Roger Bullock

Long-term effects of Aβ42 immunisation in Alzheimer's disease: follow-up of a randomised, placebo-controlled phase I trial

BACKGROUND Immunisation of patients with Alzheimers disease with full-length amyloid-beta peptide (Abeta(42)) can clear amyloid plaques from the brain. Our aim was to assess the relation between Abeta(42) immune response, degree of plaque removal, and long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS In June, 2003, consent for long-term clinical follow-up, post-mortem neuropathological examination, or both, was sought from 80 patients (or their carers) who had entered a phase I randomised, placebo-controlled trial of immunisation with Abeta(42) (AN1792, Elan Pharmaceuticals) in September, 2000. The follow-up study was completed in September, 2006. Plaques were assessed in terms of the percentage area of the cortex with Abeta immunostaining (Abeta load) and in terms of characteristic histological features reflecting plaque removal. Survival of all 80 individuals until severe dementia or death was assessed with a Cox proportional hazard model. FINDINGS 20 participants--15 in the AN1792 group, five in the placebo group--died before follow-up started. A further 22 patients--19 in the AN1792 group, three in the placebo group--died during follow-up. Nine of the deceased patients, all in the AN1792 group, had given consent for post-mortem analysis; one of these who did not die with Alzheimers disease was excluded. In the remaining eight participants who received immunisation and who were examined neuropathologically, mean Abeta load was lower than in an unimmunised control group that was matched for age at death (2.1% [SE 0.7] in treated participants vs 5.1% [0.9] in controls; mean difference 3.0%, 95% CI 0.6-5.4; p=0.02). Although there was considerable variation in Abeta load and degree of plaque removal among immunised participants, the degree of plaque removal varied significantly with mean antibody response attained during the treatment study period (Kruskal-Wallis p=0.02). Seven of the eight immunised patients who underwent post-mortem assessment, including those with virtually complete plaque removal, had severe end stage dementia before death. In the whole cohort, there was no evidence of improved survival (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.43-3.11; p=0.86) or of an improvement in the time to severe dementia (1.18, 0.45-3.11; p=0.73) in the AN1792 group versus the placebo group. INTERPRETATION Although immunisation with Abeta(42) resulted in clearance of amyloid plaques in patients with Alzheimers disease, this clearance did not prevent progressive neurodegeneration.

Efficacy of galantamine in probable vascular dementia and Alzheimer's disease combined with cerebrovascular disease: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND Vascular dementia is the second commonest form of dementia, and vascular factors contribute to the development of dementia in many patients with Alzheimers disease. Galantamine amplifies the acetylcholine response by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase and modulating nicotinic receptors. It has shown broad, sustained benefits in patients with Alzheimers disease. We investigated the effects of galantamine in patients with a diagnosis of probable vascular dementia or Alzheimers disease combined with cerebrovascular disease. METHODS Eligible patients were randomly assigned galantamine 24 mg/day (n=396) or placebo (n=196) in a multicentre, double-blind, 6-month trial. Primary endpoints were cognition (Alzheimers disease assessment scale, cognitive subscale [ADAS-cog]) and global functioning (clinicians interview-based impression of change plus caregiver input [CIBIC-plus]). Secondary endpoints included assessments of activities of daily living and behavioural symptoms. Patients were monitored for adverse events. Analyses were on the basis of observed case or last observation carried forward. FINDINGS Galantamine showed greater efficacy than placebo on ADAS-cog (galantamine change -1.7 [SE 0.4] vs placebo 1.0 [0.5]; treatment effect 2.7 points; p<0.0001) and CIBIC-plus (213 [74%] vs 95 [59%] patients remained stable or improved, p=0.0001). Activities of daily living and behavioural symptoms were also significantly improved compared with placebo (p=0.002 and p=0.016, respectively). Galantamine was well tolerated. INTERPRETATION Galantamine showed a therapeutic effect on all key areas of cognitive and non-cognitive abilities in this group of dementia patients.

