ArticleDementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra
Effectiveness and Safety of MLC601 in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of medications in controlling cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer's : a systematic review.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2025Review
- Traditional East Asian Herbal Medicine Treatment for Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- TheAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2019Article
- MLC601 in vascular dementia: an efficacy and safety pilot study.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2017Article
- The NeuroAiD Safe Treatment (NeST) Registry: a protocol.BMJ open · 2015Observational
- Efficacy and Safety of MLC601 in Patients with Mild to Moderate Alzheimer Disease: An Extension 4-Year Follow-Up Study.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extraArticle
- Efficacy and Safety of MLC601 in the Treatment of Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Pilot, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMLC601 is a possible modulator of amyloid precursor protein processing, and in a clinical trial study MLC601 showed some effectiveness in cognitive function in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of MLC601 in the treatment of mild to moderate AD as compared to 3 approved cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) including donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine.
methodsIn a multicenter, nonblinded, randomized controlled trial, 264 volunteers with AD were randomly divided into 4 groups of 66; groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 received donepezil, rivastigmine, MLC601 and galantamine, respectively. Subjects underwent a clinical diagnostic interview and a cognitive/functional battery including the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog). Patients were visited every 4 months, and the score of cognition was recorded by the neurologists.
resultsThere were no significant differences in age, sex, marital status and baseline score of cognition among the 4 groups. In total, 39 patients (14.7%) left the study. Trend of cognition changes based on the modifications over the time for MMSE and ADAS-cog scores did not differ significantly among groups (p = 0.92 for MMSE and p = 0.87 for ADAS-Cog).
conclusionMLC601 showed a promising safety profile and also efficacy compared to 3 FDA-approved ChEIs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.