MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144769321 · doi:10.1159/000088494

Donepezil in Vascular Dementia: Combined Analysis of Two Large-Scale Clinical Trials

2005· article· en· W2144769321 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gustavo C. Román, David Wilkinson, Rachelle S. Doody, Sandra E. Black, Stephen Salloway, Rachel Schindler

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDonepezilPlaceboClinical Dementia RatingDementiaVascular dementiaAlzheimer's diseaseInternal medicineRandomizationPsychologyMedicineRandomized controlled trialMini–Mental State ExaminationDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There are currently no drugs approved to treat vascular dementia (VaD). The objective of this study was to determine if treatment with donepezil, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, may provide benefit for VaD patients. METHODS: Combined analysis of 2 identical randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 24-week studies involving 1,219 patients enrolled at 109 investigational sites in the USA, Europe, Canada and Australia. Patients were randomized to receive donepezil 5 mg/day (n = 406) or 10 mg/day (after brief titration; n = 421) or placebo (n = 392). Patients were assessed on cognition [Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)], global function [Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus (CIBIC-plus), Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of the Boxes (CDR-SB)] and function [Alzheimer's Disease Functional Assessment and Change Scale (ADFACS); instrumental activities of daily living (ADFACS-IADL)]. RESULTS: Both donepezil groups showed significant improvements in cognition compared with placebo (ADAS-cog, MMSE, p < 0.01). Significant global function benefits were seen on the CIBIC-plus in the 5 mg/day group (placebo vs. 5 mg/day, p < 0.001; vs. 10 mg/day, p = 0.006) and on the CDR-SB in the 10 mg/day group (placebo vs. 5 mg/day, p = 0.09; vs. 10 mg/day, p < 0.01). Significant functional benefits were also seen (ADFACS, placebo vs. 5 mg/day, p = 0.08; vs. 10 mg/day, p = 0.02; ADFACS-IADL, p < 0.05 for both donepezil groups). Donepezil was well tolerated, with low withdrawal rates due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This combined analysis of the largest trial on VaD to date showed that donepezil-treated patients had significant benefits in cognition, global function and ability to perform IADL. Based on these findings and reported tolerability, donepezil should be considered as an important therapeutic element in the overall management of patients with VaD.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.011
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.363 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations141
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive DisordersSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207