Retreatment with varenicline for smoking cessation in smokers who have previously taken varenicline: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

The efficacy and safety of retreatment with varenicline in smokers attempting to quit were evaluated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial (Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Participants were generally healthy adult smokers (≥ 10 cigarettes/day) with ≥ 1 prior quit attempt (≥ 2 weeks) using varenicline and no quit attempts in ≤ 3 months; they were randomly assigned (1:1) to 12 weeks' varenicline (n = 251) or placebo (n = 247) treatment, with individual counseling, plus 40 weeks' nontreatment follow-up. The primary efficacy end point was the carbon monoxide-confirmed (≤ 10 ppm) continuous abstinence rate for weeks 9-12, which was 45.0% (varenicline; n = 249) vs. 11.8% (placebo; n = 245; odds ratio: 7.08; 95% confidence interval: 4.34, 11.55; P < 0.0001). Common varenicline group adverse events were nausea, abnormal dreams, and headache, with no reported suicidal behavior. Varenicline is efficacious and well tolerated in smokers who have previously taken it. Abstinence rates are comparable with rates reported for varenicline-naive smokers.

Diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer disease and related disorders. Consensus statement of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry, the Alzheimer's Association, and the American Geriatrics Society.

OBJECTIVE: A consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD) and related disorders was organized by the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry, the Alzheimer's Association, and the American Geriatrics Society on January 4 and 5, 1997. The target audience was primary care physicians, and the following questions were addressed: (1) How prevalent is AD and what are its risk factors? What is its impact on society? (2) What are the different forms of dementia and how can they be recognized? (3) What constitutes safe and effective treatment for AD? What are the indications and contraindications for specific treatments? (4) What management strategies are available to the primary care practitioner? (5) What are the available medical specialty and community resources? (6) What are the important policy issues and how can policymakers improve access to care for dementia patients? (7) What are the most promising questions for future research? PARTICIPANTS: Consensus panel members and expert presenters were drawn from psychiatry, neurology, geriatrics, primary care, psychology, nursing, social work, occupational therapy, epidemiology, and public health and policy. EVIDENCE: The expert presenters summarized data from the world scientific literature on the questions posed to the panel. CONSENSUS PROCESS: The panelists listened to the experts' presentations, reviewed their background papers, and then provided responses to the questions based on these materials. The panel chairs prepared the initial drafts of the consensus statement, and these drafts were read by all panelists and edited until consensus was reached. CONCLUSIONS: Alzheimer disease is the most common disorder causing cognitive decline in old age and exacts a substantial cost on society. Although the diagnosis of AD is often missed or delayed, it is primarily one of inclusion, not exclusion, and usually can be made using standardized clinical criteria. Most cases can be diagnosed and managed in primary care settings, yet some patients with atypical presentations, severe impairment, or complex comorbidity benefit from specialist referral. Alzheimer disease is progressive and irreversible, but pharmacologic therapies for cognitive impairment and nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments for the behavioral problems associated with dementia can enhance quality of life. Psychotherapeutic intervention with family members is often indicated, as nearly half of all caregivers become depressed. Health care delivery to these patients is fragmented and inadequate, and changes in disease management models are adding stresses to the system. New approaches are needed to ensure patients' access to essential resources, and future research should aim to improve diagnostic and therapeutic effectiveness.

Mini-Mental State exam scores vary with education in blacks and whites.

Previous studies have suggested that education and race may affect performance on standardized mental status tests. In order to more clearly define these relationships, a prospective longitudinal study was devised to answer two questions: (1) whether race or level of education affects scores on the Mini-Mental State (MMS) exam in non-demented people and (2) what numerical cutpoints maximize the sensitivity and specificity of utilizing the MMS to help diagnose dementia in blacks of varying educational attainment. A total of 100 white and 258 black individuals, recruited from two city hospital primary care geriatric clinics, were evaluated and subsequently followed longitudinally over a 2 1/2 year period in order to assess accurately the presence or absence of dementia. In the non-demented, total MMS scores and performance on each item of the MMS were analyzed, revealing that people with an 8th grade or less education consistently had significantly (P less than .01) worse results than the better educated (9th grade or better) on borough, attention items, recall of table and dog, copying, sentence writing, phrase repeating, and total score. Furthermore, a total of 25% of the lower education group had an MMS score in the 18-23 range, traditionally thought to suggest dementia. There were no consistently significant differences between blacks and whites of equal education. In the better educated groups, using a score of 23 or less to define dementia maximizes the sensitivity and specificity of using the MMS in this diagnosis at 93% and 100%, respectively. In the lower education group, using 17 or less to define dementia maximizes sensitivity and specificity at 81% and 100%, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Why vitamin B12 deficiency should be managed aggressively.

Recent evidence suggests that vitamin B12 deficiency in the elderly is more than classic pernicious anemia. Instead, it is a continuum from negative B12 balance to frank deficiency, which can be detected by low serum B12 levels long before changes occur in hemoglobin levels. Current findings in the literature suggest that subtle B12 deficiency is indeed clinically significant. Treatment may prevent significant neurologic and/or hematologic disease.