Galantamine for vascular cognitive impairment

Whitla Medical Building, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen's University of Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, UK, BT9 7BL.
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 5.94). 01/2006; DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004746.pub2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Vascular dementia is the second most common form of dementia. Cholinesterase inhibitors modestly improve a broad range of symptoms in some patients with Alzheimer's disease through enhancement of cholinergic neurotransmission. These drugs may also be beneficial in vascular dementia as reductions in acetylcholine and acetyltransferase activity have been reported.
To assess the efficacy of galantamine in the treatment of people with vascular cognitive impairment or vascular dementia or "mixed" dementia.
Trials were identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 19 April 2005 using the terms: galantamine. galanthamine, reminyl. All major health care databases and many ongoing trial databases within the scope of the group are searched regularly to keep this Register up to date.
All unconfounded randomised double-blind trials comparing galantamine with placebo were eligible for inclusion.
Two RCTs fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in this review. Two reviewers independently extracted the data from these two inclusion studies.
Two trials employing randomized, double-blind, parallel-group methodology were included. GAL-INT-6 reported sub-group data for a pure population of vascular dementia patients showing no significant differences in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog/11) and Clinician's Interview-based Impression of Change (CIBIC-plus) when galantamine was compared against placebo. When data combining patients with vascular dementia diagnosed according to recognised criteria with a population of patients with Alzheimer's disease and coincidental radiographic findings of cerebrovascular disease was analysed, statistically significant improvements in cognition (ADAS-cog), global functioning (CIBIC-plus), activities of daily living (DAD) and behaviour (NPI) were noted. In the galantamine treated group, significantly higher numbers of patients dropped out and withdrew due to an adverse event. Limited data was available at the time of publication for a second larger trial (GAL-INT-26) involving patients with vascular dementia diagnosed using standard criteria. Statistically significant benefits favouring galantamine over placebo in assessments of cognition (ADAS-cog/11; p < 0.001) and executive function (Executive Interview, EXIT-25, p = 0.041) were recorded. No differences in outcome in measures of behaviour (Neuropsychiatric Inventory, NPI), daily living (Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living inventory, ADCS-ADL) and global functioning (CIBIC-plus) in this trial were seen.
Limited data were available when considering the impact of galantamine on vascular dementia or vascular cognitive impairment. The data available at the time of review suggest some advantage over placebo in the areas of cognition and executive functioning in one trial but this was not seen in a second trial which included smaller numbers of relevant patients. In both considered trials galantamine produced higher rates of gastrointestinal side-effects. More studies are needed before firm conclusions can be drawn.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While there have been no new medications approved for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) or other dementias in Canada since 2004, the Canadian Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia (CCCDTD) reviewed and updated the clinical practice guidelines on the pharmacological management of dementia that were published previously. This review focused on the literature for the pharmacological treatment of dementia based on studies published since the third CCCDTD in 2006. A literature search of English-language medical databases was preformed for studies pertaining to the pharmacological treatment of AD and other dementias that examined the management of cognitive and functional impairment, as well as neuropsychiatric symptoms. All previous recommendations were reviewed, and only those that required updating based on new published studies were revised. Several new recommendations were also added. Recommendations were rated for quality of evidence and were approved by consensus. There were 15 revised or new recommendations approved by consensus. The revised recommendations included acknowledging that cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) possess a class effect and any of the agents can be used for AD across the spectrum of severity and with co-existing cerebrovascular disease. There was insufficient evidence to recommend for or against the use of ChEIs in combination with memantine for the primary indication of treating neuropsychiatric symptoms, or for the treatment of vascular dementia. Recommendations for the discontinuation of cognitive enhancers were revised and clarified, as well as the risks associated with discontinuing these drugs. ChEIs were recommended as a treatment option for dementia with Parkinson's disease. Risks associated with use of antipsychotics for neuropsychiatric symptoms were strengthened, and guidelines regarding the use of antidepressants for affective disturbances in dementia were weakened, and are now considered an option but not a firm recommendation. Valproate was recommended not to be used, and there was insufficient evidence to recommend for or against the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or trazodone for the treatment of agitation and aggression. In spite of the lack of new therapeutic agents for the treatment of dementia, recent studies have helped to clarify and strengthen recommendations to optimize the pharmacological management of these illnesses.
    Alzheimer's Research and Therapy 07/2013; 5(Suppl 1):S5. DOI:10.1186/alzrt201 · 3.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Post-stroke cognitive impairment occurs frequently in the patients with stroke. The prevalence of post-stroke cognitive impairment ranges from 20% to 80%, which varies for the difference between the countries, the races, and the diagnostic criteria. The risk of post-stroke cognitive impairment is related to both the demographic factors like age, education and occupation and vascular factors. The underlying mechanisms of post-stroke cognitive impairment are not known in detail. However, the neuroanatomical lesions caused by the stroke on strategic areas such as the hippocampus and the white matter lesions (WMLs), the cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) due to the small cerebrovascular diseases and the mixed AD with stroke, alone or in combination, contribute to the pathogenesis of post-stroke cognitive impairment. The treatment of post-stroke cognitive impairment may benefit not only from the anti-dementia drugs, but also the manage measures on cerebrovascular diseases. In this review, we will describe the epidemiological features and the mechanisms of post-stroke cognitive impairment, and discuss the promising management strategies for these patients.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cognitive complaints are common in the geriatric population. Older adults should routinely be asked about any concerns about their memory or thinking, and any cognitive complaint from the patient or an informant should be evaluated rather than be attributed to aging. Several screening instruments are available to document objective impairments and guide further evaluation. Management goals for patients with cognitive impairment are focused on maintaining function and independence, providing caregiver support, and advance care planning. There are currently no treatments to effectively prevent or treat dementia. Increasing appreciation of the heterogeneity of Alzheimer disease may lead to novel treatment approaches. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Medical Clinics of North America 03/2015; 99(2):311-335. DOI:10.1016/j.mcna.2014.11.006 · 2.80 Impact Factor