Search

Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most common monogenic cause of inherited intellectual and developmental disabilities. Mavoglurant, a selective metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype-5 antagonist, has shown positive neuronal and behavioral effects in preclinical studies, but failed to demonstrate any behavioral benefits in two 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase IIb studies in adults and adolescents with FXS. Here we report the long-term safety (primary endpoint) and efficacy (secondary endpoint) results of the open-label extensions. Adolescent (n = 119, aged 12–19 years) and adult (n = 148, aged 18–45 years) participants received up to 100 mg bid mavoglurant for up to 34 months. Both extension studies were terminated prematurely due to lack of proven efficacy in the core studies. Mavoglurant was well tolerated with no new safety signal. Five percent of adults and 16.9 percent of adolescents discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Gradual and consistent behavioral improvements as measured by the ABC-CFX scale were observed, which were numerically superior to those seen in the placebo arm of the core studies. These two extension studies confirm the long-term safety of mavoglurant in FXS, but further investigations are required to determine whether and under which conditions the significant preclinical results obtained with mGluR5 inhibition can translate to humans.

Fragile X syndrome (FXS), the most common cause of inherited intellectual disability and autistic spectrum disorder, is typically caused by transcriptional silencing of the X-linked FMR1 gene. Work in animal models has described altered synaptic plasticity, a result of the up-regulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5)-mediated signaling, as a putative downstream effect. Post hoc analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover phase 2 trial suggested that the selective mGluR5 antagonist mavoglurant improved behavioral symptoms in FXS patients with completely methylated FMR1 genes. We present the results of two phase 2b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies of mavoglurant in FXS, designed to confirm this result in adults (n = 175, aged 18 to 45 years) and adolescents (n = 139, aged 12 to 17 years). In both trials, participants were stratified by methylation status and randomized to receive mavoglurant (25, 50, or 100 mg twice daily) or placebo over 12 weeks. Neither of the studies achieved the primary efficacy end point of improvement on behavioral symptoms measured by the Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Community Edition using the FXS-specific algorithm (ABC-C(FX)) after 12 weeks of treatment with mavoglurant. The safety and tolerability profile of mavoglurant was as previously described, with few adverse events. Therefore, under the conditions of our study, we could not confirm the mGluR theory of FXS nor the ability of the methylation state of the FMR1 promoter to predict mavoglurant efficacy. Preclinical results suggest that future clinical trials might profitably explore initiating treatment in a younger population with longer treatment duration and longer placebo run-ins and identifying new markers to better assess behavioral and cognitive benefits.

To investigate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of rivastigmine capsules (3-12 mg/day) in a 26-week, multi-centre, open-label extension of a double-blind study.Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and persistent cognitive impairment who had received rivastigmine (3-6 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks could enter the extension study and receive rivastigmine (or =12 mg/day). Patients were assessed using a range of cognitive tests including the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) and the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery Rapid Visual Information Processing (CANTAB RVIP) A' sub-test. Safety measures included monitoring of adverse events.In the extension study (n = 127), the mean duration of rivastigmine treatment was 23.8 weeks and the mean final dosage was 7.9 mg/day. Approximately 40% of patients were responders (or =1.0 SD improvement from baseline) on CANTAB RVIP A' or HVLT total score at week 38 or endpoint. Statistically significant changes from week 12 at week 38 were observed for CANTAB-RVIP A' and HVLT-total word recall for the sub-group of ex-placebo patients with greater severity of initial impairment. The safety profile of rivastigmine capsules was consistent with the label.Treatment with rivastigmine for up to 38 weeks was safe in patients with TBI and cognitive impairment.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of rivastigmine (3 to 6 mg/day) vs placebo over 12 weeks in patients with traumatic brain injury and persistent cognitive impairment. Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in 157 patients at least 12 months after injury. The primary efficacy measures were the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) Rapid Visual Information Processing (RVIP) A′ subtest and the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT). The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients who demonstrated 1.0 SD or greater improvement from baseline at week 12 on CANTAB RVIP A′ or HVLT. Results: The percentage of responders at week 12 on either the CANTAB RVIP A′ or HVLT was 48.7% for rivastigmine and 49.3% for placebo ( p = 0.940). Furthermore, for the overall study population, there were no significant differences for any of the secondary efficacy variables. In a subgroup of patients with moderate to severe memory impairment (n = 81), defined as 25% impairment or greater on HVLT at baseline, rivastigmine was significantly better than placebo for a number of measures, including the proportion of HVLT responders and CANTAB RVIP mean latency. Conclusions: Rivastigmine was safe and well tolerated in patients with traumatic brain injury with cognitive deficits. Rivastigmine shows promising results in the subgroup of patients with traumatic brain injury with moderate to severe memory deficits.

