Donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for ...
Donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for ...
Donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
TABLE 32 Withdrawals due to adverse events <strong>for</strong> <strong>galantamine</strong><br />
[Commercial/academic confidential in<strong>for</strong>mation removed]<br />
Raskind et al. 61<br />
were higher among <strong>galantamine</strong> participants<br />
[range: 6% (8 mg/day)–44% (36 mg/day)] than<br />
placebo (range 5–9%) (see Table 32).<br />
Three trials 61,63,64 demonstrated differential<br />
dropout rates between groups <strong>for</strong> reasons other<br />
than adverse events. However, the pattern of the<br />
proportion withdrawing was not consistent; in two<br />
included trials the dropout rate was greater in the<br />
treatment arms but in another study dropout rate<br />
was greater in the placebo arm. In three published<br />
trials [commercial/academic confidential<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation removed] there appeared to be no<br />
difference between groups. No statistical analyses<br />
were undertaken by the trials. Very few deaths<br />
were reported in any of the included studies. Data<br />
relating to withdrawals <strong>and</strong> deaths <strong>for</strong> the<br />
individual trials can be found in Appendix 9.<br />
Summary<br />
● Six published multicentre placebo-controlled<br />
RCTs assessing doses ranging from 8 to<br />
36 mg/day of <strong>galantamine</strong> over durations of<br />
3–6 months met the inclusion criteria <strong>for</strong> the<br />
systematic review. The methodological quality<br />
<strong>and</strong> the quality of reporting in the studies were<br />
variable. Of the six RCTs, three appeared to<br />
limit selection bias, 62,64,65 three provided<br />
adequate in<strong>for</strong>mation to reduce the likelihood<br />
of measurement bias 61,63,65 <strong>and</strong> one appeared to<br />
guard against the effects of attrition bias. 64 Five<br />
RCTs reported that they were sponsored by the<br />
manufacturers.<br />
© Queen’s Printer <strong>and</strong> Controller of HMSO 2006. All rights reserved.<br />
Health Technology Assessment 2006; Vol. 10: No. 1<br />
Galantamine 24 mg/day (n = 212) Galantamine 32 mg/day (n = 211) Placebo (n = 213)<br />
49/212 (23%) 67/211 (32%) 16/213 (8%)<br />
Wilcock et al. 64<br />
Galantamine 24 mg/day (n = 220) Galantamine 32 mg/day (n = 218) Placebo (n = 215)<br />
31/220 (14%) 48/218 (22%) 19/215 (9%)<br />
Tariot et al. 63<br />
Galantamine Galantamine Galantamine Placebo (n = 286)<br />
8 mg/day (n = 140) 16 mg/day (n = 279) 24 mg/day (n = 273)<br />
9 19 27 20<br />
Wilkinson <strong>and</strong> Murray65 Galantamine Galantamine Galantamine Placebo (n = 87)<br />
18 mg/day (n = 88) 24 mg/day (n = 56) 36 mg/day (n = 54)<br />
19 (21.6%) 10 (17.9%) 24 (44.4%) 8 (9.2%)<br />
● [Commercial/academic confidential<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation removed]<br />
● Six published RCTs showed that <strong>galantamine</strong><br />
appears to confer a statistically significant<br />
benefit to participants on the ADAS-cog scale<br />
when compared with placebo, whether reducing<br />
the deterioration or leading to some<br />
improvement in their condition. The benefit<br />
varies depending on the dose of <strong>galantamine</strong>.<br />
The <strong>galantamine</strong>–placebo differences in ADAScog<br />
<strong>for</strong> 8 mg/day was 1.3 points, 16 mg/day<br />
3.1 points, 18 mg/day 1.7 points, 16 or<br />
24 mg/day 2.5 to 2.8 points, 24–32 mg/day<br />
1.7–3.4 points <strong>and</strong> 36 mg/day 2.3 points.<br />
[Commercial/academic confidential<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation removed] In addition, 14–17%<br />
more of <strong>galantamine</strong> participants were classified<br />
as responders (improving by ≥ 4 points on the<br />
ADAS-cog) than those on placebo.<br />
● Five published [commercial/academic<br />
confidential in<strong>for</strong>mation removed] RCTs<br />
assessed the effect of <strong>galantamine</strong> compared<br />
with placebo on the CIBIC-plus, individually<br />
showing that higher proportions of participants<br />
receiving <strong>galantamine</strong> experience improvement<br />
in their condition compared with those on<br />
placebo (0–6.5% more participants). In contrast,<br />
a higher proportion of placebo participants<br />
tend to deteriorate (4–18% more participants).<br />
Also, a higher proportion of <strong>galantamine</strong><br />
compared with placebo participants were<br />
considered to be responders to treatment with<br />
differences of between 4% (8 mg/day) <strong>and</strong> 17%<br />
65