李艷,賀電,李婭,楚蘭,劉芳,方旭明,田田
·論著·
腦活素治療Alzheimer’s病的Meta分析
李艷,賀電,李婭,楚蘭,劉芳,方旭明,田田
目的 評價腦活素治療Alzheimer’s病(AD)的絕對有效性和安全性。方法 檢索CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、CBMdisc(檢索截至2015年9月30日)關于腦活素單藥治療AD癡呆或AD源性輕度認知障礙的隨機、安慰劑平行對照臨床試驗。采用Cochrane協(xié)作網(wǎng)的偏倚風險評價工具評價原始研究方法學質量,GRADEpro 3.2軟件評價原始研究的局限性、結果的不一致性和不精確性、證據(jù)的間接性、發(fā)表偏倚對主體證據(jù)質量的影響。結果 共納入6項研究,共950例AD癡呆患者。亞組分析結果顯示腦活素30 ml可改善輕中度AD癡呆患者隨訪1月時或隨訪6個月時認知功能[標準均數(shù)差(SMD)=-0.360,95%CI:-0.600 ~ -0.130,P=0.003;SMD=-0.350,95%CI:-0.590~-0.100,P=0.005)]。隨訪6個月時精神行為癥狀改善(SMD=-0.290,95%CI:-0.540~-0.050,P=0.020)。腦活素不能改善隨訪1個月時或隨訪6個月時日常能力(SMD=-0.160,95%CI:-0.350~0.040,P=0.120;SMD=-0.210,95%CI:-0.450~0.030,P=0.080)。隨訪1個月和6個月時腦活素組和安慰劑組不良事件的發(fā)生率無差異,無嚴重不良事件發(fā)生。所有研究均存在方法學局限性,主要缺陷為測量偏倚風險不清楚,且制藥企業(yè)資助或參與研究,潛在偏倚風險較高。絕大多數(shù)結局指標的總樣本量不足,并且部分結果的95%CI過寬,導致證據(jù)質量下降。結論 低/極低級別證據(jù)表明,腦活素對輕中度AD癡呆患者的認知功能和精神行為癥狀有輕微的改善作用,但不能改善患者的日常能力。
Alzheimer’s病;腦活素;隨機對照試驗;Meta分析
Alzheimer’s病(AD)是癡呆最常見的病因,目前全球范圍內約有20×106例患者,預計到2050年,全球將有1.35×108例患者[1]。AD的病理生理學過程始于臨床診斷為癡呆前多年,疾病過程可以分為無癥狀的臨床前期[2]、有癥狀的癡呆前期[輕度認知障礙(MCI)期][3]和臨床癡呆期3個階段[4]。目前尚無有效治療方法。隨著對AD分子生物學研究的深入,治療方向逐漸從單一的認知功能改善轉為疾病修正治療,目的在于防止或減少β-淀粉樣蛋白(Aβ)和tau蛋白形成、集聚或沉積,減輕神經(jīng)炎癥程度,減緩神經(jīng)變性過程,阻止認知功能惡化。腦活素是一種多肽混合物的水溶液,具有多種生物學活性,如神經(jīng)營養(yǎng)[5]、抗Aβ[6]和抗tau蛋白[7]。迄今已有多項臨床試驗評價腦活素療效,但樣本量較小且結果不盡一致。Wei 等[8]的Meta分析顯示,腦活素可以顯著改善輕中度AD患者總體印象評分。Gauthier等[9]的Meta分析顯示,腦活素可以改善輕中度AD患者總體印象評分和認知功能。然而,上述兩項研究未充分考慮各研究間的異質性和潛在偏倚,且未全面分析和評價證據(jù)質量,有必要再次對這些臨床試驗進行系統(tǒng)評價,以探討腦活素治療AD的絕對有效性和安全性。
1.1 對象 (1)AD癡呆患者的診斷符合國際疾病分類法-10(ICD-10)[10]、美國精神障礙診斷與統(tǒng)計手冊第3版修訂版(DSM-Ⅲ-R)和第4版(DSM-Ⅳ)[11-12]、美國國立神經(jīng)病學、語言障礙和卒中研究所-AD及相關疾病協(xié)會(NINCDS-ADRDA)[4,13]制定的很可能癡呆標準。(2)AD源性MCI患者的診斷符合Petersen等[14]、Winblad等[15]和NINCDS-ADRDA制定的標準[3],同時須有證據(jù)支持系AD所致,且有認知功能隨年齡增長逐漸下降的證據(jù);排除腦血管病、顱腦創(chuàng)傷或其它疾病所致的認知功能下降,排除其它神經(jīng)變性疾病。
