MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1955830823 · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2015.08.019

A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Discontinuation Study of Cholinesterase Inhibitors in Institutionalized Patients With Moderate to Severe Alzheimer Disease

2015· article· en· W1955830823 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Herrmann, Jordana O'Regan, Myuri Ruthirakuhan, Alexander Kiss, Goran Eryavec, Evelyn Williams, Krista L. Lanctôt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook HospitalNorth York General HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersAlzheimer's Society
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboDiscontinuationTolerabilityInternal medicineAdverse effectClinical Global ImpressionRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalOdds ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) offer modest benefits in Alzheimer disease (AD), which must be balanced against risks. Relatively few data delineate the benefits and risks of long-term ChEI administration in institutionalized patients with advanced AD. This study investigated the effects of ChEI discontinuation in institutionalized patients with AD. DESIGN: Institutionalized patients with moderate to severe AD (standardized Mini- Mental Status Examination ≤15) and treated with a ChEI for ≥2 years were randomized, double-blind, to ChEI continuation or placebo, with a 2-week tapering phase, for 8-weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome of this pilot study was change on the Clinician's Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) scale. Secondary outcomes included safety, efficacy, and tolerability. Baseline (BL) predictors of clinical deterioration were also determined. RESULTS: Forty patients (mean ± standard deviation age = 89.3 ± 3.5 years, standardized Mini-Mental Status Examination = 8.1 ± 5.2, Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version total score = 21.1 ± 15.9, 80% male) were randomized to ChEI continuation (n = 21) or placebo (n = 19). There was no significant difference in clinical worsening in the ChEI continuation (28.6%) and placebo groups (36.8%) on CGI-C (odds ratio for worsening 1.58, 95% confidence interval .38-6.55, P = .53). The occurrence of adverse events was similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures. In the placebo group, BL hallucinations predicted CGI-C worsening [F(1,17) = 6.4, P = .02], and there was a trend for BL delusions to predict CGI-C worsening [F(1,15) = 3.5, P = .08]. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that ChEI discontinuation is safe and well tolerated in the majority of institutionalized patients with moderate to severe AD. When discontinuing ChEI, the presence of hallucinations and delusions may predict clinical deterioration, suggesting the need for increased caution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations60
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Medical Directors AssociationSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207