion or hemizygous deletion in combination with a point mutation in the second allele of the SMN1 gene (5q11.2-13.2) confirmed by genetic analysis. The primary outcome measure was change in disability score within one year after the onset of treatment. Secondary outcome measures within one year after the onset of treatment were change in muscle strength, ability to stand or walk, change in quality of life, time from the start of treatment until death or full-time ventilation and adverse events attributable to treatment during the trial period. Treatment strategies involving SMN1-replacement with viral vectors are out of the scope of this review, but a summary is given in Appendix 1. Drug treatment for SMA type I is the topic of a separate Cochrane Review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS The review authors found 10 randomised, placebo-controlled trials of treatments for SMA types II and III for inclusion in this review, with 717 participants. We added four of the trials at this update. The trials investigated creatine (55 participants), gabapentin (84 participants), hydroxyurea (57 participants), nusinersen (126 participants), olesoxime (165 participants), phenylbutyrate (107 participants), somatotropin (20 participants), thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) (nine participants), valproic acid (33 participants), and combination therapy with valproic acid and acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC) (61 participants). Treatment duration was from three to 24 months. None of the studies investigated the same treatment and none was completely free of bias. All studies had adequate blinding, sequence generation and reporting of primary outcomes. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, intrathecal nusinersen improved motor function (disability) in children with SMA type II, with a 3.7-point improvement in the nusinersen group on the Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale Expanded (HFMSE; range of possible scores 0 to 66), compared to a 1.9-point decline on the HFMSE in the sham procedure group (P < 0.01; n = 126). On all motor function scales used, higher scores indicate better function. Based on moderate-certainty evidence from two studies, the following interventions had no clinically important effect on motor function scores in SMA types II or III (or both) in comparison to placebo: creatine (median change 1 higher, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1 to 2; on the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM), scale 0 to 264; n = 40); and combination therapy with valproic acid and carnitine (mean difference (MD) 0.64, 95% CI -1.1 to 2.38; on the Modified Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale (MHFMS), scale 0 to 40; n = 61). Based on low-certainty evidence from other single studies, the following interventions had no clinically important effect on motor function scores in SMA types II or III (or both) in comparison to placebo: gabapentin (median change 0 in the gabapentin group and -2 in the placebo group on the SMA Functional Rating Scale (SMAFRS), scale 0 to 50; n = 66); hydroxyurea (MD -1.88, 95% CI -3.89 to 0.13 on the GMFM, scale 0 to 264; n = 57), phenylbutyrate (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.58 on the Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale (HFMS) scale 0 to 40; n = 90) and monotherapy of valproic acid (MD 0.06, 95% CI -1.32 to 1.44 on SMAFRS, scale 0 to 50; n = 31). Very low-certainty evidence suggested that the following interventions had little or no effect on motor function: olesoxime (MD 2, 95% -0.25 to 4.25 on the Motor Function Measure (MFM) D1 + D2, scale 0 to 75; n = 160) and somatotropin (median change at 3 months 0.25 higher, 95% CI -1 to 2.5 on the HFMSE, scale 0 to 66; n = 19). One small TRH trial did not report effects on motor function and the certainty of evidence for other outcomes from this trial were low or very low. Results of nine completed trials investigating 4-aminopyridine, acetyl-L-carnitine, CK-2127107, hydroxyurea, pyridostigmine, riluzole, RO6885247/RG7800, salbutamol and valproic acid were awaited and not available for analysis at the time of writing. Various trials and studies investigating treatment strategies other than nusinersen (e.g. SMN2-augmentation by small molecules), are currently ongoing. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Nusinersen improves motor function in SMA type II, based on moderate-certainty evidence. Creatine, gabapentin, hydroxyurea, phenylbutyrate, valproic acid and the combination of valproic acid and ALC probably have no clinically important effect on motor function in SMA types II or III (or both) based on low-certainty evidence, and olesoxime and somatropin may also have little to no clinically important effect but evidence was of very low-certainty. One trial of TRH did not measure motor function.
-
2.
Drug treatment for spinal muscular atrophy type I.
