Effect of butyrylcholinesterase genotype on the response to rivastigmine or donepezil in younger patients with Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A randomized double-blind trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of rivastigmine, an inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE), and donepezil, an AChE-selective inhibitor, in patients with Alzheimer's disease over a 2-year period. A retrospective analysis showed differential responses to cholinesterase inhibitors (ChE-Is) in patients younger than 75 years. This analysis investigated the effect of BuChE genotype on response to ChE-I therapy in these patients. In a retrospective analysis, patients younger than 75 who had consented to pharmacogenetic analysis were divided into groups according to BuChE genotype. Efficacy measures were the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), Global Deterioration Scale (GDS), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADCS-ADL). Changes on efficacy parameters were calculated for rivastigmine-treated and donepezil-treated patients in both groups. Of 114 (34.1%) patients younger than 75 who were successfully assessed for BuChE genotype, 76 (66.7%) were homozygous for wild-type BuChE, and 38 (33.3%) carried at least one BuChE K-variant allele. Wild-type BuChE carriers showed significantly greater responses to rivastigmine than to donepezil on the SIB, ADCS-ADL, GDS and NPI. No significant between-treatment differences in efficacy were observed in BuChE K-variant carriers, although adverse events were more frequent in rivastigmine-treated patients. In this retrospective analysis, Alzheimer's disease patients younger than 75 with wild-type BuChE exhibited differential efficacy to rivastigmine, while BuChE K-variant carriers experienced similar long-term treatment effects with both agents. These differences may reflect rivastigmine's ability to inhibit BuChE and AChE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".