1.2 方法
1.2.1 文獻檢索 以“cerebrolysin”“cerebroprotein hydrolysate”“Alzheimer” “dementia”“mild cognitive impairment”為英文檢索詞;以“腦活素”“腦蛋白水解物” “阿爾茨海默病” “老年性癡呆”“輕度認知障礙”為中文檢索詞。計算機檢索CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、CBMdisc(檢索截至日期:2015年9月30日)等國內外數(shù)據(jù)庫關于腦活素單藥治療AD癡呆或MCI的隨機、安慰劑平行對照臨床試驗,并查閱相關綜述和研究的參考文獻以補充可能遺漏的相關臨床試驗。
1.2.2 文獻納入及排除標準 選擇腦活素單藥治療AD癡呆或AD源性MCI的隨機、安慰劑平行對照試驗。試驗組為腦活素靜脈滴注,給藥頻率和治療時間無限制。對照組為安慰劑靜脈滴注,給藥頻率和治療時間與試驗組一致。主要結局包括:(1)認知功能,采用AD評估量表-認知分量表(ADAS-Cog)[16-17]、MMSE[18]、連線測驗(TMT)[19]。(2)臨床總體印象:采用臨床醫(yī)師整體印象變化量表(CGI)[20]、 臨床醫(yī)師訪談時對病情變化的印象補充量表(CIBIC+)[21]。(3)基線時為AD源性MCI的患者,隨訪中進展為AD癡呆的病例數(shù)。(4)不良事件的病例數(shù)、發(fā)生嚴重不良事件的病例數(shù)。次要結局包括:(1)日常能力:采用日常生活活動能力量表(ADL)[22]、工具性日常生活活動能力量表(IADL)[23]、癡呆殘疾評估(DAD)[24]、紐倫堡活動問卷(NAI)[25]。(2)精神行為癥狀:采用神經(jīng)精神癥狀問卷(NPI)[26]、AD病理行為評定量表(BEHAVE-AD)[27]、AD評估量表-非認知分量表(ADAS-nonCog)[16]。
1.2.3 文獻質量評價 根據(jù)Cochrane 系統(tǒng)評價手冊5.1.0版[28],由兩位評價員采用Cochrane協(xié)作網(wǎng)的偏倚風險評價工具對各項研究的方法學質量獨立進行評價,包括隨機分配方法、分配方案隱藏方法、受試者和研究人員設盲情況,結局測量者的設盲情況、結局數(shù)據(jù)的完整性、選擇性報告研究結果和其他偏倚情況。如果一項研究退出率>20%或干預組組間退出原因不平衡,則該項研究判定為具有較高的隨訪偏倚。采用GRADEpro軟件[29]進一步評價各項臨床試驗設計和實施過程中的局限性和偏倚風險、研究結果的不一致性(研究結果間無法解釋的異質性)和不精確性(總樣本量過小或95%CI過寬)、研究證據(jù)的間接性,以及發(fā)表偏倚對證據(jù)質量的影響。
1.2.4 資料提取 由兩位評價員獨立篩選研究、提取資料,包括研究基本信息、研究方法和可能存在的偏倚、研究對象特征、干預措施、結局指標、研究結果、資助機構以及潛在利益沖突等。
1.2.5 統(tǒng)計學方法 采用RevMan 5.3.3[30]進行數(shù)據(jù)合成,選擇腦活素30 ml組與安慰劑對照組進行Meta分析,并分析隨訪短期(≤1個月)、中期(1~6個月)、長期(>6個月)的結局數(shù)據(jù)。若異質性檢驗顯示存在中度或中度以上統(tǒng)計學異質性(I2>30.000%),根據(jù)癡呆嚴重程度、同一結局所測量的量表差異、偏倚風險程度進行亞組分析,以分析異質性來源。根據(jù)一種假設(可能情況)進行敏感性分析,以評價退出病例對主要結局的影響。
2.1 文獻檢索和研究質量評價 初篩共獲得相關文獻95篇,經(jīng)閱讀文題和摘要篩選出10篇文獻,進一步閱讀原文,剔除1項開放性臨床試驗[31],最終納入9篇文獻[32-40]共6項隨機對照臨床試驗,共950例輕中度AD癡呆患者。特征見表1;研究質量和偏倚風險評價結果見表2。
2.2 效應量的合并
