A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the PDE9A inhibitor, PF-04447943, in Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: PF-04447943 is a potent, selective phosphodiesterase 9A (PDE9A) inhibitor that elevates guanoscine 3',5' - cyclic monophosphate (cGMP) in brain and cerebrospinal fluid. PDE9A inhibition enhances synaptic plasticity and improves memory in preclinical cognition models, and prevents decreases in dendritic spine density in transgenic mice that overexpress amyloid precursor protein (APP) leading to high levels of amyloid beta (Aß) production (Tg2576). OBJECTIVE: This Phase 2 multicenter study was designed to assess the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of PF-04447943 compared with placebo in mild to moderate probable Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Subjects in overall good health with Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores of 14-26 were randomized to 12 weeks treatment with PF-04447943 25 mg q12h (n=91) or placebo (n=100). Concomitant acetylcholinesterase inhibitor or memantine use was excluded. The primary outcome was the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog). The Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I) and standard safety measures were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Completion rates were similar, 87% PF-04447943 vs 92% placebo. At week 12 the mean (SE) baseline adjusted decrease from baseline in ADAS cog for PF-04447943-treated patients was -1.91 (0.54). Placebo treated patients had a change of -1.60 (0.50). The difference between treatments was -0.31 (90% CI of -1.52, 0.90). Corresponding values for the NPI were -2.86 (0.72) vs -2.70 (0.67) with a treatment difference of -0.16 (90% CI of -1.78, 1.48). Neither these changes nor the distribution of CGI-I scores were statistically significantly different between groups. The incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups with 2 deaths in the placebo group. The PF-04447943 group reported more gastrointestinal AEs including diarrhea (5.5% vs 3%) and nausea (5.5% vs 1%) and had a higher rate of discontinuation due to AEs (6.6% vs 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Although generally safe and well-tolerated, 12 weeks PF-04447943 treatment did not improve cognition, behavior, and global change compared with placebo.

Phase II crossover trial of varenicline in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports a role of α4ß2 receptors in Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: This Korean, multicenter, double-blind, two-period (6 weeks each), crossover study randomized participants to the order in which they received varenicline (1 mg twice daily) and placebo. Assessments included AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) 75, Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), adverse events (AEs) and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). RESULTS: For varenicline versus placebo (n = 66 randomized), there was no significant difference in the week 6 least square (LS) mean ADAS-Cog 75 total score (primary endpoint; 18.07 vs. 18.49; p = 0.3873) and a slight worsening in the week 6 LS mean NPI (3.82 vs. 2.55; p = 0.0468), primarily driven by decreased appetite/eating. Common treatment-related AEs were nausea (23.3; 3.4%), vomiting (15.0%; 0) and decreased appetite (15.0; 6.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline did not improve cognition, behavior or global change in this population. The most frequent varenicline-associated AEs were gastrointestinal; psychiatric AEs were rare and similar between the groups.

Donepezil treatment in severe Alzheimer's disease: a pooled analysis of three clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Individual clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of donepezil in patients with severe Alzheimer's disease (AD). Data were pooled from three randomized, placebo-controlled trials of donepezil for severe AD to further evaluate treatment effects and overall tolerability/safety. METHODS: Total scores and sub-scores were analyzed for measures of cognition, global function, function, and behavior. Additional analyses were performed to investigate (1) relationships between cognitive, functional, and behavioral changes, and (2) patterns of combined domain response. RESULTS: Using pooled total scores, significant treatment differences at endpoint in favor of donepezil were observed for cognition, global function (both p < 0.0001), and function (p = 0.03), with an effect size (Cohen's d) of 0.51, 0.26, and 0.17, respectively. There was no significant treatment difference for behavior. However, donepezil-treated patients with stabilized/improved cognition tended to show significant improvements in function and behavior over placebo-treated patients. Patients treated with donepezil were 2-3 times more likely to achieve a combined domain response than placebo-treated patients (p < 0.0001). Adverse events were as expected for cholinergic therapy, and mortality rates were similar between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest measurable donepezil-mediated symptomatic benefits in cognition, global function, and daily living activities in patients with severe AD. The treatment effects support the importance of cholinesterase inhibition as a clinically relevant therapeutic option across the spectrum of AD.