Wadman, RI, van der Pol, WL, Bosboom, WM, Asselman, FL, van den Berg, LH, Iannaccone, ST, Vrancken, AF
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2019;(12):CD006281
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by a homozygous deletion of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene on chromosome 5, or a heterozygous deletion in combination with a point mutation in the second SMN1 allele. This results in degeneration of anterior horn cells, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. By definition, children with SMA type I are never able to sit without support and usually die or become ventilator dependent before the age of two years. There have until very recently been no drug treatments to influence the course of SMA. We undertook this updated review to evaluate new evidence on emerging treatments for SMA type I. The review was first published in 2009 and previously updated in 2011. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy and safety of any drug therapy designed to slow or arrest progression of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) type I. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science conference proceedings in October 2018. We also searched two trials registries to identify unpublished trials (October 2018). SELECTION CRITERIA We sought all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that examined the efficacy of drug treatment for SMA type I. Included participants had to fulfil clinical criteria and have a genetically confirmed deletion or mutation of the SMN1 gene (5q11.2-13.2). The primary outcome measure was age at death or full-time ventilation. Secondary outcome measures were acquisition of motor milestones, i.e. head control, rolling, sitting or standing, motor milestone response on disability scores within one year after the onset of treatment, and adverse events and serious adverse events attributable to treatment during the trial period. Treatment strategies involving SMN1 gene replacement with viral vectors are out of the scope of this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS We identified two RCTs: one trial of intrathecal nusinersen in comparison to a sham (control) procedure in 121 randomised infants with SMA type I, which was newly included at this update, and one small trial comparing riluzole treatment to placebo in 10 children with SMA type I. The RCT of intrathecally-injected nusinersen was stopped early for efficacy (based on a predefined Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination-Section 2 (HINE-2) response). At the interim analyses after 183 days of treatment, 41% (21/51) of nusinersen-treated infants showed a predefined improvement on HINE-2, compared to 0% (0/27) of participants in the control group. This trial was largely at low risk of bias. Final analyses (ranging from 6 months to 13 months of treatment), showed that fewer participants died or required full-time ventilation (defined as more than 16 hours daily for 21 days or more) in the nusinersen-treated group than the control group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.89; N = 121; a 47% lower risk; moderate-certainty evidence). A proportion of infants in the nusinersen group and none of 37 infants in the control group achieved motor milestones: 37/73 nusinersen-treated infants (51%) achieved a motor milestone response on HINE-2 (risk ratio (RR) 38.51, 95% CI 2.43 to 610.14; N = 110; moderate-certainty evidence); 16/73 achieved head control (RR 16.95, 95% CI 1.04 to 274.84; moderate-certainty evidence); 6/73 achieved independent sitting (RR 6.68, 95% CI 0.39 to 115.38; moderate-certainty evidence); 7/73 achieved rolling over (RR 7.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 131.29); and 1/73 achieved standing (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.06 to 36.92; moderate-certainty evidence). Seventy-one per cent of nusinersen-treated infants versus 3% of infants in the control group were responders on the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders (CHOP INTEND) measure of motor disability (RR 26.36, 95% CI 3.79 to 183.18; N = 110; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in the majority of infants but were no more frequent in the nusinersen-treated group than the control group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05 and RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89, respectively; N = 121; moderate-certainty evidence). In the riluzole trial, three of seven children treated with riluzole were still alive at the ages of 30, 48, and 64 months, whereas all three children in the placebo group died. None of the children in the riluzole or placebo group developed the ability to sit, which was the only milestone reported. There were no adverse effects. The certainty of the evidence for all measured outcomes from this study was very low, because the study was too small to detect or rule out an effect, and had serious limitations, including baseline differences. This trial was stopped prematurely because the pharmaceutical company withdrew funding. Various trials and studies investigating treatment strategies other than nusinersen, such as SMN2 augmentation by small molecules, are ongoing. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Based on the very limited evidence currently available regarding drug treatments for SMA type 1, intrathecal nusinersen probably prolongs ventilation-free and overall survival in infants with SMA type I. It is also probable that a greater proportion of infants treated with nusinersen than with a sham procedure achieve motor milestones and can be classed as responders to treatment on clinical assessments (HINE-2 and CHOP INTEND). The proportion of children experiencing adverse events and serious adverse events on nusinersen is no higher with nusinersen treatment than with a sham procedure, based on evidence of moderate certainty. It is uncertain whether riluzole has any effect in patients with SMA type I, based on the limited available evidence. Future trials could provide more high-certainty, longer-term evidence to confirm this result, or focus on comparing new treatments to nusinersen or evaluate them as an add-on therapy to nusinersen.