2.2.1 認知功能 有5項研究[32-36]報道了隨訪1個月時的認知功能,其中3項研究[33-35]間無明顯的異質性(P=0.300,I2=16.000%),采用隨機效應模型進行合并,結果顯示,腦活素治療輕中度AD癡呆患者,可改善隨訪1個月時認知功能[標準均數(shù)差(SMD)=-0.360,95%CI:-0.600~-0.130,P=0.003)]。有3項研究[35-37]報道隨訪6個月時的認知功能,其中2項[35,37]研究間無異質性(P=0.690,I2=0.000%),用隨機效應模型進行合并顯示,腦活素治療可改善輕中度AD癡呆患者隨訪6個月時認知功能(SMD=-0.350,95%CI:-0.590~-0.100,P=0.005)。
2.2.2 臨床總體印象 有5項研究[32-36]報道隨訪1個月時臨床總體印象;3項研究[35-37]報道隨訪6個月時臨床總體印象,各研究間均存在異質性,故未進行數(shù)據(jù)合并。
表1 所納入6項研究的特征(x±s,例,%)研究 例數(shù) 女性 年齡(歲) 基線MMSE 評分 干預措施 隨訪時 間(個月)結局指標Rüether等[32](1994)1SCAG、CGI、ZVT、NAI、bf?S 腦活素組6038(63.3)71.6±8.821.6±1.330ml腦活素,靜脈輸注,1次/d,周一至周五,共四周 對照組6041(68.3)71.3±7.821.6±1.3安慰劑Bae等[33](2000)1ADAS?Cog、CGI、GDS、MMSE、ADL、IADL 腦活素組3423(67.6)73.1±9.716.3±4.830ml腦活素,靜脈輸注,1次/d,周一至周五,共四周 對照組1912(63.2)69.0±9.114.6±5.5安慰劑Xiao等[34](2000)1MMSE、CGI、ZVT、SCAG、ADL、NAI 腦活素組7434(45.9)69.8±8.118.8±3.230ml腦活素,靜脈輸注,1次/d,周一至周五,共四周 對照組8345(54.2)70.9±7.319.1±3.2安慰劑Rüether等[35](2001)6ADAS?Cog、CGI、MADR?S、NAI、ADAS?nonCog、SKT 腦活素組7649(64.5)72.5±7.917±3.930ml腦活素,靜脈輸注,1次/d,每周連續(xù)給藥5d,共四周,間隔8周后再次按上述給藥方案給藥 對照組7338(52.1)73.5±7.617.5±4.4安慰劑Panisset等[36](2002)6ADAS?Cog、CIBIC+、MMSE、DAD、CORNELL、PSMS、IADL、BEHAVE?AD、CDR 腦活素組9758(59.8)73.2±6.120.2±3.330ml腦活素,靜脈輸注,1次/d,每周連續(xù)給藥5d,共四周 對照組9553(55.8)75.2±6.220.9±3.2安慰劑Alvarez等[37](2006)6ADAS?Cog+、CIBIC+、MMSE、NPI、ZVT、DAD 腦活素10ml組6949(71.0)72.2±9.919.7±3.9腦活素10ml,靜脈輸注,1次/d,每周給藥5d,給藥四周,之后每周給藥2d,給藥8周 腦活素30ml組7053(75.7)73.4±8.719.7±3.2腦活素30ml 腦活素60ml組7150(70.4)74.6±7.319.6±4.1腦活素60ml 對照組6945(65.2)73.9±9.819.8±3.8安慰劑 注:ADAS?Cog+:ADAS?Cog量表修訂版;bf?S:Zerssen自評量表;CDR:臨床癡呆評定量表;CORNELL:康奈爾抑郁量表;GDS:老年抑郁量表;MADR?S:蒙哥馬利抑郁量表;PSMS:軀體生活自理量表;SCAG:老年臨床評定量表;SKT:簡短認知功能測驗;ZVT:TMT