The two most common causes of dementia in the elderly are Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD), which can coexist as mixed dementia. The object of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of rivastigmine in patients with mixed dementia (AD with VaD).This 26-week open-label pilot study was conducted at 19 centres in the US. To reduce bias, the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (ADAS-Cog) raters were blinded to all efficacy measures and to patient dosage information. Patients were treated with rivastigmine and titrated to their highest tolerated dose, up to 12 mg/day (6 mg twice daily). The primary efficacy measure was cognitive function assessed by the ADAS-Cog subscale (without the concentration/distractibility item, to be consistent with cognitive outcome measures used in previous rivastigmine trials).Forty-seven percent of patients treated with rivastigmine 6-12 mg/day demonstrated improvement on the ADAS-Cog at 26 weeks, with25% of patients having a clinically significant improvement ofor =4 points. Treatment with rivastigmine (6-12 mg/day) was well tolerated by the majority of patients. The most common adverse effects occurring in10% of patients were nausea, vomiting, dizziness and diarrhoea.This pilot study suggests that rivastigmine treatment may have beneficial effects in the treatment of patients with mixed dementia.

Objectives The Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version (NPI-NH) was used to study the impact of rivastigmine (Exelon; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ), on occupational disruptiveness (OD), a proxy measure for professional caregiver burden. Methods The study was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial with NH residents prescribed rivastigmine (up to 6 mg bid) for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) treatment. The NPI-NH was completed by NH staff caregivers at time of initiation of treatment with rivastigmine (T1), at treatment weeks 10 to 14 (T2), at treatment weeks 24 to 28 (T3), and at treatment weeks 50 to 54 (T4). Results Observations ranged from 173 at baseline to 73 at week 52. All but one patient had either moderate or severe dementia. Total OD score means were 4.7 ± 6.1, 3.9 ± 5.0, 4.19 ± 5.6, and 2.79 ± 2.8 at baseline, and weeks 12, 26, and 52 (T1–T4), respectively, with significant difference found between T1 and T4. Except for euphoria and disinhibition at T3 and T4, all correlations between OD scores and the domain scores of the NPI, were significant. Rivastigmine dose was an independent variable that affected OD change. Conclusion Treatment with rivastigmine was associated with a reduction in the self-reported professional caregiver burden, as assessed by the NPI-NH OD scale.