-
3.
Intravenous Magnesium Sulfate in Acute Stroke.
Avgerinos, KI, Chatzisotiriou, A, Haidich, AB, Tsapas, A, Lioutas, VA
Stroke. 2019;(4):931-938
Abstract
Background and Purpose- Acute stroke treatment is challenging, and stroke remains a major cause of death and disability. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to investigate the effects of postacute stroke intravenous administration of the neuroprotectant magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) on global outcome, functional outcome, and mortality 90 days poststroke (ischemic and nonischemic). Methods- We searched in Pubmed, Science Direct, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov, up to November 11, 2017, and we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. We synthesized results by using random-effects model, weighted mean differences, standardized mean differences, and odds ratios. Results- Seven randomized controlled trials (4347 patients) met our criteria. Compared with placebo, treatment did not improve functional outcome defined as Barthel Index >60 (odds ratio =1.05; 95% CI, 0.92-1.19) and >95 (odds ratio =0.95; 95% CI, 0.76-1.20), 90 days poststroke. It also did not improve global outcome measured with modified Rankin Scale (standardized mean difference =-0.01; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.10), 90 days poststroke. In an additional subgroup meta-analysis that exclusively included ischemic stroke patients, intravenous MgSO4 resulted in lower modified Rankin Scale score (improved global outcome; weighted mean difference =-0.96; 95% CI, -1.34 to -0.58; I2=0%], 90 days poststroke. Finally, mortality stayed unaltered (odds ratio =1.10; 95% CI, 0.94-1.29). Conclusions- The findings of our meta-analysis showed that intravenous MgSO4 generally did not improve global/functional outcomes and mortality at 90 days after stroke (combined ischemic stroke and nonischemic stroke). The finding of favorable neurological outcome, selectively in ischemic stroke patients, should be viewed with extreme caution given the limited number of patients included in this subgroup meta-analysis.
-
4.
A meta-analysis of the effect of different neuroprotective drugs in management of patients with traumatic brain injury.
El Sayed, I, Zaki, A, Fayed, AM, Shehata, GM, Abdelmonem, S
Neurosurgical review. 2018;(2):427-438
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury is a major problem worldwide. Our objective is to synthesize available evidence in the literature concerning the effectiveness of neuroprotective drugs (cerebrolysin, citicoline, and piracetam) on Glasgow outcome score (GOS), cognitive performance, and survival in traumatic brain injury patients. Comprehensive search of electronic databases, search engines, and conferences proceedings; hand search journals; searching reference lists of relevant articles, theses, and local publications; and contact of authors for incomplete data were performed. Studies included patients in all age groups regardless of severity of trauma. There was no publication date restriction. Two reviewers independently extracted data from each study. Fixed effect or random effects model selection depends on results of statistical tests for heterogeneity. The literature search yielded 13 studies. Patients treated with cerebrolysin (n = 112) had favorable GOS three times more than controls (OR 3.019; 95 % CI 1.76 to 5.16; p = 0.003*). The odds of cognition improvement in the treatment group was 3.4 times more than controls (OR 3.4; 95 % CI 1.82 to 5.21; p < 0.001*). Survival of cerebrolysin-treated patients did not differ from controls (103 patients; OR = 2.81; 95 % CI 0.905 to 8.76). Citicoline did not improve GOS (1355 patients; OR 0.96; 95 % CI 0.830 to 1.129; p = 0.676), cognitive performance (4 studies; 1291 patients; OR 1.35; 95 % CI 0.58 to 3.16; p = 0.478), and survival (1037 patients; OR = 1.38; 95 % CI 0.855 to 2.239). One study showed a positive effect of piracetam on cognition. Further research with high validity is needed to reach a solid conclusion about the use of neuroprotective drugs in cases of brain injury.
