Switching from Oral Cholinesterase Inhibitors to the Rivastigmine Transdermal Patch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oral cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) are associated with side effects such as nausea and vomiting. The use of transdermal patches for ChEI delivery may help to minimize these problems. The objective of this review was to consider available data from patients switching from oral ChEIs to transdermal rivastigmine treatment, and to suggest practical guidelines for patients wishing to do this. Literature database and reference list searches were performed to identify suitable publications. Data from two clinical trials and a series of open observational studies, in which patients were switched to the rivastigmine patch from oral rivastigmine, donepezil tablets, or galantamine, were evaluated. Adverse events were tabulated. In the studies reported here, nausea was reported in up to 3.2% and vomiting in up to 1.9% of patients switching to the rivastigmine patch from oral rivastigmine. Similar rates (up to 3.8% of patients for nausea and 0.8% of patients for vomiting) were reported when switching to the rivastigmine patch from donepezil tablets, and no nausea or vomiting was reported in a case study of patients switching to the rivastigmine patch from galantamine tablets. Switching regimes used in clinical trials appeared well tolerated. Data support recommendations for patients on high rivastigmine capsule doses to switch directly to the 9.5 mg/24 h rivastigmine patch, while those on lower oral rivastigmine doses should start on the 4.6 mg/24 h patch for 4 weeks before increasing to the 9.5 mg/24 h patch. This latter regimen is recommended for patients on other oral cholinesterase inhibitors if switching is medically indicated or requested by the patient or the caregiver.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".