Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31435707›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2019

Study of the strength of the evidence and the redundancy of the research on pharmacological treatment for Alzheimer's disease: a cumulative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Lídia Blanco-Silvente, Xavier Castells, Josep Garre-Olmo, Joan Vilalta-Franch, Marc Saez, Maria Antònia Barceló, Dolors Capellà

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lídia Blanco-SilventeTransLab Research Group, University of Girona, Emili Grahit, 77, 17003, Girona, Spain.
Xavier CastellsTransLab Research Group, University of Girona, Emili Grahit, 77, 17003, Girona, Spain. xavier.castells@udg.edu.
Josep Garre-OlmoDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Girona, Emili Grahit, 77, 17003, Girona, Spain.
Joan Vilalta-FranchDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Girona, Emili Grahit, 77, 17003, Girona, Spain.
Marc SaezResearch Group on Statistics, Econometrics and Health, Universitat de Girona, C. de la Universitat de Girona 1, 17003, Girona, Spain.
Maria Antònia BarcelóResearch Group on Statistics, Econometrics and Health, Universitat de Girona, C. de la Universitat de Girona 1, 17003, Girona, Spain.
Dolors CapellàTransLab Research Group, University of Girona, Emili Grahit, 77, 17003, Girona, Spain.
University of Girona · ESInstitut d'Investigació Biomèdica de Girona · ES

Funding

University of Girona IFUdG2015/17University of Girona MPCUdG2016/ref50
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo study the strength of the evidence on efficacy, safety and acceptability of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI) and memantine for Alzheimer's disease (AD); and to determine the number of redundant post-authorisation trials.

methodsA cumulative meta-analysis with a trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed. Primary outcomes were cognitive function assessed with ADAS-cog or SIB scales, discontinuation due to adverse events (AE) and discontinuation for any reason. The redundancy of post-authorisation clinical trials was studied by determining the novel aspects of each study on patient, intervention, comparator and trial outcome characteristics. Two criteria of futile trial (lenient and strict) were used.

resultsA total of 63 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) (16,576 patients) were included. It was conclusive that neither ChEI nor memantine achieved clinically significant improvement in cognitive function. In relation to safety, there was sufficient evidence to conclude that donepezil caused a clinically relevant increase on dropouts due to AE whereas the evidence was inconclusive for the remaining interventions. Regarding acceptability, it was conclusive that no ChEI improved treatment discontinuation while it was uncertain for memantine. The proportion of redundant trials was 5.6% with the lenient criteria and 42.6% with the strict one.

conclusionsThe evidence is conclusive that ChEI and memantine do not achieve clinically significant symptomatic improvement in AD while the acceptability of ChEI is unsatisfactory. Although evidence on the safety of pharmacological interventions for AD and acceptability of memantine is inconclusive, no further RCTs are needed as their efficacy is not clinically relevant. Redundant trials were identified but their number depends on the criteria of futility used.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingAlzheimer DiseaseCholinesterase InhibitorsCognitionEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMemantineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCholinesterase InhibitorsMemantineAlzheimer’s diseaseCholinesterase inhibitorsCumulative meta-analysisMemantineRedundant researchTrial sequential analysis

Identifiers

PMID31435707
OpenAlexW2969831920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.