表2 所納入6項研究的方法學質量與偏倚風險評價(例,%)研究隨機分配方法(選擇性偏倚)分配方案隱藏(選擇性偏倚)受試者和研究人員的設盲(實施偏倚)結果測量者的設盲(測量偏倚)結果數(shù)據(jù)的完整性(隨訪偏倚)腦活素組安慰劑組選擇性報告研究結果(報告偏倚)其他偏倚來源Rüether等[32](1994)不清楚偏倚風險低偏倚風險低不清楚00偏倚風險低偏倚風險高Bae等[33](2000)不清楚偏倚風險低偏倚風險低不清楚00偏倚風險低偏倚風險高Xiao等[34](2000)偏倚風險低偏倚風險低偏倚風險低不清楚2(2.7)0偏倚風險低偏倚風險高Ruether等[35](2001)偏倚風險低偏倚風險低偏倚風險低不清楚6(7.9)7(9.6)偏倚風險低偏倚風險高Panisset等[36](2002)偏倚風險高偏倚風險低偏倚風險低不清楚9(9.3)12(12.6)偏倚風險低偏倚風險高Alvarez等[37](2006)偏倚風險低不清楚偏倚風險低不清楚腦活素10ml:11(15.9)腦活素30ml:9(12.9)腦活素60ml:6(8.6)16(23.2)偏倚風險低偏倚風險高
2.2.3 精神行為癥狀 有3項研究[35-37]報道隨訪6個月時精神行為癥狀,其中2項[35,37]研究間無異質性(P=0.870,I2=0.000%),采用隨機效應模型進行合并,結果顯示,腦活素治療輕中度AD癡呆患者,可改善隨訪6個月時精神行為癥狀(SMD=-0.290,95%CI:-0.540~-0.050,P=0.020)。
2.2.4 日常能力 有5項研究[32-36]報道隨訪1個月時日常能力,其中3項[34-36]研究間無明顯異質性(P=0.300,I2=16.000%),采用隨機效應模型進行合并,結果顯示,腦活素治療輕中度AD癡呆患者,不能改善隨訪1個月時日常能力(SMD=-0.160,95%CI:-0.350~0.040,P=0.120)。有3項研究[35-37]報道隨訪6個月日常能力,其中2項[35,37]研究間無異質性(P=0.580,I2=0.000%),采用隨機效應模型進行合并顯示,腦活素治療輕中度AD癡呆患者,不能改善隨訪6個月時日常能力(SMD=-0.210,95%CI:-0.450~0.030,P=0.080)。
2.2.5 安全性 有3項[32-34]報道隨訪1個月時不良事件發(fā)生率,各研究間無異質性(P=0.710,I2=0.000%),采用隨機效應模型進行合并,結果顯示,與安慰劑比較,腦活素治療輕中度AD癡呆不增加隨訪1個月時不良事件發(fā)生率(RR=2.940,95%CI:0.720~11.990;P=0.130)。3項研究[32-34]報道隨訪1個月時無一例發(fā)生嚴重不良事件。3項研究[35-37]報道隨訪6個月時不良事件和嚴重不良事件發(fā)生率,各項研究間無異質性(P=0.430,I2=0.000%;P=0.790,I2=0.000%),采用隨機效應模型進行合并,結果顯示,與安慰劑比較,腦活素治療輕中度AD癡呆不增加隨訪6個月時不良事件和嚴重不良事件發(fā)生率(RR= 0.920,95%CI:0.790~1.070,P=0.280 ;RR= 1.090,95%CI:0.620~1.910,P=0.760)。
2.3 主要結局的證據(jù)質量 所有經(jīng)Meta分析的結局證據(jù)等級因原始研究局限性或(和)結果的不精確性而降低,評為極或極低級別證據(jù)。由于本系統(tǒng)評價納入的研究數(shù)目較少,未能進行發(fā)表偏倚評價。
本系統(tǒng)評價共納入6項腦活素單藥治療AD的隨機、安慰劑平行對照臨床試驗,所有試驗在方法學上均存在局限性,主要為測量偏倚風險不清楚,并且制藥企業(yè)資助或參與了研究。因此,所有試驗均判定為高偏倚風險的研究。其中1項研究使用計算機產(chǎn)生隨機化序列,但因區(qū)組長度過大,導致兩組患者在年齡和病程上不具有可比性,選擇性偏倚風險較高。
本研究結果顯示,靜脈滴注腦活素30 ml治療輕中度AD癡呆可改善患者短中期認知功能;此外,精神行為癥狀亦有所改善;但不能改善日常能力。腦活素30 ml治療輕中度AD癡呆安全性較好。
