Rivastigmine in Chinese patients with subcortical vascular dementia. Effect of rivastigmine on delay to diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease from mild cognitive impairment: the InDDEx study. Efficacy, safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules in patients with probable vascular dementia: the VantagE study.
We explored the efficacy and tolerability of rivastigmine among Chinese patients with subcortical vascular dementia.
                Forty subjects were randomized to either placebo (n = 20) or rivastigmine (n = 20) in a double-blind 26-week trial. Outcome measures were cognition (mini-mental state examination, frontal assessment battery), neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI), instrumental activities of daily living, clinical dementia rating scale, and adverse events.
                No statistical significant benefit could be observed in the active group in any of the efficacy measures. A trend favoring active group was observed only in the NPI subscore of irritability (p = 0.066) and aberrant motor behavior (p = 0.068). Withdrawal rate was 30% and 15% in the active and placebo group, respectively.
                Among Chinese subcortical vascular dementia patients, there was no apparent cognitive benefit associated with use of rivastigmine over the 6 months period. A trend favoring rivastigmine was observed in certain behavioral measures. Rivastigmine was associated with more withdrawals relative to placebo. To assess the effect of rivastigmine in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) on the time to clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and the rate of cognitive decline.
                The study was a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of up to 48 months. All patients had MCI operationally defined by having cognitive symptoms, a global clinical dementia rating stage of 0.5, a score of less than 9 on the New York University delayed paragraph recall test, and by not meeting the diagnostic criteria for AD. Primary efficacy variables were time to clinical diagnosis of AD, and change in performance on a cognitive test battery. This study is registered with the US National Institutes of Health clinical trials database (ClinicalTrials.gov), number NCT00000174.
                Of 1018 study patients enrolled, 508 were randomly assigned to rivastigmine and 510 to placebo; 17.3% of patients on rivastigmine and 21.4% on placebo progressed to AD (hazard ratio 0.85 [95% CI 0.64-1.12]; p=0.225). There was no significant difference between the rivastigmine and placebo groups on the standardised Z score for the cognitive test battery measured as mean change from baseline to endpoint (-0.10 [95% CI -0.63 to 0.44], p=0.726). Serious adverse events were reported by 141 (27.9%) rivastigmine-treated patients and 155 (30.5%) patients on placebo; adverse events of all types were reported by 483 (95.6%) rivastigmine-treated patients and 472 (92.7%) placebo-treated patients. The predominant adverse events were cholinergic: the frequencies of nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and dizziness were two to four times higher in the rivastigmine group than in the placebo group.
                There was no significant benefit of rivastigmine on the progression rate to AD or on cognitive function over 4 years. The overall rate of progression from MCI to AD in this randomised clinical trial was much lower than predicted. Rivastigmine treatment was not associated with any significant safety concerns. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules in patients diagnosed with probable vascular dementia (VaD).
                VantagE (Vascular Dementia trial studying Exelon) was a 24-week, multicentre, double-blind study. VaD patients aged 50-85 years were randomized to rivastigmine capsules (3-12 mg/day) or placebo. Efficacy assessments included global and cognitive performances, activities of daily living and neuropsychiatric symptoms. Adverse events were recorded. Additional exploratory analyses determined whether heterogeneity in pathologies and symptoms extended to differential treatment effects.
                NCT00099216.
                710 patients were randomized. Rivastigmine demonstrated superiority over placebo on three measures of cognitive performance (Vascular Dementia Assessment Scale, Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale, Mini-Mental State Examination; all p< or = 0.05, intent-to-treat population [ITT]), but not other outcomes. Predominant adverse events were nausea and vomiting. Exploratory analyses indicated that older patients (> or =75 years old), assumed more likely to also have Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology, demonstrated significant cognitive responses to rivastigmine and a safety profile similar to that seen in AD patients. Younger patients, assumed less likely to have concomitant AD pathology, showed no efficacy response and were associated with slight elevations of blood pressure, cerebrovascular accidents and mortality. Rivastigmine-placebo differences in patients with, versus those without, medial temporal atrophy (also suggestive of concomitant AD) showed a numerical difference similar to that seen between the older versus younger patients, but did not attain statistical significance.
                Consistent with trials evaluating other cholinesterase inhibitors, rivastigmine did not provide consistent efficacy in probable VaD. The efficacy apparent on cognitive outcomes was derived from effects in older patients likely to have concomitant Alzheimer pathology. This is supportive of an existing argument that the putative cholinergic deficit in VaD reflects the presence of concomitant Alzheimer pathology.
There is some evidence of benefit of rivastigmine in VCI from trial data from three studies. However, this conclusion is based on one large study. Rivastigmine is capable of inducing side effects that lead to withdrawal in a significant proportion of patients.