Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,004

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A 30-week randomized controlled trial of high-dose tacrine in patients with Alzheimer's disease. The Tacrine Study Group

M. J. Knapp·1994·JAMA

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose tacrine hydrochloride over 30 weeks in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease. DESIGN: A 30-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. SETTING: Outpatients at 33 US centers. PATIENTS: Men and women at least 50 years of age with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and otherwise in good health. INTERVENTIONS: Group 1 received placebo; group 2 received 40 mg/d of tacrine for 6 weeks, then 80 mg/d for 24 weeks; groups 3 and 4 received 40 mg/d of tacrine for 6 weeks, 80 mg/d for 6 weeks, and 120 mg/d for 6 weeks. Group 3 remained on a dosage of 120 mg/d for a total of 18 weeks; after 6 weeks at 120 mg/d, group 4 titrated to 160 mg/d for the last 12 weeks. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinician Interview-Based Impression (CIBI), Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale--Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog), and Final Comprehensive Consensus Assessment (FCCA). RESULTS: A total of 663 patients entered the study; 653 patients were included in an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis; 263 had evaluable data at 30 weeks. The results of the ITT analysis revealed significant (P < or = .05) dose-response trends and between-group comparisons on CIBI and ADAS-Cog. In evaluable patients, significant dose-response trends were observed for all three primary measures (P < or = .001). Significant differences in favor of 160 mg/d of tacrine vs placebo were observed on the CIBI (P < or = .002) and ADAS-Cog and FCCA (P < or = .001), as well as caregiver-global and quality-of-life assessments (P < or = .05). On the CIBI, 23% and 42% of tacrine-treated patients in the ITT and evaluable-patient populations, respectively, were rated improved compared with 17% and 18% of placebo patients, respectively. The primary reasons for withdrawal of tacrine-treated patients were asymptomatic liver transaminase elevations (28%) and gastrointestinal complaints (16%). These adverse events were reversible on discontinuation of treatment, and many patients were able to restart tacrine. CONCLUSIONS: Tacrine produced statistically significant, dose-related improvements on objective performance-based tests, clinician- and caregiver-rated global evaluations, and measures of quality of life. There was no evidence that the large number of patient withdrawals biased the overall conclusions of the study.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1001/jama.271.13.985

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,004

Metadata

Authors
Knapp, M. J.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1994-04-06
Volume
271
Issue
13
Pages
985
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W4233035841
Cited by
1,004
References
2
FWCI
77.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A 30-week randomized controlled trial of high-dose tacrine in patients with Alzheimer's disease. The Tacrine Study Group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.271.13.985
The paper
Knapp, M. J. (1994). A 30-week randomized controlled trial of high-dose tacrine in patients with Alzheimer's disease. The Tacrine Study Group. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.271.13.985

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.