然而,由于所納入研究方法學的缺陷(主要為測量偏倚風險不清楚、制藥企業(yè)資助或參與研究)或/和結果的不精確性(由于總樣本量不足或/和結果95%CI過寬),上述結果的真實性受影響,證據(jù)質量降低??偟膩碚f,使用量表評估的結局,包括認知功能、精神行為癥狀以及日常能力,受測量偏倚的影響較大。本系統(tǒng)評價所納入試驗的測量偏倚風險不清楚,并且制藥企業(yè)資助或參與了所有研究,潛在偏倚風險較高,上述量表評估結局的證據(jù)質量下調2個等級,此外,除隨訪1個月日常能力外,其余結局總樣本量均不足400例,并且部分結果的95%CI過寬,證據(jù)質量進一步下調1個等級,被評定為極低級別證據(jù)。雖不良事件結局的證據(jù)受測量偏倚影響小,但仍受潛在高偏倚風險(制藥企業(yè)資助或參與研究)的影響,因此,證據(jù)質量下調1個等級。此外,不良事件結局的證據(jù)質量還因樣本量不足或/和結果95%CI過寬進一步下調1個等級,被評定為低級別證據(jù)。在臨床總體印象方面,由于各項研究間存在統(tǒng)計學異質性,未能進行Meta分析。
低/極低級別證據(jù)表明,腦活素對輕中度AD癡呆患者的認知功能和精神行為癥狀有輕微的改善作用,但不能改善患者的日常能力。
[1]Alzheimer ’s Association. 2014 Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2014, 10:e47.
[2]Sperling RA, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, et al. Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the national institute on aging- Alzheimer’s association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2011, 7:280.
[3]Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2011, 7:270.
[4]McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the national institute on aging-Alzheimer’s association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2011, 7:263.
[5]Ubhi K, Rockenstein E, Vazquez-Roque R, et al. Cerebrolysin modulates pronerve growth factor/nerve growth factor ratio and ameliorates the cholinergic deficit in a transgenic model of Alzheimer’s disease[J]. J Neurosci Res, 2013, 91:167.
[6]Rockenstein E, Torrance M, Mante M, et al. Cerebrolysin decreases amyloid-beta production by regulating amyloid protein precursor maturation in a transgenic model of Alzheimer’s disease[J]. J Neurosci Res, 2006, 83:1252.
[7]Rockenstein E, Ubhi K, Trejo M, et al. CerebrolysinTMefficacy in a transgenic model of tauopathy: role in regulation of mitochondrial structure[J]. BMC Neurosci, 2014,15:90.
[8]Wei ZH, He QB, Wang H, et al. Meta-analysis: the efficacy of nootropic agent Cerebrolysin in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease[J]. J Neural Transm (Vienna), 2007, 114:629.