Evaluation of the safety and immunogenicity of synthetic Aβ42 (AN1792) in patients with AD

Background: Aβ42-immunization reduces plaque burden and improves cognition in transgenic mouse models of Alzheimer disease (AD). This phase 1 study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of AN1792 (human aggregated Aβ42) in patients with mild to moderate AD. Methods: Twenty patients were enrolled into each of four dose groups and randomly assigned to receive IM AN1792 (50 or 225 μg) with QS-21 adjuvant (50 or 100 μg) or QS-21 only (control) in a 4:1 active:control ratio on day 0 and at weeks 4, 12, and 24. Patients could receive up to four additional injections of a polysorbate 80 modified formulation at weeks 36, 48, 60, and 72. Safety, tolerability, immunogenicity, and exploratory evidence of efficacy were evaluated. Results: Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 19 (23.8%) patients, but no relationship was observed between AN1792 dose and incidence. One patient developed meningoencephalitis that was diagnosed after death (not directly related to study treatment) and 219 days after discontinuing from the study. Five deaths occurred during the study follow-up, but none was considered to be directly related to study treatment. During the period of the first four injections, 23.4% of AN1792-treated patients had a positive anti-AN1792 antibody titer (an anti-AN1792 antibody titer of ≥1:1,000). This increased to 58.8% after additional injections with the modified formulation. Disability Assessment for Dementia scores showed less decline among active compared with control patients at week 84 (p = 0.002). No treatment differences were observed in three other efficacy measures. Conclusions: AN1792 + QS-21 elicited a positive antibody response to Aβ42 in more than half of this elderly study population.

Neuropsychiatric syndromes in dementia - Results from the European Alzheimer Disease Consortium: Part I

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to identify neuropsychiatric subsyndromes of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory in a large sample of outpatients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods: Cross-sectional data of 2,354 patients with AD from 12 centres from the European Alzheimer’s Disease Consortium were collected. Principal component analysis was used for factor analysis. Results: The results showed the presence of 4 neuropsychiatric subsyndromes: hyperactivity, psychosis, affective symptoms and apathy. The subsyndrome apathy was the most common, occurring in almost 65% of the patients. Conclusion: This large study has provided additional robust evidence for the existence of neuropsychiatric subsyndromes in AD.

Rivastigmine and donepezil treatment in moderate to moderately-severe Alzheimer's disease over a 2-year period

ABSTRACT Objectives: Randomised controlled trials that directly compare cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimers disease have been characterised by significant methodological limitations. As a consequence, they have failed to establish whether there are differences between agents in this class. To help address this question, a double-blind, randomised, controlled, multicentre trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of cholinesterase inhibitor treatment in patients with moderate to moderately-severe Alzheimers disease over a 2-year period. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to rivastigmine 3–12 mg/day or donepezil 5–10 mg/day. Efficacy measures comprised assessments of cognition, activities of daily living, global functioning and behavioural symptoms. Safety and tolerability assessments included adverse events and measurement of vital signs. Results: In total, 994 patients received cholinesterase inhibitor treatment (rivastigmine, n = 495; donepezil, n = 499), and 57.9% of patients completed the study. The most frequent reason for premature discontinuation in both treatment groups was adverse events, primarily gastrointestinal. Adverse events were more frequent in the rivastigmine group during the titration phase, but similar in the maintenance phase. Serious adverse events were reported by 31.7% of rivastigmine- and 32.5% of donepezil-treated patients, respectively. Rivastigmine and donepezil had similar effects on measures of cognition and behaviour, but rivastigmine showed a statistically significant advantage on measures of activities of daily living and global functioning in the ITT–LOCF population. However, this was not maintained in the non-ITT–LOCF populations. In secondary sub-group analyses, AD patients who had genotypes that encoded for full expression of the butyrylcholinesterase enzyme (BuChE wt/wt; n = 226/340), who were < 75 years of age (n = 362/994) or who had symptoms suggestive of concomitant Lewy body disease (n = 49/994) showed significantly greater benefits from rivastigmine treatment. Conclusions: Cholinesterase inhibitor treatment may offer continued therapeutic benefit for up to 2 years in patients with moderate AD. Although both drugs performed similarly on cognition and behaviour, rivastigmine may provide greater benefit in activities of daily living and global functioning.

