SynthesisClinical and experimental medicine2025
Donepezil for cancer-related cognitive impairment: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment, part 2: from bench to bedside-and back: why candidate therapies for cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment fail to translate.Pharmacological reports : PR · 2026Review
- Neuro-immune crosstalk in the tumor microenvironment: mechanisms and therapeutic implications for cancer immunotherapy.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2026Review
- Review
- Chemobrain as a Neuroimmune Syndrome: Mechanisms, Modifiers, and Emerging Multi-Target Therapeutic Strategies.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Risk factors and gender disparity of cognitive impairment among cancer and neurological diseases regarding rural West Texas.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) affects a significant proportion of cancer patients and survivors, impacting their memory, focus, mood, and quality of life. While non-pharmacological interventions have shown effectiveness in managing this condition, some studies have also explored various pharmacological agents, including donepezil, a reversible acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. This compound demonstrated beneficial effects on cognition in Alzheimer's disease; however, its effectiveness in CRCI remains unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of donepezil in improving cognitive outcomes in cancer patients. We conducted a search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Both randomized controlled trials and observational studies were included. We extracted data on cognitive outcomes of donepezil treatment, including the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R), Trail Making Test (TMT), and Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWA), as well as reported adverse events (AEs). Out of 896 identified records, nine studies involving 837 patients met the inclusion criteria, including five RCTs and four observational studies. Donepezil failed to demonstrate significant improvements in cognitive outcomes in HVLT-R, TMT, and COWA. Fatigue, measured as a secondary outcome, also showed no significant improvement. AEs, such as insomnia and headache, were more prevalent in adults than children. Donepezil did not increase the risk of AEs compared to placebo. This meta-analysis found that donepezil does not provide cognitive improvements for CRCI patients. Given the complex and multifactorial nature of CRCI, the lack of efficacy suggests that donepezil may not address the underlying mechanisms of the condition.
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.