[9]Gauthier S, Proao JV, Jia J, et al. Cerebrolysin in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials[J]. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord, 2015, 39:332.
[10]World Health Organization. The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: clinical description and diagnostic guidelines[M]. Geneva: World Health Organization, Division of Mental Health, 1992.
[11]American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders[M]. Third Edition, Revised. American Psychiatric Association, 1989.
[12]American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders[M]. 4th Edition. American Psychiatric Association, 1994.
[13]McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, et al. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA work group under the auspices of department of health and human services task force on Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Neurology, 1984, 4:939.
[14]Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, et al. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome[J]. Arch Neurol,1999,56:303.
[15]Winblad B, Palmer K, Kivipelto M, et al. Mild cognitive impairment-beyond controversies, towards a consensus: report of the international working group on mild cognitive impairment[J]. J Intern Med, 2004,256:240.
[16]Rosen WG, Mohs RC, Davis KL. A new rating scale for Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Am J Psychiatry, 1984,141:1356.
[17]Mohs RC, Knopman D, Petersen RC, et al. Development of cognitive instruments for use in clinical trials of antidementia drugs: additions to the Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale that broaden its scope. The Alzheimer’s disease cooperative study[J]. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord, 1997,11:s13.
[18]Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician[J]. J Psychiatr Res,1975,12:189.
[19]Oswald WD. Der Zahlen-Verbindungs-Test im hoheren lebensalter[M]. In: Aspekte Psychologischer Forschung. Hogrefe, Gottingen: 1986.
[20]Guy W. Clinical Global Impressions (CCI)[M]. In: ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1976.
[21]Knopman DS, Knapp MJ, Gracon SI, et al. The Clinician Interview-Based Impression (CIBI): a clinician’s global change rating scale in Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Neurology, 1994,44:2315.
[22]Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, et al. Studies of illness in aged. The index of ADL: a standardized measure of biological and psychosocial funtion[J]. JAMA, 1963, 185:914.
[23]Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining andinstrumental activities of daily living[J]. Gerontologist, 1969, 9:179.
[24]Gélinas I, Gauthier L, McIntyre M, et al. Development of a functional measure for persons with Alzheimer’s disease: the disability assessment for dementia[J]. Am J Occup Ther, 1999,53:471.
[25]Oswald WD, Fleischmann UM. Nürnberger-Alters-Inventar NAI[M]. Testkasten und Manual, 3. Aufl. Universit?t Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg. Hogrefe (Testzentrale Stuttgart), G?ttingen. 1992.
[26]Cummings JL, Mega M, Gray K, et al. The neuropsychiatric inventory: comprehensive assessment of psychopathology in dementia[J]. Neurology, 1994,44:2308.
[27]Reisberg B, Borenstein J, Salob SP, et al. Behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer’s disease: phenomenology and treatment[J]. J Clin Psychiatry,1987,48:9.
[28]Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011][DB/OL]. Available at: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
[29]Schünemann H, Brozek J, Oxman A, editors. GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendation. Version 3.2 [updated March 2009][DB/OL]. Available at: http://www.cc-ims.net/gradepro.
[30]Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3 [CP]. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
[31]Muresanu DF, Rainer M, Moessler H. Improved global function and activities of daily living in patients with AD: a placebo-controlled clinical study with the neurotrophic agent Cerebrolysin[J]. J Neural Transm Suppl, 2002,62:277.
[32]Rüether E, Ritter R, Apecechea M, et al. Efficacy of the peptidergic nootropic drug cerebrolysin in patients with senile dementia of the lzheimer type (SDAT) [J]. Pharmacopsychiatry,1994,27:32.
[33]Bae CY, Cho CY, Cho K, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of erebrolysin for Alzheimer’s disease[J]. J Am Geriatr Soc,2000,48:1566.
[34]Xiao SF, Yan HQ, Yao PF, et al. Efficacy of FPF 1070 (Cerebrolysin) in atients with Alzheimer ’s disease: A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, lacebo-controlled trial[J]. Clin Drug Invest, 2000,9:43.
