Background Currently approved Alzheimer’s disease (AD) treatments have been reported to provide symptomatic benefit, without proven impact on clinical progression. We hypothesized that the loss of initial therapeutic benefit over time may be mitigated by higher doses of a cholinesterase inhibitor. Objective The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness and tolerability of increasing donepezil from 10 to 23 mg/d in patients with moderate to severe AD. Methods This randomized, double-blind study was conducted at 219 sites in Asia, Europe, Australia, North America, South Africa, and South America from June 6, 2007, to March 27, 2009. Patients aged 45 to 90 years with probable AD, Mini-Mental State Examination score 0 to 20 (moderate to severe impairment), and who were receiving donepezil 10 mg once daily for ≥12 weeks before the start of the study were eligible. Patients (n = 1467) were randomly assigned to receive high-dose donepezil (23 mg once daily) or standard-dose donepezil (10 mg once daily) for 24 weeks. Coprimary effectiveness measures were changes in cognition and global functioning, as assessed using least squares mean changes from baseline (LSM [SE] Δ) scores (last observation carried forward) on the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB; cognition) and the Clinician’s Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input scale (CIBIC+; global function rating) overall change score (mean [SD]) at week 24. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed using spontaneous patient/caregiver reporting and open-ended questioning; clinical laboratory testing (hematology, biochemistry, and urinalysis panels analyzed by a central laboratory); 12-lead ECG; and physical and neurologic examinations, including vital sign measurements. Results The effectiveness analyses included 1371 patients (mean age, 73.8 years; 62.8% female; 73.5% white; weight range, 34.0–138.7 kg). A total of 296 of 981 patients (30.2%) withdrew from the donepezil 23-mg/d group; 87 of 486 patients (17.9%) withdrew from the donepezil 10-mg/d group. At study end (week 24), the LSM (SE) Δ in SIB score was significantly greater with donepezil 23 mg/d than with donepezil 10 mg/d (+2.6 [0.58] vs +0.4 [0.66], respectively; difference, 2.2; P < 0.001). The between-treatment difference in CIBIC+ score was nonsignificant (4.23 [1.07] vs 4.29 [1.07]). In post hoc analysis, LSM Δ in SIB score and CIBIC+ treatment effect at end point were greater with donepezil 23 mg/d than 10 mg/d in patients with more advanced AD compared with less impaired patients (SIB, +1.6 [0.78] vs −1.5 [0.88], respectively [P < 0.001]; CIBIC+, 4.31 [1.09] vs 4.42 [1.10] [P = 0.028]). TEAEs were reported in 710 of 963 patients (73.7%) who received donepezil 23 mg/d and in 300 of 471 patients (63.7%) who received donepezil 10 mg/d. With donepezil 23 mg/d, mild, moderate, and severe TEAEs were reported in 297 (30.8%), 332 (34.5%), and 81 (8.4%) patients, respectively; with donepezil 10 mg/d, these proportions were 147 (31.2%), 119 (25.3%), and 34 (7.2%). The 3 mo...

Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) is associated with cholinergic deficits. This report presents an efficacy and safety study of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor donepezil hydrochloride in PDD. PDD patients (n = 550) were randomized to donepezil (5 or 10 mg) or placebo for 24 weeks. Coprimary end points were the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus caregiver input (CIBIC+; global function). Secondary end points measured executive function, attention, activities of daily living (ADLs), and behavioral symptoms. Safety and tolerability were assessed. ADAS-cog mean changes from baseline to week 24 (end point) were not significant for donepezil in the intent-to-treat population by the predefined statistical model (difference from placebo: -1.45, P = .050, for 5 mg; -1.45, P = .076, for 10 mg). Alternative ADAS-cog analysis, removing the treatment-by-country interaction term from the model, revealed significant, dose-dependent benefit with donepezil (difference from placebo: -2.08, P = .002, for 5 mg; -3.31, P < .001, for 10 mg). The 10-mg group, but not the 5-mg group, had significantly better CIBIC+ scores compared with placebo (3.7 vs 3.9, P = .113, for 5 mg; 3.6 vs 3.9, P = .040, for 10 mg). Secondary end points-Mini-Mental State Exam; Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System; Brief Test of Attention, representing cognitive functions particularly relevant to PDD-showed significant benefit for both donepezil doses (P ≤ .007). There were no significant differences in ADLs or behavior. Adverse events were more common with donepezil but mostly mild/moderate in severity. Although the study did not achieve its predefined primary end points, it presents evidence suggesting that donepezil can improve cognition, executive function, and global status in PDD. Tolerability was consistent with the known safety profile of donepezil. © 2012 Movement Disorder Society.