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of long-term treatment with rivastigmine (3-12 mg/day) and its effects on neuropsychiatric and behavioral disturbances in nursing home patients with moderate to severe probable Alzheimer's disease (AD).A prospective, multicenter 26-week open-label extension to a 26-week open-label study (52 week results) of rivastigmine treatment in patients with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores of 6-15 inclusive, residing in nursing homes at 13 centers in the US. Effects of treatment with rivastigmine for up to 52 weeks on neuropsychiatric and behavioral symptoms were examined using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home (NPI-NH) scale. Cognitive function was assessed by the MMSE, and the Naming Objects and Fingers Test (NOFT) subset of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale -- Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog). Global functioning was assessed using the simplified Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-Plus).Rivastigmine (3-12 mg/day) significantly improved neuropsychiatric and behavioral symptoms compared to baseline (in patients with specific behavioral disturbances at baseline) in observed cases (OC) and last observation carried forward (LOCF) analyses. Over 52 weeks, treatment with rivastigmine significantly improved 10 of 12 individual NPI-NH domains from baseline in LOCF patients with symptoms present at baseline. Cognitive function was stable, indicated by the lack of decline in MMSE and the NOFT. Global function was stabilized or improved in greater than half of the patients as indicated by the simplified CIBIC-Plus scores.Rivastigmine showed potential benefit in the long-term treatment of behavioral symptoms as well as cognitive and global functioning in nursing home residents with moderate to severe AD with concurrent behavioral symptoms present at baseline. Although these results suggest that treatment with rivastigmine may have beneficial behavioral effects and cognitive benefits on patients with moderate to severe AD, they are subject to the limitations of an open-label study.

Objective Rivastigmine, a dual cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI), is widely approved for the symptomatic treatment of both mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease dementia. Orally administered ChEIs may be associated with gastrointestinal (GI) side effects and add-on therapy with memantine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist, approved for moderate-to-severe AD, may ameliorate such side effects. This was a 26-week, prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label pilot study to assess the safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules plus memantine in patients with moderate AD. Methods The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules 6–12 mg/day plus memantine (5–20 mg/day) as measured by the incidences of vomiting and nausea compared with those reported in the rivastigmine United States Prescribing Information (US PI). A total of 117 patients were enrolled with 116 receiving at least one dose of study medication. Results The incidences of nausea and vomiting (30% and 13%, respectively) observed in patients who received 6–12 mg/day rivastigmine plus memantine were lower than those stated in the US PI for rivastigmine monotherapy 6–12 mg/day (47% and 31%, respectively). The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and dizziness. Conclusion Results from this study suggest the combination of rivastigmine capsule and memantine in patients with moderate AD is safe and tolerable. A greater reduction in the GI tolerability of rivastigmine has been established with rivastigmine transdermal patch. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Objective: Evaluate safety and tolerability of switching from donepezil to rivastigmine transdermal patch in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Methods: Prospective, parallel-group, open-label study to evaluate immediate or delayed switch from 5-10 mg/day donepezil to 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine following a 4-week treatment period. Results: Rates of discontinuation due to any reason or adverse events were similar between groups. Incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events were 3.8% in the immediate and 0.8% in the delayed switch group. No patients discontinued secondary to nausea and vomiting. Discontinuations due to application site reactions were low (2.3%). Asymptomatic bradycardia was more common following the immediate switch (2.3% vs 0%); however, these patients had coexisting cardiac comorbidities. Conclusion: Both switch strategies were safe and well tolerated. The majority of patients may be able to switch directly to rivastigmine patches without a withdrawal period. Appropriate clinical judgment should be used for patients with existing bradycardia or receiving β blockers.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia and is characterized clinically by a gradual decline in cognitive performance, an increasingly impaired ability to perform activities of daily living, and neuropsychiatric and behavioral disturbances.The goal of this study was to assess the effect of rivastigmine on the neuropsychiatric and behavioral disturbances of nursing home residents with moderate to severe probable AD and to evaluate the safety and tolerability of rivastigmine in this population.This prospective, 26-week, open-label study was conducted in 13 centers in the United States and involved a total of 29 nursing homes. The effects of rivastigmine 3 to 12 mg/d for 26 weeks were assessed in nursing home residents with moderate to severe probable AD. Efficacy was evaluated using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home (NPI-NH) scale for neuropsychiatric and behavioral disturbances; the Mini-Mental State Examination and the naming subset of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale for cognitive performance; and the simplified Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input for global functioning.A total of 173 patients (141 women, 32 men; mean [SD]age, 82.6 [5.9] years) were enrolled. After 26 weeks of rivastigmine treatment, the mean (SD) change from baseline for all treated patients in the observed cases population was -2.5 (16.4) (n = 100; P = 0.138); it was -0.8 (16.5) (n = 149; P = 0.576) for the last-observation-carried-forward population. Patients with at least 1 neuropsychiatric symptom present at baseline showed a 3.2-point mean improvement in NPI-NH total score (n = 92; P = 0.062), with 49% of these patients demonstrating a clinically meaningful (ie,or = 30%) reduction from baseline. At 26 weeks, scores for 8 of the 12 neuropsychiatric and behavioral disturbances in patients with the specific symptom present at baseline showed statistically significant improvements from baseline (delusions [n = 32; P = 0.007], hallucinations [n = 15; P0.001], agitation [n = 58; P = 0.044], apathy/indifference [n = 37; P0.001], irritability/lability [n = 50; P0.001], aberrant motor behavior [n = 32; P0.001], nighttime disturbances [n = 22; P0.001], and appetite/eating changes [n = 28; P = 0.002]) in the observed cases population. Limitations of this study include that it was open label and not restricted to patients with behavioral disturbances at baseline.In the current study, rivastigmine treatment for 26 weeks in nursing home residents with moderate to severe probable AD was associated with decreased NPI-NH item scores for a wide range of behavioral disturbances in the subgroup of patients with behavioral symptoms at baseline.

