Browsing by Author "Meng, Xiangyi"

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A 24-Week, Open-Label Extension Study to Investigate the Long-term Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of 13.3 mg/24 h Rivastigmine Patch in Patients With Severe Alzheimer Disease
    (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2015-04) Farlow, Martin R.; Grossberg, George T.; Sadowsky, Carl H.; Meng, Xiangyi; Velting, Drew M.; Department of Neurology, IU School of Medicine
    The long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of high-dose 13.3 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch in severe Alzheimer disease was evaluated in a 24-week, open-label extension to the double-blind ACTION study. Safety and tolerability, and efficacy on the Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living scale-Severe Impairment Version (ADCS-ADL-SIV), Severe Impairment Battery (SIB), and ADCS-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) were assessed. Overall, 197 patients continued on 13.3 mg/24 h patch; 199 uptitrated from 4.6 mg/24 h to 13.3 mg/24 h patch. The incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs was similar in patients who continued on, and patients who uptitrated to, 13.3 mg/24 h patch (AEs: 57.9% and 59.8%; serious AEs: 16.2% and 16.1%; discontinuations: 11.2% and 12.1%, respectively). Larger mean changes from double-blind baseline were observed in patients uptitrated on the ADCS-ADL-SIV (−4.6; SD=8.7) and SIB (−7.0; SD=16.6), than those who continued on 13.3 mg/24 h patch (−3.9; SD=8.0 and −4.7; SD=16.8, respectively). ADCS-CGIC scores were comparable. There were no clinically relevant between-group differences in safety and tolerability. Greater decline was observed in patients with delayed uptitration to high-dose 13.3 mg/24 h patch than patients who continued on high-dose patch.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A 24-week, randomized, controlled trial of rivastigmine patch 13.3 mg/24 h versus 4.6 mg/24 h in severe Alzheimer's dementia
    (Wiley Blackwell (Blackwell Publishing), 2013-10) Farlow, Martin R.; Grossberg, George T.; Sadowsky, Carl H.; Meng, Xiangyi; Somogyi, Monique; Department of Neurology, IU School of Medicine
    AIMS: The 24-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind ACTION study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 13.3 versus 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch in patients with severe Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Patients had probable AD and Mini-Mental State Examination scores ≥3-≤12. Primary outcome measures were as follows: Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) and AD Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living scale-Severe Impairment Version (ADCS-ADL-SIV). Secondary outcomes were as follows: ADCS-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC), 12-item Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-12), and safety/tolerability. RESULTS: Of 1014 patients screened, 716 were randomized to 13.3 mg/24 h (N = 356) or 4.6 mg/24 h (N = 360) patch. Baseline characteristics/demographics were comparable. Completion rates were as follows: 64.3% (N = 229) with 13.3 mg/24 h and 65.0% (N = 234) with 4.6 mg/24 h patch. The 13.3 mg/24 h patch was significantly superior to 4.6 mg/24 h patch on cognition (SIB) and function (ADCS-ADL-SIV) at Week 16 (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.049, respectively) and 24 (primary endpoint; P < 0.0001 and P = 0.025). Significant between-group differences (Week 24) were observed on the ADCS-CGIC (P = 0.0023), not NPI-12 (P = 0.1437). A similar proportion of the 13.3 mg/24 h and 4.6 mg/24 h patch groups reported adverse events (AEs; 74.6% and 73.3%, respectively) and serious AEs (14.9% and 13.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The 13.3 mg/24 h patch demonstrated superior efficacy to 4.6 mg/24 h patch on SIB and ADCS-ADL-SIV, without marked increase in AEs, suggesting higher-dose patch has a favorable benefit-to-risk profile in severe AD.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparing Clinical Profiles in Alzheimer's Disease and Parkinson's Disease Dementia
    (Karger, 2013-09-11) Farlow, Martin R.; Schmitt, Frederick; Aarsland, Dag; Grossberg, George T.; Somogyi, Monique; Meng, Xiangyi; Neurology, School of Medicine
    Background: Greater understanding of differences in baseline impairment and disease progression in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) may improve the interpretation of drug effects and the design of future studies. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of three randomized, double-blind rivastigmine databases (one in PDD, two in AD). Impairment on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale, 10-item Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-10) and the ADCS-Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was compared [standardized difference (Cohen's d), similar if <0.1]. Results: Patients with AD or PDD had similar levels of impairment on the ADAS-cog and NPI-10. Scores on the ADCS-ADL scale (standardized difference = 0.47) and the ADAS-cog memory domain (total, 0.33; items, 0.10-0.58) were higher in AD; PDD patients were more impaired in the language (0.23) and praxis (0.34) domains. AD patients receiving placebo showed greater deterioration on the ADAS-cog (0.14) and improvement on the NPI-10 (0.11) compared with patients with PDD. Conclusion: Differing patterns of impairment occur in AD and PDD.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Effects of Oral Rivastigmine on Cognitive Domains in Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease
