4.1 Article

Adverse Events With Sustained-Release Donepezil in Alzheimer Disease: Relation to Body Mass Index

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 37, 期 4, 页码 401-404

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000000726

关键词

adverse effects; Alzheimer disease; body mass index; clinical trial; donepezil

资金

  1. Eisai Korea Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose/Background Sustained-release, high-dose (23 mg/d) donepezil has been approved for treatment of moderate to severe Alzheimer disease (AD). Based on a previous clinical trial, body weight of less than 55 kg is a risk factor for adverse events with donepezil 23 mg/d treatment in global population. Methods/Procedures To clarify whether this finding is consistent across ethnic groups that vary in absolute body mass, we recruited Korean patients aged 45 to 90 years with moderate to severe AD who had been receiving standard donepezil immediate release 10 mg/d for at least 3 months. After screening, we analyzed a final cohort of 166 patients who received donepezil 23 mg/d for 24 weeks to compare the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between patients with high versus low body mass index (BMI) based on the World Health Organization overweight criteria for Asian populations (23 kg/m(2)). Findings/Results Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 79.45% of patients in the lower BMI group and 58.06% of patients in the higher BMI group (odds ratio, 2.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-5.63; (2) = 7.58, P = 0.006). In a multivariable survival analysis, the group with lower BMI showed a higher occurrence of TEAEs (hazard ratio, 1.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.68; P = 0.002). Implications/Conclusions In Korean patients with moderate to severe AD receiving high-dose donepezil over 24 weeks, TEAEs were significantly more common in those with lower BMI (not clinically overweight), especially nausea. This finding may inform clinical practice for Asian patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据