-
5.
A meta-analysis of pharmacological neuroprotection in noncardiac surgery: focus on statins, lidocaine, ketamine, and magnesium sulfate.
Zeng, ZW, Zhang, YN, Lin, WX, Zhang, WQ, Luo, R
European review for medical and pharmacological sciences. 2018;(6):1798-1811
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Non-cardiac surgery is associated with perioperative cerebral complications (delirium, postoperative cognition dysfunction, stroke). While rare, these complications can lead to disabilities and deaths. Information is ambiguous as to whether pharmacological preoperative treatment exerts neuroprotection. We wished to systematically assess potential modulation by statins, lidocaine, ketamine or magnesium sulfate of the relative risk of cerebral complications in noncardiac surgery. Selection of these pharmacological agents was based on their known neuroprotective abilities. PATIENTS AND METHODS By searching Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, we identified 4 suitable publications that collectively enrolled 1358 patients (intent-to-treat population), of which 679 patients were treated preoperatively with statins (404 patients on atorvastatin and 275 on rosuvastatin) and 679 patients with preoperative placebo. The reported cerebral outcome was stroke, assessed either within 30 days (4 publications) or 6 months (2 publications) after surgery. RESULTS Episodes of stroke within 30 days and 6 months postoperatively were observed in several publications, enabling aggregate analyses. No modulation by statins of the relative risk of stroke at 30 days was observed (risk ratio 1.59, 95% confidence interval 0.08-30.97; p = 0.76). At 6 months, statins showed an insignificant trend toward neuroprotection (risk ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.05-2.10; p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS The available clinical data are still scarce. Our analyses indicate no protective effects by statins against perioperative stroke but some favorable trends toward delayed stroke. Further randomized trials are needed to unequivocally assess the neuroprotective potential of current pharmacological agents in non-cardiac surgery.
-
6.
Safety and efficacy of Cerebrolysin in early post-stroke recovery: a meta-analysis of nine randomized clinical trials.
Bornstein, NM, Guekht, A, Vester, J, Heiss, WD, Gusev, E, Hömberg, V, Rahlfs, VW, Bajenaru, O, Popescu, BO, Muresanu, D
Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology. 2018;(4):629-640
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This meta-analysis combines the results of nine ischemic stroke trials, assessing efficacy of Cerebrolysin on global neurological improvement during early post-stroke period. Cerebrolysin is a parenterally administered neuropeptide preparation approved for treatment of stroke. All included studies had a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. The patients were treated with 30-50 ml Cerebrolysin once daily for 10-21 days, with treatment initiation within 72 h after onset of ischemic stroke. For five studies, original analysis data were available for meta-analysis (individual patient data analysis); for four studies, aggregate data were used. The combination by meta-analytic procedures was pre-planned and the methods of synthesis were pre-defined under blinded conditions. Search deadline for the present meta-analysis was December 31, 2016. The nonparametric Mann-Whitney (MW) effect size for National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) on day 30 (or 21), combining the results of nine randomized, controlled trials by means of the robust Wei-Lachin pooling procedure (maximin-efficient robust test), indicated superiority of Cerebrolysin as compared with placebo (MW 0.60, P < 0.0001, N = 1879). The combined number needed to treat for clinically relevant changes in early NIHSS was 7.7 (95% CI 5.2 to 15.0). The additional full-scale ordinal analysis of modified Rankin Scale at day 90 in moderate to severe patients resulted in MW 0.61 with statistical significance in favor of Cerebrolysin (95% CI 0.52 to 0.69, P = 0.0118, N = 314). Safety aspects were comparable to placebo. Our meta-analysis confirms previous evidence that Cerebrolysin has a beneficial effect on early global neurological deficits in patients with acute ischemic stroke.
-
7.
Meta-analysis of folic acid efficacy trials in stroke prevention: Insight into effect modifiers.
