Shinji Matsunaga

Combination Therapy with Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: We performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of combination therapy with cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Methods: We reviewed cognitive function, activities of daily living, behavioral disturbance, global assessment, discontinuation rate, and individual side effects. Results: Seven studies (total n=2182) were identified. Combination therapy significantly affected behavioral disturbance scores (standardized mean difference=−0.13), activity of daily living scores (standardized mean difference=−0.10), and global assessment scores (standardized mean difference=−0.15). In addition, cognitive function scores (standardized mean difference=−0.13, P=.06) exhibited favorable trends with combination therapy. The effects of combination therapy were more significant in the moderate-to-severe Alzheimer’s disease subgroup in terms of all efficacy outcome scores. The discontinuation rate was similar in both groups, and there were no significant differences in individual side effects. Conclusions: Combination therapy was beneficial for the treatment of moderate-to-severe Alzheimer’s disease in terms of cognition, behavioral disturbances, activities of daily living, and global assessment was well tolerated.

Suvorexant for Primary Insomnia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.

Objective We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials evaluating suvorexant for primary insomnia. Methods Relevant studies were identified through searches of PubMed, databases of the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO citations through June 27, 2015. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of suvorexant trial efficacy and safety outcomes. The primary efficacy outcomes were either subjective total sleep time (sTST) or subjective time-to-sleep onset (sTSO) at 1 month. The secondary outcomes were other efficacy outcomes, discontinuation rate, and individual adverse events. The risk ratio, number-needed-to-treat/harm, and weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on a random effects model were calculated. Results The computerized literature database search initially yielded 48 results, from which 37 articles were excluded following a review of titles and abstracts and another eight review articles after full-text review. Thus, we identified 4 trials that included a total of 3,076 patients. Suvorexant was superior to placebo with regard to the two primary efficacy outcomes (sTST: WMD = −20.16, 95% CI = −25.01 to −15.30, 1889 patients, 3 trials, sTSO: WMD = −7.62, 95% CI = −11.03 to −4.21, 1889 patients, 3 trials) and was not different from placebo in trial discontinuations. Suvorexant caused a higher incidence than placebo of at least one side effects, abnormal dreams, somnolence, excessive daytime sleepiness/sedation, fatigue, dry mouth, and rebound insomnia. Conclusions Our analysis of published trial results suggests that suvorexant is effective in treating primary insomnia and is well-tolerated.

Antipsychotic medications for the treatment of delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Objectives We performed an updated meta-analysis of antipsychotic treatment in patients with delirium, based on a previous meta-analysis published in 2007. Methods Included in this study were randomised, placebo-controlled or usual care (UC) controlled trials of antipsychotics in adult patients with delirium. Our primary outcome measure was response rate at the study end point. The secondary outcome measures included improvement of severity of delirium, Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S), time to response (TTR), discontinuation rate and individual adverse effects. The risk ratio (RR), the number-needed-to-treat/harm (NNT/NNH), 95% CIs and standardised mean difference (SMD), were calculated. Results We identified 15 studies (mean duration: 9.8 days) for the systematic review (total n=949, amisulpride=20, aripiprazole=8, chlorpromazine=13, haloperidol=316, intramuscular olanzapine or haloperidol injection=62, olanzapine=144, placebo=75, quetiapine=125, risperidone=124, UC=30 and ziprasidone=32), 4 of which were conference abstracts and unpublished. When pooled as a group, antipsychotics were superior to placebo/UC in terms of response rate (RR=0.22, NNT=2), delirium severity scales scores (SMD=−1.27), CGI-S scores (SMD=−1.57) and TTR (SMD=−1.22). The pooled antipsychotic group was associated with a higher incidence of dry mouth (RR=13.0, NNH=5) and sedation (RR=4.59, NNH=5) compared with placebo/UC. Pooled second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) were associated with shorter TTR (SMD=−0.27) and a lower incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms (RR=0.31, NNH=7) compared with haloperidol. Conclusions Our results suggested that SGAs have a benefit for the treatment of delirium with regard to efficacy and safety compared with haloperidol. However, further study using larger samples is required.

Lithium as a Treatment for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND This is the first meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials testing lithium as a treatment for patients with Alzheimers disease (AD) and individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS The primary outcome measure was efficacy on cognitive performance as measured through the Alzheimers Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale or the Mini-Mental State Examination. Other outcome measures were drug discontinuation rate, individual side effects, and biological markers (phosphorylated tau 181, total tau, and amyloid-β42) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). RESULTS Three clinical trials including 232 participants that met the studys inclusion criteria were identified. Lithium significantly decreased cognitive decline as compared to placebo (standardized mean difference = -0.41, 95% confidence interval = -0.81 to -0.02, p = 0.04, I2 = 47% , 3 studies, n = 199). There were no significant differences in the rate of attrition, discontinuation due to all causes or adverse events, or CSF biomarkers between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS The results indicate that lithium treatment may have beneficial effects on cognitive performance in subjects with MCI and AD dementia.

