4.7 Article

Benefits of combined cholinesterase inhibitor and memantine treatment in moderate-severe Alzheimer's disease

期刊

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
卷 9, 期 3, 页码 326-331

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.11.005

关键词

Combination; Drugs; Alzheimer; Treatment

资金

  1. H. Lundbeck A/S, Denmark
  2. Pfizer
  3. Eisai
  4. MSD
  5. Merz
  6. Janssen-Cilag
  7. Novartis
  8. Lundbeck
  9. Roche
  10. Bayer
  11. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  12. GE Health Care
  13. GlaxoSmithKline
  14. Innogenetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Clinical studies and post hoc analyses have investigated the use of combination therapy for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). We review the evidence for the short- and long-term efficacy of combination therapy in AD. Methods: The review is based on a search of the PubMed database to identify relevant articles concerning combination treatment with memantine and cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs). Results: In patients with moderate-to-severe AD, combination treatment with the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine and the ChEI donepezil has produced significant benefits in cognition, function, behavior, global outcome, and care dependency, compared with donepezil treatment alone. Data from long-term observational studies support these findings. Compared with ChEI monotherapy, combination treatment slowed cognitive and functional decline (a 4-year sustained effect that appeared to increase over time) and reduced the risk of nursing home admission. Preclinically, the combination of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor modulation and acetylcholinesterase inhibition has been shown to act synergistically, which may explain the observed clinical effects of combination treatment. Conclusion: Treatment with memantine/ChEI combination therapy in moderate-to-severe AD produces consistent benefits that appear to increase over time, and that are beyond those of ChEI treatment alone. (C) 2013 The Alzheimer's Association. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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