    (Sage, 2010) Farlow, Martin R.; Cummings, Jeffrey L.; Olin, Jason T.; Meng, Xiangyi; Neurology, School of Medicine
    Rivastigmine has beneficial effects on cognitive functioning in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Effects of cholinesterase inhibitors, particularly rivastigmine, on AD Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) domains and individual items have rarely been analyzed. Results from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 26-week rivastigmine capsule trials in patients with mild-to-moderate AD were pooled and ADAS-cog domains and individual items were evaluated. Data were available from 878, 1053, and 863 patients in the 1 to 4 mg/d, 6 to 12 mg/d, and placebo groups, respectively. Rivastigmine-treated groups were superior to placebo on total ADAS-cog and memory domain scores (P < or = .0001). Rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/d was also significantly better versus placebo on language (P < .001) and praxis (P < .001); greatest treatment responses were seen on memory items (P < .0001). Although rivastigmine was associated with dose-dependent improvements in all cognitive domains, largest effects were on memory items. Evaluation of ADAS-cog domain scores provides insight into test items most likely to respond to treatment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Evaluating High-Dose Rivastigmine Patch in Severe Alzheimer’s Disease: Analyses with Concomitant Memantine Usage as a Factor
    (Bentham Science, 2015) Grossberg, George T.; Farlow, Martin R.; Meng, Xiangyi; Velting, Drew M.; Department of Neurology, IU School of Medicine
    Background: ACTION, a 24-week, prospective, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind study in patients with severe Alzheimer’s disease (AD), demonstrated significant efficacy of 13.3 mg/24 h versus 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch on the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) and Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study–Activities of Daily Living scale–Severe Impairment Version (ADCS-ADL-SIV). Overall, 61% of the study population received at least 1 dose of concomitant memantine, regardless of dose or duration. This retrospective analysis investigated the effects of concomitant memantine on the efficacy, safety and tolerability of 13.3 mg/24 h versus 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch. Methods: Patients were stratified according to whether or not they received at least one dose of concomitant memantine during the double-blind phase. Changes from baseline on the SIB and ADCS-ADL-SIV were compared using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with treatment, pooled center, memantine usage and treatment-by-memantine as factors, and baseline as a covariate. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Results: Memantine-treated patients were younger than those not receiving memantine (mean 75.9 and 78.8 years, respectively), with a lower screening Mini-Mental State Examination (8.6 and 9.2, respectively). ANCOVA confirmed there was no significant interaction (p>0.1) between study treatment and memantine use on the SIB or ADCS-ADL-SIV. The incidence of adverse events was: 71.4%, 13.3 mg/24 h patch with memantine; 79.7%, 13.3 mg/24 h patch alone; 74.7%, 4.6 mg/24 h patch with memantine; and 71.1%, 4.6 mg/24 h patch alone. Conclusion: These data suggest benefit of 13.3 mg/24 h versus 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch, regardless of concomitant memantine use. The incidence of adverse events with highdose patch was similar in memantine-treated patients and those not receiving memantine.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Evaluating Response to High-Dose 13.3 mg/24 h Rivastigmine Patch in Patients with Severe Alzheimer's Disease
    (Wiley, 2015-06) Farlow, Martin R.; Sadowsky, Carl H.; Velting, Drew M.; Meng, Xiangyi; Islam, M. Zahur; Neurology, School of Medicine
    AIMS: To identify factors predicting improvement/stabilization on the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) and investigate whether early treatment responses can predict long-term outcomes, during a trial of 13.3 mg/24 h versus 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch in patients with severe Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Logistic regression was used to relate Week 24 ADCS-CGIC score to potential baseline predictors. Additional analyses based on receiver-operating characteristic curves were performed using Week 8/16 ADCS-CGIC scores to predict response (13.3 mg/24 h patch) at Week 24. ADCS-CGIC score of (1) 1-3 = "improvement," (2) 1-4 = "improvement or no change". RESULTS: "Treatment" (13.3 mg/24 h patch) and increased age were significant predictors of "improvement" (P = 0.01 and P = 0.003, respectively), and "treatment" (P = 0.001), increased age (P = 0.002), and prior AD treatment (P = 0.03) for "improvement or no change". At Week 8 and 16, ADCS-CGIC scores of 4 and 5 were optimal thresholds in predicting "improvement," and "improvement or no change," respectively, at Week 24. CONCLUSIONS: A significant therapeutic effect of high-dose rivastigmine patch on ADCS-CGIC response was observed. The 13.3 mg/24 h patch was identified as a predictor of "improvement" or "improvement or no change". Patients with minimal worsening/improvement/no change after treatment initiation may be more likely to respond following long-term therapy.