Zhao, M, Wu, G, Li, Y, Wang, X, Hou, FF, Xu, X, Qin, X, Cai, Y
Neurology. 2017;(19):1830-1838
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the efficacy and effect modifiers of folic acid supplementation in the prevention of stroke in regions without folic acid fortification based on relevant, up-to-date published randomized trials. METHODS Relative risk (RR) was used to measure the effect of folic acid supplementation on risk of stroke using a fixed effects model. FINDINGS Overall, folic acid supplementation significantly reduced the stroke risk by 11% (22 trials, n = 82,723; RR 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.96). The effect was greater in low folate regions (2 trials, n = 24,020; Asia, 0.78, 0.67-0.90) compared to high folate regions (7 trials, n = 14,655; America, 1.05, 0.90-1.23), and among patients without folic acid fortification (11 trials, n = 49,957; 0.85; 0.77-0.94) compared with those with folic acid fortification (7 trials, n = 14,655; 1.05, 0.90-1.23). In further stratified analyses among trials without folic acid fortification, a larger beneficial effect was found in those trials that used a low dosage of folic acid (≤0.8 mg: 0.78, 0.69-0.88) or low baseline vitamin B12 levels (<384 pg/mL: 0.78, 0.68-0.89). In the corresponding comparison groups, the effect sizes were attenuated and insignificant (p for interaction <0.05 for both). Although the interaction tests were not significant, there might be a higher benefit in trials with a low dosage of vitamin B12, a low prevalence of statin use, but a high prevalence of hypertension. CONCLUSIONS Folic acid supplementation could reduce the stroke risk in regions without folic acid fortification, particularly in trials using a relatively low dosage of folic acid and with low vitamin B12 levels.
-
8.
Pharmacological treatments for preventing epilepsy following traumatic head injury.
Thompson, K, Pohlmann-Eden, B, Campbell, LA, Abel, H
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2015;(8):CD009900
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Head injury is a common event and can cause a spectrum of motor and cognition disabilities. A frequent complication is seizures. Antiepileptic drugs (AED) such as phenytoin are often used in clinical practice with the hopes of preventing post-traumatic epilepsy. Whether immediate medical intervention following head trauma with either AEDs or neuroprotective drugs can alter the process of epileptogenesis and lead to a more favorable outcome is currently unknown. This review attempted to address the effectiveness of these treatment interventions. This review updates and expands on the earlier Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES To compare the efficacy of antiepileptic drugs and neuroprotective agents with placebo, usual care or other pharmacologic agents for the prevention of post-traumatic epilepsy in people diagnosed with any severity of traumatic brain injury. SEARCH METHODS We searched The Cochrane Epilepsy Group's specialized register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) in January 2015. We searched EMBASE, Biological Abstracts and National Research Register in September 2014 and SCOPUS in December 2013. The Cochrane Epilepsy Group performed handsearches of relevant journals. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that include AEDs or neuroprotective agents compared with placebo, another pharmacologic agent or a usual care group. The outcomes measured included a seizure occurring within one week of trauma (early seizure), seizure occurring later than one week post-trauma (late seizure), mortality and any adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted the data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each outcome. We used random-effects models in the meta-analyses and performed pre-defined subgroup and sensitivity analyses. MAIN RESULTS This review included 10 RCTs (reported in 12 articles) consisting of 2326 participants The methodological quality of the studies varied. The type of intervention was separated into three categories; AED versus placebo or standard care, alternative neuroprotective agent versus placebo or standard care and AED versus other AED. Treatment with an AED (phenytoin or carbamazepine) decreased the risk of early seizure compared with placebo or standard care (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.73; very low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of late seizure occurrence between AEDs and placebo or standard care (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.46; very low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a significant difference in all-cause mortality between AEDs and placebo or standard care (RR 1.08 95% CI 0.79 to 1.46,very low quality of evidence). Only one study looked at other potentially neuroprotective agents (magnesium sulfate) compared with placebo. The risk ratios were: late seizure 1.07 (95% CI 0.53 to 2.17) and all-cause mortality 1.20 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.81). The risk ratio for occurrence of early seizure was not estimable.Two studies looked at comparison of two AEDs (levetiracetam, valproate) with phenytoin used as the main comparator in each study. The risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.53 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.94). There was no evidence of treatment benefit of phenytoin compared with another AED for early seizures (RR 0.66, 95% 0.20 to 2.12) or late seizures(RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.30).Only two studies reported adverse events. The RR of any adverse event with AED compared with placebo was 1.65 (95% CI 0.73 to 3.66; low quality evidence). There were insufficient data on adverse events in the other treatment comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS This review found low-quality evidence that early treatment with an AED compared with placebo or standard care reduced the risk of early post-traumatic seizures. There was no evidence to support a reduction in the risk of late seizures or mortality. There was insufficient evidence to make any conclusions regarding the effectiveness or safety of other neuroprotective agents compared with placebo or for the comparison of phenytoin, a traditional AED, with another AED.
