Cited by 80Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative DiseasesDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatments

The comparative efficacy and safety of cholinesterase inhibitors in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

Open access
Kobayashi, Hisanori, Ohnishi, Takashi, Nakagawa, Ryoko, Yoshizawa, Kazutake·2016·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Comparative evidence for efficacy and safety of second-generation cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) is still sparse. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this research is to compare three ChEIs, donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine, in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review for published articles and included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and head-to-head randomised trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of ChEIs in patients with AD. We examined Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus caregiver's input (CIBIC+) and Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) as efficacy endpoints. Withdrawals due to adverse events and number of patients experiencing nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and dizziness were examined as safety profiles. Network meta-analyses were sequentially performed for efficacy and safety outcomes based on drug/dose treatment conditions. RESULTS: Among the 21 trials included, network meta-analysis showed that all treatments were significantly more efficacious than placebo in cognition measured by ADAS-Cog. All treatments except galantamine were significantly more efficacious than placebo in global change in CIBIC+ or CGIC. Across all conditions, no significant efficacy was observed in neuropsychiatric symptoms measured by NPI. Derived hierarchies in the efficacy of treatment conditions were variables across efficacy and safety. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis is the first attempt to incorporate available direct and indirect evidence. The results suggest that ChEIs should have significant efficacy for cognition and global change assessment, but the efficacy on neuropsychiatric symptoms is questionable in patients with mild-to-moderate AD.

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

Crossref · 10.1002/gps.4405

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rabins PV, Blacker D, Rovner BW, et al. 2007 American Psychiatric Association practice guideline for the treatment of patients with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. Second edition. Am J Psychiatry 164: 5– 56. 18340692

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kobayashi, H., Ohnishi, T., Nakagawa, R., & Yoshizawa, K.
Affiliations
Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K. (Japan) (JP)
Corresponding author
Ohnishi, Takashi
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-12-17
Volume
31
Issue
8
Pages
892-904
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
OpenAlex
W2197001618
Cited by
79
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3
FWCI
0.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K. of Johnson & Johnson
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Keywords
cholinesterase inhibitors, Alzheimer's disease, donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, cognitive function, neuropsychiatric symptoms, treatment efficacy, drug safety, adverse events, mild to moderate dementia
MeSH terms
Rivastigmine, Network Meta-Analysis, Donepezil, Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Bayes Theorem, Cholinesterase Inhibitors, Cognition, Female, Galantamine, Humans, Indans, Male, Middle Aged, Piperidines, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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