A Long-Term Comparison of Galantamine and Donepezil in the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease

ObjectiveTo compare the long-term efficacy and safety of galantamine 24 mg/day and donepezil 10 mg/day in patients with Alzheimer’s disease.Patients and Study DesignThis was a rater-blinded, randomised, parallel-group multicentre study (18 outpatient clinics) in the UK. 182 patients (69 male, 113 female) with Alzheimer’s disease were randomised to galantamine (n = 94) or donepezil (n = 88) for 52 weeks.Main outcome measuresThe effects of galantamine and donepezil on function using the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BrADL); cognition using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog/11); behaviour using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI); caregiver burden using the Screen for Caregiver Burden; and safety were assessed.ResultsBrADL total scores showed no significant difference between treatment groups in mean change from baseline to week 52. In the total population, in terms of cognition, galantamine patients’ scores on the MMSE at week 52 did not differ significantly from baseline (−0.52 ± 0.39, p < 0.5 vs baseline), whereas donepezil patients’ scores deteriorated significantly from baseline (−1.58 ± 0.42, p < 0.0005 vs baseline). The between-group difference in MMSE change, which showed a trend for superiority of galantamine, did not reach statistical significance (p < 0.1). In the ADAS-cog/11 analysis, between-group differences for the total population were not significant, whereas galantamine-treated patients with MMSE scores of 12–18 demonstrated an increase (worsening) in the ADAS-cog/11 score of 1.61 ± 0.80 versus baseline, compared with an increase of 4.08 ± 0.84 for patients treated with donepezil, with a significant between-group difference in favour of galantamine (p ≤ 0.05). More caregivers of patients receiving galantamine reported reductions in burden compared with donepezil. Changes from baseline in NPI were similar for both treatments.Both treatments were well tolerated; most adverse events were transient and of mild-to-moderate intensity, and were consistent with the findings of previous clinical trials.ConclusionsSignificant advantages were found in the treatment response to galantamine (versus donepezil) on cognition as measured by response rates on the MMSE and ADAS-cog/11.

Consistency of Neuropsychiatric Syndromes across Dementias: Results from the European Alzheimer Disease Consortium

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the consistency of neuropsychiatric subsyndromes of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory across several clinical and demographic subgroups (e.g. dementia subtypes, dementia severity, medication use, age and gender) in a large sample of outpatients with dementia. Methods: Cross-sectional data of 2,808 patients with dementia from 12 centres from the European Alzheimer’s Disease Consortium were collected. Principal component analysis was used for factor analysis. Subanalyses were performed for dementia subtypes, dementia severity, medication use, age and gender. Results: The results showed the relatively consistent presence of the 4 neuropsychiatric subsyndromes ‘hyperactivity’, ‘psychosis’, ‘affective symptoms’ and ‘apathy’ across the subanalyses. The factor structure was not dependent on dementia subtypes, age and gender but was dependent on dementia severity and cholinesterase use. The factors hyperactivity and affective symptoms were present in all subanalyses, but the presence of the factors apathy and psychosis was dependent on use of cholinesterase inhibitors and dementia severity, respectively. Conclusion: The present study provided evidence of the relative consistency of neuropsychiatric subsyndromes across dementia subtypes, age and gender, thereby stressing the importance of thinking about neuropsychiatric subsyndromes instead of separate symptoms. However, the subsyndromes apathy and psychosis were dependent on use of cholinesterase inhibitors and dementia severity.

Mild cognitive impairment and deficits in instrumental activities of daily living: a systematic review

IntroductionThere is a growing body of evidence that subtle deficits in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) may be present in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, it is not clear if there are IADL domains that are consistently affected across patients with MCI. In this systematic review, therefore, we aimed to summarize research results regarding the performance of MCI patients in specific IADL (sub)domains compared with persons who are cognitively normal and/or patients with dementia.MethodsThe databases PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science were searched for relevant literature in December 2013. Publications from 1999 onward were considered for inclusion. Altogether, 497 articles were retrieved. Reference lists of selected articles were searched for potentially relevant articles. After screening the abstracts of these 497 articles, 37 articles were included in this review.ResultsIn 35 studies, IADL deficits (such as problems with medication intake, telephone use, keeping appointments, finding things at home and using everyday technology) were documented in patients with MCI. Financial capacity in patients with MCI was affected in the majority of studies. Effect sizes for group differences between patients with MCI and healthy controls were predominantly moderate to large. Performance-based instruments showed slight advantages (in terms of effect sizes) in detecting group differences in IADL functioning between patients with MCI, patients with Alzheimer’s disease and healthy controls.ConclusionIADL requiring higher neuropsychological functioning seem to be most severely affected in patients with MCI. A reliable identification of such deficits is necessary, as patients with MCI with IADL deficits seem to have a higher risk of converting to dementia than patients with MCI without IADL deficits. The use of assessment tools specifically designed and validated for patients with MCI is therefore strongly recommended. Furthermore, the development of performance-based assessment instruments should be intensified, as they allow a valid and reliable assessment of subtle IADL deficits in MCI, even if a proxy is not available. Another important point to consider when designing new scales is the inclusion of technology-associated IADL. Novel instruments for clinical practice should be time-efficient and easy to administer.