[35]Rüether E, Husmann R, Kinzler E, et al. A 28-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with cerebrolysin in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Int Clin Psychopharmacol, 2001,16:253.
[36]Panisset M, Gauthier S, Moessler H, et al. Cerebrolysin in Alzheimer’s disease: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a neurotrophic agent[J]. J Neural Transm (Vienna),2002,109:1089.
[37]Alvarez XA, Cacabelos R, Laredo M, et al. A 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of three dosages of cerebrolysin in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease[J]. Eur J Neurol,2006, 13:43.
[38]Rüether E, Ritter R, Apecechea M, et al.Sustained improvements in patients with dementia of Alzheimer’s type (DAT) 6 months after termination of cerebrolysin therapy[J]. J Neural Transm (Vienna),2000,107:815.
[39]Rüether E, Alvarez XA, Rainer M, et al. Sustained improvement of cognition and global function in patients with moderately severe Alzheimer’s disease: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study with the neurotrophic agent cerebrolysin[J]. J Neural Transm Suppl, 2002,62:265.
[40]Alvarez XA, Cacabelos R, Sampedro C, et al. Efficacy and safety of cerebrolysin in moderate to moderately severe Alzheimer’s disease: results of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial investigating three dosages of cerebrolysin[J]. Eur J Neurol, 2011,18:59.
Meta-analysis of cerebrolysin for Alzheimer’s disease
LIYan,HEDian,LIYa,etal.
DepartmentofNeurology,AffiliatedHospitalofGuizhouMedicalUniversity,Guiyang550004,China
Objective To assess the absolute efficacy and safety of cerebrolysin for patients with Alzheimer’s disease(AD). Methods CENTRAL, MEDLINE、EMBASE, PsycINFO, CBMDisc(up to September 30,2015) were searched for the randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trials evaluating cerebrolysin as monotherapy for patients with AD dementia or mild cognitive impairment due to AD. The methodological quality of the original studies were evaluated by using the Cochrane collaboration’s tool. The influences of study limitations, inconsistency of results, imprecision of effect estimates, indirectness of evidence and publication bias on the quality of the body of evidence were assessed by using GRADEpro software (version 3.2).Results Six studies were included, involving 950 patients with AD dementia. Subgroup analyses indicated cerebrolysin at a dose of 30 ml improved cognitive function in patients with mild-to-moderate AD dementia at one month or six months of follow-up [standard mean difference (SMD)=-0.360,95%CI:-0.600--0.130,P=0.003;SMD =-0.350,95%CI:-0.590--0.100,P=0.005)]. There was improvement in behavioural and psychiatric symptoms at six months of follow-up(SMD=-0.290,95%CI:-0.540--0.050,P=0.020).Cerebrolysin did not improve activities of daily living at one month or six months of follow-up (SMD=-0.160,95%CI:-0.350-0.040,P=0.120;SMD=-0.210,95%CI:-0.450-0.030,P=0.080). The incidence of adverse events (AEs) at one month or six month of follow-up was not different between the cerebrolysin group and the placebo group. No serious AEs occurred in both groups. All studies had methodological limitations, mainly on an unclear risk of detection bias. The pharmaceutical company funded or participated in the clinical trials, therefore,the potential risk of bias was high.Furthermore, the total sample size for most outcomes was insufficient, and the 95%CIof most results was wide. All these factors contributed to a decreased quality level of the evidence.Conclusions There is low/very low-quality evidence to show that cerebrolysin has slight effects in improving cognitive function and behavioural and psychiatric symptoms in patients with mild-to-moderate AD dementia. It has no effects in improving activities of daily living.
Alzheimer’s disease; cerebrolysin; randomized controlled trial; meta-analysis
貴州省科技計劃項目(黔科合重大專項字[2014]6008號)
550004 貴陽,貴州醫(yī)科大學附屬醫(yī)院神經(jīng)內科
賀電
R749.1
A
1004-1648(2017)03-0179-06
2016-03-29
2016-05-19)