Background Treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors improves cognition in patients with Alzheimer disease (AD). In studies designed with a washout period at the end of the study, after treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor is discontinued, the cognitive benefits of therapy are no longer apparent following washout. The rivastigmine trials discussed in this article were not designed with a posttreatment washout period at the end of the study. Therefore, to evaluate the effect of discontinuing treatment, we analyzed the retrieved dropout (RDO) population. Objective To evaluate the change in cognition (at week 26 vs baseline) observed in patients from 3 large clinical trials of AD who prematurely discontinued treatment with placebo or rivastigmine. Design and Methods Eligible patients with AD (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score, 10-26, inclusive) were enrolled in 1 of three 26-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (Novartis US Pivotal [dose-range] Trial, US fixed-dose study, and a Global Pivotal [dose-range] Trial) that compared rivastigmine therapy with placebo. Patients who discontinued study participation (for any reason) (considered to be the RDO population) were encouraged to return for their scheduled week 26 efficacy evaluations. Effects on cognition were assessed using the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog). Results The results for the Novartis US Pivotal Trials and for the 3 studies combined (Novartis studies B352, B351, and B303) are reported. In the US pivotal trial, RDO patients in the 6- to 12-mg/d group had been not receiving the drug (to be called "off drug") for 102 (57.7) days (mean [SD]) compared with 68 (51.7) days in the RDO placebo group. In these RDO analyses, a statistically significantly greater worsening on the ADAS-Cog mean change score was observed in the placebo group (n = 17) compared with the rivastigmine 6- to 12-mg/d group (n = 33) at week 26 (MMSE score, −8.2 vs −3.0;P= .009). In the pooled studies, the mean (SD) number of days off treatment was 95 (52.0) days for the rivastigmine 6- to 12-mg/d group and 66 (52.7) days for the placebo group. The RDO analysis also showed a statistically significantly greater decline in cognitive function as measured by the ADAS-Cog mean change score in the placebo group (n = 38) compared with the rivastigmine 6- to 12-mg/d group (n = 88) at week 26 (MMSE score, −5.69 vs −2.5;P= .004). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the placebo group exhibited at least a 4-point and 7-point worsening in ADAS-Cog scores at week 26 compared with the rivastigmine 6- to 12-mg/d group in both the Novartis US Pivotal Trials (P= .007,P= .009) and the pooled studies (P= .002,P= .017). Conclusions After discontinuation of therapy, rivastigmine-treated patients exhibited less deterioration in cognitive function compared with placebo-treated patients. The less severe worsening of cognition after withdrawal of treatment in patients previously treated with rivastigmine suggests an effect on disease progression.