-
9.
Pharmacological Management of Lewy Body Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Stinton, C, McKeith, I, Taylor, JP, Lafortune, L, Mioshi, E, Mak, E, Cambridge, V, Mason, J, Thomas, A, O'Brien, JT
The American journal of psychiatry. 2015;(8):731-42
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The authors examined research on effects, costs, and patient and caregiver views of pharmacological management strategies for Lewy body dementia. METHOD Studies were identified through bibliographic databases, trials registers, gray literature, reference lists, and experts. The authors used the search terms "Lewy or parkinson" and "dementia" through March 2015 and used the following inclusion criteria: participants with diagnoses of Lewy body dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies, or Parkinson's disease dementia (or participants' caregivers); investigation of pharmacological management strategies; outcome measures and test scores reported. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by at least two authors. Meta-analyses were conducted, and when studies could not be combined, summaries were provided. RESULTS Forty-four studies examining 22 strategies were included in the review. Meta-analysis indicated beneficial effects of donepezil and rivastigmine for cognitive and psychiatric symptoms. Rivastigmine, but not donepezil, was associated with greater risk of adverse events. Meta-analysis of memantine suggested that it is well tolerated but with few benefits. Descriptive summaries provide some evidence of benefits for galantamine, modafinil, levodopa, rotigotine, clozapine, duloxetine, clonazepam, ramelteon, gabapentin, zonisamide, and yokukansan. Piracetam, amantadine, selegiline, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and citalopram do not appear to be effective. CONCLUSIONS High-level evidence related to pharmacological strategies for managing Lewy body dementia is rare. Strategies for important areas of need in Lewy body dementia, such as autonomic symptoms and caregiver burden, have not been investigated, nor have the views of patients and caregivers about pharmacological strategies.
-
10.
Creatine for Parkinson's disease.
Xiao, Y, Luo, M, Luo, H, Wang, J
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2014;(6):CD009646
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Parkinson's disease is one of the most common neurodegenerative disorders and mitochondrial dysfunction plays an important role in its pathogenesis. Creatine is effective in improving mitochondrial function. It may therefore be useful for slowing the progression of Parkinson's disease. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy and safety of creatine used alone or as an adjuvant treatment for Parkinson's disease. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Movement Disorders Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, November Issue 4), MEDLINE (January 1966 to 10 November 2013), EMBASE (1974 to 10 November 2013) and two Chinese databases. We searched ongoing trials registers and conference proceedings, checked reference lists and contacted authors of included trials. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing creatine versus placebo for Parkinson's disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently selected the trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS We included two RCTs with a total of 194 patients. Both trials compared creatine with placebo for Parkinson's disease and both had methodological limitations. There was no clear evidence of an effect on motor function (MD -0.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.39 to 3.88, low quality evidence), activities of daily living (MD 0.37; 95% CI -1.28 to 2.02, low quality evidence) or quality of life after one or two years of treatment. One trial reported serious adverse events that were not attributed to creatine. Also, one trial observed higher rates of gastrointestinal effects at two years follow-up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The evidence base on the effects of creatine in Parkinson's disease is limited by risk of bias, small sample sizes and short duration of the eligible trials. It does not provide a reliable basis on which treatment decisions can be made. Future well-designed RCTs with larger sample size and long-term follow-up are needed to assess creatine for Parkinson's disease.