BackgroundDonepezil 23 mg/d, recently approved in the United States for treatment of moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease (AD), was developed to address the need for an additional treatment option for patients with advanced AD. This report, based on a pivotal phase 3 study, presents a detailed analysis of the safety and tolerability of increasing donepezil to 23 mg/d compared with continuing 10 mg/d.MethodSafety analyses comprised examination of the incidence, severity, and timing of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and their relationship to treatment initiation; changes in weight, electrocardiogram, vital signs, and laboratory parameters; and the incidence of premature study discontinuation. The analysis population (n = 1434) included all randomized patients who took at least 1 dose of study drug and had a postbaseline safety assessment. To further examine the effect of transition from a lower to a higher donepezil dose, a pooled analysis of safety data from 2 phase 3 trials of donepezil 5 mg/d and 10 mg/d was also performed.ResultsThe safety population comprised 1434 patients: donepezil 23 mg/d (n = 963); donepezil 10 mg/d (n = 471); completion rates were 71.1% and 84.7%, respectively. The most common AEs were nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea (donepezil 23 mg/d: 11.8%, 9.2%, 8.3%; donepezil 10 mg/d: 3.4%, 2.5%, 5.3%, respectively). AEs that contributed most to early discontinuations were vomiting (2.9% of patients in the 23 mg/d group and 0.4% in the 10 mg/d group), nausea (1.9% and 0.4%), diarrhea (1.7% and 0.4%), and dizziness (1.1% and 0.0%). The percentages of patients with AEs in the 23 mg/d group, as well as the timing, type, and severity of these AEs, were similar to those seen in previous donepezil trials with titration from 5 to 10 mg/d. Serious AEs were uncommon (23 mg/d, 8.3%; 10 mg/d, 9.6%).DiscussionThe 23 mg/d dose of donepezil was associated with typical cholinergic AEs, particularly gastrointestinal-related AEs, similar to those observed in studies with a dose increase from 5 to 10 mg/d.ConclusionThe good safety and predictable tolerability profile for donepezil 23 mg/d supports its favorable risk/benefit ratio in patients with moderate to severe AD.Trial RegistrationNCT00478205

The purpose of the Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable meeting was to discuss the potential of finding diagnostic tools to determine the earliest risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Currently, drugs approved for AD address symptoms which are generally manifest after the disease is already well-established, but there is a growing pipeline of drugs that may alter the underlying pathology and therefore slow or halt progression of the disease. As these drugs become available, it will become increasingly imperative that those at risk for AD be detected and possibly treated early, especially given recent indications that the disease process may start decades before the first clinical symptoms are recognized. Early detection must go hand-in-hand with qualified tools to determine the efficacy of drugs in people who may be asymptomatic or who have only very mild symptoms of the disease. Devising strategies and screening tools to identify and monitor those at risk in order to perform "prevention" trials is seen by many as a top public-health priority, made all the more urgent by an impending growth in the elderly population worldwide.

Effective communication between staff members is key to patient safety in hospitals. A variety of patient care activities including admittance, evaluation, and treatment rely on oral communication. Surprisingly, published information on speech intelligibility in hospitals is extremely limited. In this study, speech intelligibility measurements and occupant evaluations were conducted in 20 units of five different U.S. hospitals. A variety of unit types and locations were studied. Results show that overall, no unit had "good" intelligibility based on the speech intelligibility index (SII > 0.75) and several locations found to have "poor" intelligibility (SII < 0.45). Further, occupied spaces were found to have 10%-15% lower SII than unoccupied spaces on average. Additionally, staff perception of communication problems at nurse stations was significantly correlated with SII ratings. In a targeted second phase, a unit treated with sound absorption had higher SII ratings for a larger percentage of time as compared to an identical untreated unit. Taken as a whole, the study provides an extensive baseline evaluation of speech intelligibility across a variety of hospitals and unit types, offers some evidence of the positive impact of absorption on intelligibility, and identifies areas for future research.