|
CADASIL
Study Treatment Trial January Susan Jeffrey
February 26, 2008 (New Orleans, Lousiana) A randomized trial of donepezil (Aricept,
Eisai/Pfizer) in patients with cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical
infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) has found no effect of treatment on the study's
primary end point, change from baseline in the vascular Alzheimer's disease (AD) assessment
scale cognitive subscale (V-ADAS-cog).
Improvements
were seen on several secondary measures of executive function, the researchers, with first
author Martin Dichgans, MD, from Ludwig Maximilian University, in Munich, Germany, note,
"but the clinical relevance of these findings is not clear."
Results
of the trial, funded by Esai Medical Research, were published online February 22 in Lancet
Neurology, to coincide with their presentation here at the American Stroke Association
International Stroke Conference 2008.
Although
the results were negative, the researchers feel this trial has some lessons for how to proceed
in the study of vascular dementia, Dr. Dichgans told a press conference here. "First, we
feel our results emphasize the need to focus on specific etiologic subgroups in future
interventional trials in vascular dementia," he said, as well as the importance of using
dedicated neuropsychological test batteries developed for vascular dementia, not Alzheimer's
disease.
Finally,
he added, "we feel that CADASIL is a good model to assess novel therapeutic approaches in
future trials."
Heterogeneous
Disease
Cholinesterase
inhibitors, including donepezil, have been shown to benefit patients with mild to moderate
Alzheimer's disease, with improvements seen in cognition, global functioning, and activities
of daily living (ADL), the authors write.
The
picture is less clear in vascular dementia. These patients do have cholinergic deficits caused
by disruption of cholinergic pathways by subcortical ischemic lesions, and trials of
cholesterase inhibitors in vascular dementia have shown some benefit on cognition.
"However, effects on global functioning and ADL have been inconsistent, and regulatory
approval for this class of drugs has so far not been granted for use in this condition,"
they write.
Dr.
Dichgans said that the conduct and interpretation of trials in vascular dementia have been
difficult; vascular dementia is a heterogeneous group of disorders, he explained, and there is
frequent overlap with AD pathology. In addition, many of the assessment tools used in these
trials were developed in the field of AD.
"We
set out to perform a dedicated trial in a more narrowly defined type of vascular dementia,
subcortical vascular dementia," Dr. Dichgans said. They focused on a specific disorder,
CADASIL, a genetic disorder with an early age of onset that causes subcortical vascular
ischemic dementia. "These patients, because of the very early age of onset, are unlikely
to have AD pathology, so this seemed a very clean system, a clear model, to study vascular
dementia, specifically subcortical vascular dementia," he said.
The
current study was an 18-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial carried
out in 10 countries. A total of 168 patients with a diagnosis of CADASIL and cognitive
impairment, defined as a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of 10 to 27 or a
trail-making test (TMT) B time score of at least 1.5 standard deviations below the mean, after
adjustment for age and education.
They
were randomized to receive either donepezil, 5 mg per day for the first 6 weeks, increasing to
10 mg until 18 weeks, or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline on
the V-ADAS-cog at 18 weeks.
Of
168 patients randomized, 82 were assigned to placebo and 86 to donepezil. Of these, 5 in the
placebo group and 2 in the donepezil group discontinued the trial either because they did not
receive at least 1 dose of the study medication or did not have a baseline and postbaseline
assessment on the V-ADAS-cog available for analysis. The intention-to-treat analysis therefore
included 77 placebo and 84 donepezil patients.
Results
at 18 weeks showed no significant difference between the donepezil and placebo groups on the
primary end point.
Change
in V-ADAS-cog from Baseline to 18 Weeks by Treatment Group
End
Point
|
Placebo
|
Donepezil
|
P
|
Least-squares
mean change from baseline score (SE)
|
-0.81
(0.59) |
-0.85
(0.57) |
.956
|
Similar
results were seen on the V-ADAS-cog and the MMSE assessments of a range of cognitive
functions, both secondary end points.
They
did see a significant treatment effect, though, on several measures of executive function,
specifically the TMT B time (P = .023), TMT A time (P = .015), and the executive
interview-25 (P = .022).
This
finding is "of great interest because it emphasizes the involvement of cholinergic
deficits in executive function," the authors note, adding, however, that the clinical
relevance of these improvements is not clear.
The
rate of adverse events was slightly higher with donepezil, as was expected, Dr. Dichgans said,
but the rate and spectrum of events was similar to known effects seen in previous trials with
donepezil. There were no serious adverse events with donepezil; 1 such event in the placebo
group was probably unrelated to study medication, he noted.
Questions
on Sample Selection
In
a Reflection and Reaction commentary accompanying the paper, Lon S. Schneider, MD, from the
University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, in Los Angeles, lays out several
issues with the design of the trial that he suggests may limit how the effect of donepezil can
be interpreted.
For
example, inclusion criteria required "poor but not necessarily abnormal
performance" on cognitive tests, he writes. "The consideration that this sample
included patients with dementia and possibly even patients who had normal scores on
psychometric tests but with cognitive symptoms might imply that the investigators did not have
the sample of patients with CADASIL that they were seeking or did not have a sample that was
best suited to test the effects of donepezil," Dr. Schneider writes.
He
suggests that half of the outcomes measured were more appropriate for patients with mild to
moderate dementia who have orientation, memory, and comprehensive deficits. Further,
randomization did not achieve balance between treatment groups on the basis of sex,
antidepressant use, and TMT B time, which was longer in the placebo group, with a mean
difference of about 22 seconds, he points out.
"Dichgans
and colleagues showed the feasibility of multicenter trials with patients with CADASIL and the
therapeutic potential of cholinesterase inhibitors," Dr. Schneider concludes. "In
future trials, the sample selection should be reconsidered to better define the cognitive
impairment syndrome to be treated, choose outcomes that reflect the deficits to be treated,
and identify the individual patients who benefit from treatment."
"Slain
by the Data"
Commenting
on the findings for Medscape Neurology & Neurosurgery, session moderator and
American Stroke Association program committee chair Philip Gorelick, MD, from the University
of Illinois College of Medicine, in Chicago, said the negative findings in this trial are
disappointing but perhaps not surprising.
"Unfortunately,
this is the story of all the cholinesterase inhibitors that have been tested in vascular
dementia, all of them," he said. "If you look at the studies, some of the subtests
are positive, but the primary end point they choose, the most important one, doesn't come out
to be positive."
The
present study was well-designed, and the primary end point was the correct one, in his
opinion, but the study was nevertheless negative. "We were all hoping it would work, and
it just didn't." Although there was a "very strong scientific rationale" for
testing cholinesterase inhibitors in CADASIL because of the disruption of cholinergic pathways
in the white matter of these patients, he said during the press conference here, "this
hypothesis has been slain by the data."
The
study was funded by Esai Medical Research. Dr. Dichgans participated as an investigator and
received consultancy fees and research grant support from Esai Medical Research. Disclosures
for coauthors are listed in the paper. Dr. Snyder reports he has received honoraria for
educational presentations from or has acted as a consultant for Forest Pharmaceuticals,
Johnson & Johnson, Lundbeck, Merz GmB, Novartis, and Pfizer.
Lancet
Neurol.
Published online February 22, 2008. Abstract
Abstract
American
Stroke Association International Stroke Conference 2008: Abstract LB 5. Presented February 22,
2008. |