Serotonin 2A Receptor Inverse Agonist as a Treatment for Parkinson's Disease Psychosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Serotonin 2A Receptor Negative Modulators

BACKGROUND There is uncertainty about the efficacy and tolerability of serotonin 2A (5-HT2A) receptor negative modulators for Parkinsons disease psychosis (PDP). OBJECTIVE This is the first meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) testing negative modulators of the 5-HT2A receptor as a treatment for PDP. METHODS The primary outcome was the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS)-hallucinations (H) and -delusions (D) scores (SAPS-H+D). Other outcome measures were SAPS-H, SAPS-D, the Unified Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale Part II and III (UPDRS-II+III), discontinuation rates, and individual adverse events. RESULTS Four RCTs were identified that met inclusion criteria, all assessing the 5-HT2A inverse agonist pimavanserin (including 417 drug-treated and 263 placebo-treated PDP patients). Pimavanserin significantly decreased SAPS-H+D scores compared to placebo [weighted mean differences (WMD) = -2.26, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = -3.86 to -0.67, p = 0.005, I2 = 30% , N = 4 studies, n = 502 patients]. Moreover, pimavanserin was superior to placebo for reducing SAPS-H (WMD = -2.15, 95% CI = -3.45 to -0.86, p = 0.001, I2 = 0% , N = 2, n = 237) and SAPS-D scores (WMD = -1.32, 95% CI = -2.32 to -0.32, p = 0.010, I2 = 0% , N = 2, n = 237). Pimavanserin was associated with less orthostatic hypotension than placebo (risk ratio = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.15-0.75, p = 0.008, I2 = 0% , number needed to harm = 17, p = 0.01, N = 3, n = 476). There were no significant differences in rates of all-cause discontinuation, adverse events, and death, UPDRS-II+III scores, and incidences of individual adverse events (other than orthostatic hypotension) between pimavanserin and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS Pooled RCT results suggest that pimavanserin is beneficial for the treatment of PDP and is well tolerated. We did not identify other negative modulators of the 5-HT2A receptor for the treatment of PDP.

An evaluation of polymorphisms in casein kinase 1 delta and epsilon genes in major psychiatric disorders

Disturbances of the circadian rhythm are involved in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder (BD), schizophrenia (SCZ) and major depressive disorder (MDD). Specifically, because clock gene dysfunction is good candidate for enhancing the susceptibility to these psychiatric disorders, we selected two circadian rhythm-related genes (CSNK1D and CSNK1E) and investigated genetic associations of the genes with these three disorders. None of the SNPs showed a significant association with MDD, but a SNP (rs2075984) in CSNK1E and SNP (rs6502097) in CSNK1D were associated with SCZ (P=0.0091, uncorrected) and BD (P=0.030, uncorrected), respectively. To confirm these findings, we analyzed an independent dataset (maximum N=3815) but found a lack of association (P=0.63 for rs2075984 and P=0.61 for rs6502097). The final meta-analysis showed no association between these SNPs with SCZ (P=0.21) and BD (P=0.53). These results do not support that genetic variation in CSNK1D and CSNK1E is a susceptibility factor for major psychiatric disorders in the Japanese population.

Possible association between ubiquitin-specific peptidase 46 gene and major depressive disorders in the Japanese population.

BACKGROUND Several investigations have reported that abnormalities in circadian rhythms might be related to the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD) and the therapeutic response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Recently, ubiquitin-specific peptidase 46 (USP46), a new molecule related to the circadian clock system, has been described. We conducted a case control study between seven tagging SNPs (rs10517263, rs17675844, rs6554557, rs12646800, rs2244291, rs10034164, rs346005) in the USP46 gene, MDD, and the SSRI therapeutic response in MDD in the Japanese population. METHOD We recruited 432 MDD patients (202 males and 230 females) and 792 healthy controls (319 males and 473 females). Two hundred sixty-one of 432 MDD patients were treated with SSRIs (fluvoxamine, sertraline or paroxetine). RESULT We detected an association between the USP46 gene and MDD in a haplotype analysis (rs2244291-rs10034164-rs346005 and rs12646800-rs2244291-rs10034164-rs346005). However, we did not find any association between the USP46 gene and SSRI response or remission in MDD in the Japanese population. LIMITATIONS A replication study using larger samples may be required for conclusive results, since our sample size was small. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that the USP46 gene might play a role in the pathophysiology of MDD in the Japanese population.