Memantine for dementia in adults older than 40 years with Down's syndrome (MEADOWS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Prevalence of Alzheimers disease in people with Downs syndrome is very high, and many such individuals who are older than 40 years have pathological changes characteristic of Alzheimers disease. Evidence to support treatment with Alzheimers drugs is inadequate, although memantine is beneficial in transgenic mice. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of memantine on cognition and function in individuals with Downs syndrome. METHODS In our prospective randomised double-blind trial, we enrolled adults (>40 years) with karyotypic or clinically diagnosed Downs syndrome, with and without dementia, at four learning disability centres in the UK and Norway. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) to receive memantine or placebo for 52 weeks by use of a computer-generated sequence and a minimisation algorithm to ensure balanced allocation for five prognostic factors (sex, dementia, age group, total Downs syndrome attention, memory, and executive function scales [DAMES] score, and centre). The primary outcome was change in cognition and function, measured with DAMES scores and the adaptive behaviour scale (ABS) parts I and II. We analysed differences in DAMES and ABS scores between groups with analyses of covariance or quantile regression in all patients who completed the 52 week assessment and had available follow-up data. This study is registered, number ISRCTN47562898. FINDINGS We randomly allocated 88 patients to receive memantine (72 [82%] had DAMES data and 75 [85%] had ABS data at 52 weeks) and 85 to receive placebo (74 [87%] and 73 [86%]). Both groups declined in cognition and function but rates did not differ between groups for any outcomes. After adjustment for baseline score, there were non-significant differences between groups of -4·1 (95% CI -13·1 to 4·8) in DAMES scores, -8·5 (-20·1 to 3·1) in ABS I scores, and 2·0 (-7·2 to 11·3) in ABS II scores, all in favour of controls. 10 (11%) of 88 participants in the memantine group and six (7%) of 85 controls had serious adverse events (p=0·33). Five participants in the memantine group and four controls died from serious adverse events (p=0·77). INTERPRETATION There is a striking absence of evidence about pharmacological treatment of cognitive impairment and dementia in people older than 40 years with Downs syndrome. Despite promising indications, memantine is not an effective treatment. Therapies that are effective for Alzheimers disease are not necessarily effective in this group of patients. FUNDING Lundbeck.

Hip fracture risk and subsequent mortality among Alzheimer's disease patients in the United Kingdom, 1988–2007

BACKGROUND hip fractures result in a significant burden to the patient, their caregivers and the health care system. Patients with Alzheimers disease (AD) have a higher incidence of hip fracture compared with other older people without AD, although it is not clear if AD is an independent risk factor for hip fracture. METHODS a retrospective cohort study was conducted using anonymised electronic medical records from primary care practices in the United Kingdom. Proportional hazards regression modelling with adjustment for potential confounders was used to evaluate AD as an independent risk factor for predicting hip fractures. RESULTS the incidence of hip fracture among patients with and without AD was 17.4 (95% CI, 15.7-19.2) and 6.6 (95% CI, 5.8-7.6) per 1,000 person years, respectively. Patients with AD had a hazard that was 3.2 (95% CI, 2.4-4.2) times that of non-AD patients after controlling for potential confounders. AD patients who experienced a hip fracture also had an increased mortality rate compared with non-AD patients who experienced a hip fracture (hazard ratio = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9). CONCLUSION patients with AD and their caregivers should be advised on how to prevent hip fractures and more attention should be given to AD patients who are undergoing rehabilitation following a hip fracture.