Dataset Information

Different Doses of Pharmacological Treatments for Mild to Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pharmacological treatments play a significant role in treating mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD), but the optimal doses of various drugs used for these treatments are unknown. Our study compared the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of different doses of pharmacological treatments for mild to moderate AD.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (all RCTs published from the date of inception of the databases until September 19, 2019). Trials comparing the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of pharmacological interventions involving donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, memantine, huperzine A, and Ginkgo biloba extract EGb761, alone or in combination, were identified. The primary outcomes were efficacy, acceptability, and safety.

Results

Our meta-analysis included 37 studies involving 14,705 participants. In terms of improving cognitive function, galantamine 32 mg, galantamine 24 mg, donepezil 5 mg, and donepezil 10 mg were more effective than other interventions, with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values of 93.2, 75.5, 73.3, and 65.6%, respectively. According to the SUCRA values, EGb761 240 mg was considered to be the optimal intervention in terms of both acceptability and safety. With regard to clinical global impression, rivastigmine 12 mg had the highest probability of being ranked first (83.7%). The rivastigmine 15 cm² patch (SUCRA = 93.7%) may be the best choice for daily living. However, there were no interventions that could significantly improve neuropsychiatric symptoms, compared with the placebo.

Conclusions

Different doses of the tested pharmacological interventions yielded benefits with regard to cognition, acceptability, safety, function, and clinical global impressions, but not effective behaviors.

SUBMITTER: Zhang T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7264393 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Different Doses of Pharmacological Treatments for Mild to Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

Zhang Tingting T Liu Nanyang N Cao Hongfu H Wei Wei W Ma Lina L Li Hao H

Frontiers in pharmacology 20200526

<h4>Background</h4>Pharmacological treatments play a significant role in treating mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD), but the optimal doses of various drugs used for these treatments are unknown. Our study compared the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of different doses of pharmacological treatments for mild to moderate AD.<h4>Methods</h4>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (all RCTs published from the date ...[more]

PMID: 32528296

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:To provide evidence for medical management of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) in China based on comparisons of all clinical practical interventions using Bayesian network meta-analysis. METHODS:We conducted a systematic literature review by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the Wanfang Database (inception to May 2019) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CIC in Chinese people. Only RCTs that recruited participants aged over 18 and diagnosed with CIC by the Rome II, III or IV criteria were included. We used three outcomes to examine efficacy. The risk ratio (RR) of the responder rate, based on ≥3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) per week after treatment, was the primary outcome, and the SBM count per week and the Bristol score (BS) were secondary outcomes. In addition, adverse effects (AEs) were also considered a secondary outcome to evaluate safety. We conducted Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effects, and the RR or mean difference with its 95% credible interval was calculated. In addition, we ranked all treatments via their cumulative curves (SUCRA) and assessed the quality of evidence according to the GRADE criteria. RESULTS:We included a total of 42 trials (6820 participants) of 20 grouped interventions that included pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments. For the primary outcome, fourteen interventions were significantly better than placebo, and Probiotics plus Mosapride (PB + MP) appeared superior to others (GRADE quality of evidence: Moderate to Low), followed by Prucalopride (PP) (High to Low) and Electroacupuncture (EA) (High to Low). For SBM, Compound sodium bicarbonate suppository (CSBS) appeared to be best, with an SUCRA value of 90% (High to Low). For BS, Lactulose plus Probiotics (LT + PB) was superior to others (Moderate to Low), followed by Polyethylene glycol (PEG) (High to Moderate). Although all interventions appeared non-significant when compared with placebo in terms of adverse effects, Lactulose plus Mosapride showed greater risk than others on ranking probability. CONCLUSIONS:Given the GRADE assessment, PB + MP, PP and EA may be the priory options with moderate certainty in the quality of evidence for the primary outcome. For SBM, a CSBS may be the best option with moderate certainty in the quality of evidence. For BS, PEG may be the priory option with high certainty in the quality of evidence. However, due to a lack of high certainty in the quality of evidence, caution is needed when recommending the interventions. Because of the limitations, an increased number of trials are required for more accurate results.

Project description:Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is the early phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aim of early intervention for MCI is to decrease the rate of conversion from MCI to AD. However, the efficacy of multiple interventions in MCI, and the optimal methods of delivery, remain controversial. We aimed to compare and rank the treatment methods for MCI in AD, in order to find an optimal intervention for MCI and a way to prevent or delay the occurrence of AD. Methods: Pair-wise and network meta-analysis were conducted to integrate the treatment effectiveness through direct and indirect evidence. Four English databases and three Chinese databases were searched for international registers of eligible published, single or double blind, randomized controlled trials up to September 31st 2019. We included nine comparative interventions: pharmacological therapies which incorporated cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI), ginkgo, nimodipine, and Chinese medicine; non-pharmacological therapies comprising of acupuncture, music therapy, exercise therapy, and nutrition therapy; and a placebo group. The primary outcome was the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score. The secondary outcome was the AD Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog). Results: Twenty-eight trials were eligible, including 6,863 participants. In the direct meta-analysis, as for the Mini-Mental State Examination scale, the ChEIs (MD: -0.38; 95% CI: -0.74, -0.01), Chinese medicine (MD: -0.31; 95% CI: -0.75, 0.13), exercise therapy (MD: -0.50; 95% CI: -0.65, -0.35), music therapy (MD: -1.71; 95% CI: -4.49, 1.07), were statistically more efficient than placebo. For AD Assessment Scalecognitive subscale outcome, ChEIs (MD: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.73, 1.68), Acupuncture (MD: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.28, 1.44), Chinese medicine (MD: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.49, 0.73) and exercise (MD: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.49, 0.73) were better than placebo. In the network meta-analysis, the MMSE outcome ranked music therapy (59%) as the best and Acupuncture (26%) as second. Nutrition and Ginkgo treatment had the lowest rank among all interventions. For ADAS-cog outcome, acupuncture (52) ranked the best. Conclusion: Among the nine treatments studied, music therapy appears to be the best treatment for MCI, followed by acupuncture. Our study provides new insights into potential clinical treatments for MCI due to AD, and may aid the development of guidelines for MCI in AD.