Defining treatment response to donepezil in Alzheimer's disease: responder analysis of patient-level data from randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: Defining treatment success in progressive diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), can be challenging. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of employing different criteria to define a treatment 'responder' using analyses of patient-level data from randomized, placebo-controlled studies of donepezil in AD. METHODS: Trials were included in the analysis if they met several criteria, including the following: randomized, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil 10 mg/day in mild-to-moderate AD; cognition measured by the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) or Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); and a 24-week endpoint and outcomes that included global assessments. Definitions of response were: improvements in cognition plus one other domain; improvement in cognition only; improvement or improvement/no change in global response; and improvement/stabilization/less than expected decline by < or = 2 or < or = 4 or < or = 6 points on the ADAS-cog. RESULTS: Five studies identified from the literature search met the specified criteria for inclusion. The response to donepezil measured by ADAS-cog varied from 26% to 63% and that of placebo from 14% to 47%, depending on the definition of improvement used. For definitions that included a less than expected decline on ADAS-cog, the more modest the effect defined, the less the drug versus placebo difference and the higher the percentage of patients meeting this definition. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of treatment 'response' in a progressive neurodegenerative disease can encompass a variety of outcomes, including short-term improvement, longer-term stabilization and a slowed decline in one or more clinically relevant symptoms or symptom domains. The ability to identify groups of people who respond to donepezil underscores the clinical utility of the medication and may contribute to more focused assessments of the cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors.

Health economics and the value of therapy in Alzheimer's disease.

In increasingly aging societies throughout the developed and developing world, Alzheimer's disease and related dementias are fast becoming a critical public health issue, exacting an enormous toll on individuals and healthcare systems. Over the past 10 years, five drugs have been developed and approved for the symptomatic treatment of Alzheimer's dementia, and several disease-modifying drugs are in various stages of clinical development. While symptomatic medications were consistently shown to have clinical benefit in numerous efficacy studies, the cost effectiveness of antidementia therapies and their value to healthcare systems remain unclear. The pharmacoeconomics of antidementia therapies is an evolving field, with several unanswered questions. This poses many challenges for biopharmaceutical companies developing these therapies, regulatory agencies responsible for their approval, and payers responsible for ensuring their availability to patients. The challenge partly relates to the unique nature of dementia as a disease of impaired cognition, behavior, and function. Thus, the selection of appropriate outcome measures that directly relate to healthcare utilization, quality of life, caregiver burden, and pharmacoeconomic analysis has been difficult. The development of meaningful and widely acceptable outcome measures, as well as novel clinical-study designs, is needed to better evaluate cost effectiveness and to demonstrate the value of therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease. Providing the decision-makers in healthcare systems with a body of evidence that demonstrates a positive relationship between clinical outcomes and the economic and humanistic benefits of antidementia therapeutics will improve patient access to novel drugs as they become available.

Efficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with more severe Alzheimer's disease: a subgroup analysis from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There have been very limited investigations of cholinesterase inhibitor therapy in more advanced stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The efficacy and safety of donepezil were evaluated in post hoc analyses of a subgroup of patients with more severe AD (standardized Mini-Mental State Examination [sMMSE] score 5-12) within a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in moderate to severe AD (MSAD study). Additional analyses examined whether donepezil's treatment effects were consistent across the full range of baseline AD severity studied (sMMSE score 5-17). METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe AD (n = 290) who were living in the community or in assisted living facilities received donepezil or placebo for 24 weeks; n = 145 in the more severe AD subgroup. The primary outcome measure was the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change (CIBIC-plus) with secondary outcomes including the sMMSE, Severe Impairment Battery, Neuropsychiatric Inventory, and Disability Assessment for Dementia. Analysis of Variance and Analysis of Covariance models tested for treatment x disease severity interaction in the full MSAD study sample. RESULTS: CIBIC-plus scores for donepezil patients were significantly improved compared with placebo for each time-point, with a 0.70 mean treatment difference at Week 24 last observation carried forward (LOCF; p = 0.0002). Significant differences favoring donepezil were noted at Week 24 LOCF for all secondary measures. There were no treatment x severity interactions for any of the efficacy measures. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, donepezil had significant benefits over placebo on global, cognitive, functional, and behavioral measures in a subgroup of patients with more severe AD. Furthermore, the treatment effects of donepezil were not driven by a particular stratum within the moderate to severe dementia range.