MO354PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE OF RIVASTIGMINE EFFICACY IN CKD RELATED MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Aims Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is a common finding in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Indeed, CKD represents a relevant risk factor for developing dementia and MCI. Cholinesterase inhibitors, such as rivastigmine, are among the few drugs approved for the treatment of dementia and MCI. Rivastigmine is also used to treat vascular dementia because it protects subcortical brain structures. Data are scanty regarding the use of rivastigmine in CKD patients with MCI and are much needed to guide the therapy for MCI in this cohort of patients. Method This retrospective case-control study compared the effects of rivastigmine on cognitive functions in MCI patients with CKD (stage III-IV; n= 20) and without CKD (n=21, control group), comparable for the extent of cognitive impairment (indexed by Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA), age (range 18-65 years), gender, weight, and comorbidities. Patients under treatment with rivastigmine and with a baseline MoCA score available were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were ictus, psychiatric or other neurological conditions, heart failure, liver failure, severe obesity, anemia, electrolyte disorders, cancer, dialysis, and other severe comorbidities. Laboratory test data (glycemia, cholesterol, hemoglobin, proteinuria, creatinine) were used to characterize the two populations. MCI was defined as a MoCA score between 21-26. The cognitive screening was available at baseline (before treatment) and during a follow-up in a range of three-six months after the start of the treatment. CKD was defined by eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73m2. Results The follow-up timing for cognitive screening was not statistically different between the two cohorts. The control group (MCI without CKD) showed a small, significant improvement in the MoCA score after treatment (baseline MoCA: 22.9±0.5, follow-up MoCA: 23.5±0.5, p=0.02, t-test for paired data). At variance, the MCI-CKD group showed a significant improvement in the MoCA score (baseline MoCA=23±0.4, follow-up MoCA=24.3±0.4, p<0.05). Accordingly, the extent of improvement of MoCA score after rivastigmine was inversely correlated to the eGFR (r = -0.23). Conclusion A significant improvement in MoCA score accompanied treatment with rivastigmine in the CKD group. More extensive population studies are needed to verify the greater efficacy of Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in this population.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".