DOMINO-AD protocol: donepezil and memantine in moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease - a multicentre RCT.

Section of Old Age Psychiatry, The University of Nottingham, A Floor, South Block, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Trials (Impact Factor: 2.21). 08/2009; 10:57. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-57
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the commonest cause of dementia. Cholinesterase inhibitors, such as donepezil, are the drug class with the best evidence of efficacy, licensed for mild to moderate AD, while the glutamate antagonist memantine has been widely prescribed, often in the later stages of AD. Memantine is licensed for moderate to severe dementia in AD but is not recommended by the England and Wales National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. However, there is little evidence to guide clinicians as to what to prescribe as AD advances; in particular, what to do as the condition progresses from moderate to severe. Options include continuing cholinesterase inhibitors irrespective of decline, adding memantine to cholinesterase inhibitors, or prescribing memantine instead of cholinesterase inhibitors. The aim of this trial is to establish the most effective drug option for people with AD who are progressing from moderate to severe dementia despite treatment with donepezil.
DOMINO-AD is a pragmatic, 15 centre, double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial. Patients with AD, currently living at home, receiving donepezil 10 mg daily, and with Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE) scores between 5 and 13 are being recruited. Each is randomized to one of four treatment options: continuation of donepezil with memantine placebo added; switch to memantine with donepezil placebo added; donepezil and memantine together; or donepezil placebo with memantine placebo. 800 participants are being recruited and treatment continues for one year. Primary outcome measures are cognition (SMMSE) and activities of daily living (Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale). Secondary outcomes are non-cognitive dementia symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory), health related quality of life (EQ-5D and DEMQOL-proxy), carer burden (General Health Questionnaire-12), cost effectiveness (using Client Service Receipt Inventory) and institutionalization. These outcomes are assessed at baseline, 6, 18, 30 and 52 weeks. All participants will be subsequently followed for 3 years by telephone interview to record institutionalization.
There is considerable debate about the clinical and cost effectiveness of anti-dementia drugs. DOMINO-AD seeks to provide clear evidence on the best treatment strategies for those managing patients at a particularly important clinical transition point.
Current controlled trials ISRCTN49545035.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although less likely to be reported in clinical trials than expressions of the statistical significance of differences in outcomes, whether or not a treatment has delivered a specified minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is also relevant to patients and their caregivers and doctors. Many dementia treatment randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have not reported MCIDs and, where they have been done, observed differences have not reached these. As part of the development of the Statistical Analysis Plan for the DOMINO trial, investigators met to consider expert opinion- and distribution-based values for the MCID and triangulated these to provide appropriate values for three outcome measures, the Standardised Mini-mental State Examination (sMMSE), Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) and Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Only standard deviations (SD) were presented to investigators who remained blind to treatment allocation. Adoption of values for MCIDs based upon 0.4 of the SD of the change in score from baseline on the sMMSE, BADLS and NPI in the first 127 participants to complete DOMINO yielded MCIDs of 1.4 points for sMMSE, 3.5 for BADLS and 8.0 for NPI. Reference to MCIDs is important for the full interpretation of the results of dementia trials and those conducting such trials should be open about the way in which they have determined and chosen their values for the MCIDs.
    International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 08/2011; 26(8):812-7. · 3.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neuroinflammatory responses caused by amyloid β(Aβ) play an important role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Aβ is known to be directly responsible for the activation of glial cells and induction of apoptosis. Akebia Saponin D (ASD) is extracted from a traditional herbal medicine Dipsacus asper Wall, which has been shown to protect against ibotenic acid-induced cognitive deficits and cell death in rats. In this study, we investigated the in vivo protective effect of ASD on learning and memory impairment induced by bilateral intracerebroventricular injections of Aβ1-42 using Morris water and Y-maze task. Furthermore, the anti-inflammatory activity and neuroprotective effect of ASD was examined with methods of histochemistry and biochemistry. These data showed that oral gavage with ASD at doses of 30, 90 and 270mg/kg for 4 weeks exerted an improved effect on cognitive impairment. Subsequently, the ASD inhibited the activation of glial cells and the expression of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) in rat brain. Moreover, ASD afforded beneficial actions on inhibitions of Akt and IκB kinase (IKK) phosphorylations, as well as nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) activation induced by Aβ1-42. These results suggest that ASD may be a potential agent for suppressing both Alzheimer's disease-related neuroinflammation and memory system dysfunction.
    Behavioural brain research 08/2012; 235(2):200-9. · 3.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) questionnaire is the most widely used instrument for resource use data collection in dementia, enabling comparison of costs of care across countries with differing health care provisions. Recent feedback from payers questioned its face validity given that health care provisions have changed since the initial development of the RUD in 1998. The aim of this study was to update the RUD to improve its face validity in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical research and its utility for health care resource allocation. METHODS: An extensive PubMed review was conducted of current relevant resource items in AD in 15 countries. The findings were complemented by interviews with local care providers and experts in dementia care and health economics. Their proposed revisions were discussed with five leading dementia experts in North and South America, northern and southern Europe, and Asia. A new version of the RUD was developed based on their recommendations. RESULTS: RUD users identified a need for more information relevant to coverage decisions. Proposed revisions included changes to existing questions (e.g., to capture more accurately the number and type of health care visits) and the addition of new questions (e.g., on informal caregiver hours and the primary caregiver's hours of sleep). CONCLUSION: Several minor changes were made to the RUD instrument to improve the accuracy and precision of the data while maintaining comparability with the original version and reflecting current medical practice. The RUD Complete Version 4.0 is now available for use in future AD clinical trials.
    Alzheimer's & dementia: the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 11/2012; · 14.48 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 2, 2014