Intramuscular olanzapine for agitated patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intramuscular (IM)-olanzapine (OLA-IM) versus controls in agitated patients. The risk ratio, number-needed-to-treat/harm, and standardized mean difference based on a random effects model were calculated. We identified 13 RCTs (19 comparisons) as follows: 7 comparisons with 1059 patients for OLA-IM versus placebo; 5 comparisons with 613 patients for OLA-IM versus haloperidol (HAL)-IM; 2 comparisons with 108 patients for OLA-IM versus ziprasidone (ZIP)-IM; 2 comparisons with 110 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus midazolam; and 3 comparisons with 412 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus promethazine, 2 comparisons with 355 patients for OLA-IM versus lorazepam-IM (LOR-IM); and 1 comparison with 67 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus LOR-IM. OLA-IM was superior to placebo in both Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) and Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES) scores 2 h after first injection, and had a comparable side effect profile, including over sedation, extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, and anticholinergic use. While there was no significant difference in PANSS-EC scores after 2 h between OLA-IM and HAL-IM, OLA-IM outperformed HAL-IM in ACES after 2 h. Compared with HAL-IM, OLA-IM was associated with fewer side effects, including anticholinergic use, akathisia, extrapyramidal symptoms, and dystonia, and marginally less QT prolongation compared with HAL-IM. Based on our findings, OLA-IM is preferable to HAL-IM for the treatment of agitated patients. However, comparator data for ZIP-IM, LOR-IM and HAL-IM combination therapy were insufficient.

Memantine for Alzheimer's Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND The clinical benefit of memantine for Alzheimers disease (AD) remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy/safety of memantine in AD. METHODS We included randomized trials of memantine for AD patients. Cognitive function scores (CF), behavioral disturbances scores (BD), and all-cause discontinuation were used as primary measures. Effect size based on a random-effects model was evaluated in the meta-analyses. RESULTS Thirty studies (n = 7,567; memantine versus placebo: N = 11, n = 3,298; memantine + cholinesterase inhibitors (M+ChEIs) versus ChEIs: N = 17, n = 4,175) were identified. Memantine showed a significant improvement in CF [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.24, 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) = -0.34, -0.15, p < 0.00001, I2 = 35% ] and BD (SMD = -0.16, 95% CIs = -0.29, -0.04, p = 0.01, I2 = 52%) compared with placebo. In the sensitivity analysis including only patients with moderate-severe AD, memantine was superior to the placebo in reducing BD without considerable heterogeneity (SMD = -0.20, 95% CIs = -0.34, -0.07, p = 0.003, I2 = 36%). Compared with ChEIs, M+ChEIs showed a greater reduction in BD (SMD = -0.20, 95% CIs = -0.36, -0.03, p = 0.02, I2 = 77%) and a trend of CF improvement (SMD = -0.11, 95% CIs = -0.22, 0.01, p = 0.06, I2 = 56%). However, in the sensitivity analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled studies only, M+ChEIs showed a significant reduction in BD compared with ChEIs without considerable heterogeneity (SMD = -0.11, 95% CIs = -0.21, -0.01, p = 0.04, I2 = 40%). When performing the sensitivity analysis of donepezil studies only, M+ChEIs was superior to ChEIs in improving CF without considerable heterogeneity (SMD = -0.18, 95% CIs = -0.31, -0.05, p = 0.006, I2 = 49%). No differences were detected in all-cause discontinuation between the groups. CONCLUSIONS The meta-analyses suggest the credible efficacy and safety of memantine in treating AD when used alone or in combination with ChEIs.

Cholinesterase Inhibitors for Lewy Body Disorders: A Meta-Analysis

Background: We performed a meta-analysis of cholinesterase inhibitors for patients with Lewy body disorders, such as Parkinson’s disease, Parkinson’s disease dementia, and dementia with Lewy bodies. Methods: The meta-analysis included only randomized controlled trials of cholinesterase inhibitors for Lewy body disorders. Results: Seventeen studies (n = 1798) were assessed. Cholinesterase inhibitors significantly improved cognitive function (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −0.53], behavioral disturbances (SMD = −0.28), activities of daily living (SMD = −0.28), and global function (SMD = −0.52) compared with control treatments. Changes in motor function were not significantly different from control treatments. Furthermore, the cholinesterase inhibitor group had a higher all-cause discontinuation (risk ratio [RR] = 1.48, number needed to harm [NNH] = 14), discontinuation due to adverse events (RR = 1.59, NNH = 20), at least one adverse event (RR = 1.13, NNH = 11), nausea (RR = 2.50, NNH = 13), and tremor (RR = 2.30, NNH = 20). Conclusions: Cholinesterase inhibitors appear beneficial for the treatment of Lewy body disorders without detrimental effects on motor function. However, a careful monitoring of treatment compliance and side effects is required.