Project description:IntroductionRapid improvement of psoriasis is valued by patients and should be considered to be an important factor in treatment selection. We investigated Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) response rates within the first 12 weeks of treatment to compare the rapid response of 11 biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe psoriasis using Bayesian and Frequentist network meta-analyses (NMA).MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled trials for adult patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis treated with interleukin (IL)-17 (brodalumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab), IL-12/-23 (ustekinumab), IL-23 (guselkumab, risankizumab, tildrakizumab), or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, infliximab). Outcome measures extracted from 32 publications were ≥ 75, ≥ 90, or 100% improvement in PASI score (PASI 75, PASI 90, or PASI 100, respectively) at weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 and DLQI (0,1), where score (0,1) indicates no effect on patient's life, at week 12. Bayesian NMA (BNMA) used fixed-treatment effect and random-baseline effect, normal independent models. Frequentist NMA (fNMA) was conducted as sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of the findings.ResultsBased on BNMA and fNMA, brodalumab and ixekizumab showed the most rapid treatment effects on PASI 75 at weeks 2, 4, and 8 and on PASI 90 and PASI 100 at weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12; ixekizumab overlapped with risankizumab on PASI 75 at week 12. Brodalumab, ixekizumab, and secukinumab yielded higher DLQI (0,1) gains at week 12 compared to all of the other biologics studied. Additional measures of quality of life were not assessed in this report.ConclusionsIxekizumab and brodalumab provide the most rapid response and earliest clinical benefit at week 2 among all of the biologics studied, including other biologic treatments such as secukinumab, ustekinumab, guselkumab, adalimumab, and etanercept. BNMA and fNMA results showed similar relative effect estimates and treatment rankings.FundingEli Lilly and Company.

Project description:IntroductionAlthough one of the major presentations of vestibular migraine is dizziness with/without unsteady gait, it is still classified as one of the migraine categories. However, in contrast to ordinary migraine, vestibular migraine patients have distinct characteristics, and the detailed treatment strategy for vestibular migraine is different and more challenging than ordinary migraine treatment. Currently, there is no conclusive evidence regarding its management, including vestibular migraine prophylaxis.AimThe objective of this current network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of individual treatment strategies in patients with vestibular migraine.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, Web of Science, ClinicalKey, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a final literature search date of 30 December 2022. Patients diagnosed with vestibular migraine were included. The PICO of the current study included (1) patients with vestibular migraine; (2) intervention: any active pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic intervention; (3) comparator: placebo-control, active control, or waiting list; and (4) outcome: changes in migraine frequency or severity. This NMA of RCTs of vestibular migraine treatment was conducted using a frequentist model. We arranged inconsistency and similarity tests to re-examine the assumption of NMA, and also conducted a subgroup analysis focusing on RCTs of pharmacological treatment for vestibular migraine management. The primary outcome was changes in the frequency of vestibular migraines, while the secondary outcomes were changes in vestibular migraine severity and acceptability. Acceptability was set as the dropout rate, which was defined as the participant leaving the study before the end of the trial for any reason. Two authors independently evaluated the risk of bias for each domain using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.ResultsSeven randomized controlled trials (N = 828, mean age 37.6 years, 78.4% female) and seven active regimens were included. We determined that only valproic acid (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.69, -0.54), propranolol (SMD -1.36, 95% CI -2.55, -0.17), and venlafaxine (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.32, -0.18) were significantly associated with better improvement in vestibular migraine frequency than the placebo/control groups. Furthermore, among all the investigated pharmacologic/non-pharmacologic treatments, valproic acid yielded the greatest decrease in vestibular migraine frequency among all the interventions. In addition, most pharmacologic/non-pharmacologic treatments were associated with similar acceptability (i.e. dropout rate) as those of the placebo/control groups.ConclusionsThe current study provides evidence that only valproic acid, propranolol, and venlafaxine might be associated with beneficial efficacy in vestibular migraine treatment.Trial registrationCRD42023388343.

Dataset Information

Different Doses of Pharmacological Treatments for Mild to Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Different Doses of Pharmacological Treatments for Mild to Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets