SUMMARY Background Depression is common in Alzheimer’s disease [AD], and antidepressants are commonly used for its treatment, yet evidence for antidepressant efficacy in this population is lacking. We conducted a multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled trial titled “Depression in Alzheimer’s Disease-2” (DIADS-2) to assess the efficacy and tolerability of sertraline for depression in AD. Methods One hundred thiry-one participants from 5 U.S. medical centers with mild-to-moderate AD (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] scores 10–26) and depression of AD were randomized to double-blinded treatment with sertraline (N=67) or placebo (N=64), with a target dosage of 100 mg daily. Efficacy was assessed using logistic regressions and mixed effects models in an intention to treat (ITT) analysis with imputation of missing data. Principal outcome measures were modified Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC), change in Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) scores, and remission defined by both mADCS-CGIC score ≤2 and CSDD score ≤ 6. Findings mADCS-CGIC ratings (OR = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.52, 1.97, p=0.98), CSDD scores (median difference at 12 weeks 1.2,[95% CI -1.65, 4.05], p=0.41), and remission at 12 weeks of followup (OR = 2.06, [95% CI - 0.84, 5.04], p=0.11) did not differ between sertraline (N=67) and placebo (N=64). Sertraline-treated patients experienced more adverse events, most notably gastrointestinal and respiratory, than placebo-treated patients. Interpretation Sertraline did not demonstrate efficacy for the treatment depression symptoms in patients with Alzheimer's disease. In addition, its use was associated with an increased incidence of adverse events. Thus, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors may be of limited value for treating depression in AD patients

Objective In a recent crossover trial, methylphenidate treatment decreased apathy in Alzheimer's disease. We further assessed this finding in the Alzheimer's Disease Methylphenidate Trial (ADMET). Method Six-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial enrolling Alzheimer's disease participants (NINCDS-ADRDA criteria) with apathy assigned to methylphenidate 20 mg daily or placebo, conducted from June 2010 to December 2011. Primary outcomes were change in Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) score and modified Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGI-C). Secondary outcomes included change in Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) apathy score, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, and safety. Results 60 participants were randomly assigned (29 methylphenidate, 31 placebo). At baseline, mean (SD) age = 76 (8) years, MMSE score = 20 (5), AES score = 51 (12), NPI total score = 16 (8), and 62% of the participants (n = 37) were female. After 6 weeks' treatment, mean (SD) change in AES score was −1.9 (1.5) for methylphenidate and 0.6 (1.4) for placebo (P = .23). Odds ratio for improvement in ADCS-CGI-C was 3.7 (95% CI, 1.3 to 10.8) (P = .02), with 21% of methylphenidate versus 3% of placebo rated as moderately or markedly improved. NPI apathy score improvement was 1.8 points (95% CI, 0.3 to 3.4) greater on methylphenidate than on placebo (P = .02). MMSE trended toward improvement on methylphenidate (P = .06). There were trends toward greater anxiety and weight loss > 2% in the methylphenidate-treated group. Conclusions Methylphenidate treatment of apathy in Alzheimer's disease was associated with significant improvement in 2 of 3 efficacy outcomes and a trend toward improved global cognition with minimal adverse events, supporting the safety and efficacy of methylphenidate treatment for apathy in Alzheimer's disease.

Background Depression and antidepressant use are common in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), but the effect of antidepressant treatment for depression on longer-term outcomes is unknown. We report the week-24 outcomes of patients who participated in a 12-week efficacy study of sertraline for depression of AD. Methods 131 participants (sertraline=67, placebo=64) with mild-moderate AD and depression participated in the study. Patients who showed improvement on the modified Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study Clinical Global Impression-Change (mADCS-CGIC) after 12 weeks of randomized treatment with sertraline or placebo continued double-blinded treatment for an additional 12 weeks. Depression response and remission at 24 weeks were based on mADCS-CGIC score and change in Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) score. Secondary outcome measures included time to remission, non-mood neuropsychiatric symptoms, global cognition, function, and quality of life. Results 117 (89.3%) participants completed all study assessments and 74 (56.5%; sertraline=38, placebo=36) completed all 24 weeks on randomized treatment. By 24 weeks, there were no between-group differences in depression response (sertraline=44.8%, placebo=35.9%; odds ratio [95% CI]=1.23 [0.64, 2.35]), change in CSDD score (median difference=0.6 [95% CI −2.26, 3.46], χ2 [df=2]=1.03), remission rates (sertraline=32.8%, placebo=21.8%; odds ratio [95% CI]=1.61 [0.70, 3.68]), or secondary outcomes. Common SSRI-associated adverse events, specifically diarrhea, dizziness, and dry mouth, and pulmonary serious adverse events (SAEs) were more frequent in sertraline-randomized patients than in placebo subjects. Conclusions Sertraline treatment is not associated with delayed improvement between 12 and 24 weeks of treatment and may not be indicated for the treatment of depression of AD.

Background Several lines of evidence suggest that inflammatory mechanisms may be involved in the severity and progression of depression. One pathway implicated is the production of prostaglandins via the enzyme cyclooxygenase (COX). Although late life depression in particular has been associated with inflammation, we know of no published studies using COX inhibitors, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), in the treatment of depressive syndromes in this population. Objective To evaluate the effect of the NSAIDs celecoxib and naproxen on depressive symptoms in older adults. Methods The Alzheimer’s Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial (ADAPT) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked clinical trial conducted at six U.S. memory clinics. Cognitively normal volunteers aged 70 and over with a family history of Alzheimer-like dementia were randomly assigned to receive celecoxib 200mg BID, naproxen sodium 220mg BID, or placebo. The 30-item version of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) was administered to all participants at enrollment and at yearly follow-up visits. Participants with a GDS score >5 at baseline were classified as depressed. Results Of 2,528 participants enrolled 2,312 returned for at least one follow-up visit. Approximately one-fifth had significant depressive symptoms at baseline. Mean GDS score, and the percentage with significant depressive symptoms, remained similar over time across all three treatment groups. Furthermore, there was no treatment effect on GDS scores over time in the subgroup of participants with significant depressive symptoms at baseline. In longitudinal analysis using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) regression, higher baseline GDS scores, a prior psychiatric history, older age, time in the study, and lower cognition interacting with time, but not treatment assignment, were associated with significantly higher GDS scores over time. Conclusions Treatment with celecoxib or naproxen did not improve depressive symptoms over time compared with placebo. While inflammation has been implicated in late life depression, these results do not support the hypothesis that inhibition of the cyclooxygenase pathway with these NSAIDs at these doses alleviates depressive symptoms in older adults.

Background Agitation is one of the most common neuropsychiatric symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and is associated with serious adverse consequences for patients and caregivers. Evidence-supported treatment options for agitation are limited. The citalopram for agitation in Alzheimer’s disease (CitAD) study was designed to evaluate the potential of citalopram to ameliorate these symptoms. Methods CitAD is a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial with two parallel treatment groups assigned in a 1:1 ratio and randomization stratified by clinical center. The study has eight recruiting clinical centers, a chair’s office and a coordinating center located in university settings in the United States and Canada. 200 people having probable Alzheimer’s disease with clinically significant agitation and without major depression are being recruited. Patients are randomized to receive citalopram (target dose of 30 mg/day) or matching placebo. Caregivers of patients in both treatment groups receive a structured psychosocial therapy. Agitation will be compared between treatment groups using the NeuroBehavioral Rating Scale and the AD Cooperative Study- Clinical Global Impression of Change which are the primary outcomes. Functional performance, cognition, caregiver distress and rates of adverse and serious adverse events will also be measured. Conclusion The authors believe the design elements in CitAD are important features to be included in trials assessing the safety and efficacy of psychotropic medications for clinically significant agitation in Alzheimer’s disease.

The vision-related function score correlated positively with visual acuity and moderately positively with general QoL measures. Cost-utility analyses relying on changes in generic healthy utility measures will be more likely to detect changes when there are clinically meaningful changes in vision-related function, rather than when there are only changes in visual acuity. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00132691.).

Background Little is known about the effect of methylphenidate (MPH) on attention in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). MPH has shown to improve apathy in AD, and both apathy and attention have been related to dopaminergic function. The goal was to investigate MPH effects on attention in AD and assess the relationship between attention and apathy responses. Methods MPH (10mg PO twice daily) or placebo was administered for 6 weeks in a randomized, double-blind trial in mild-to-moderate AD outpatients with apathy (Neuropsychiatric Inventory [NPI] Apathy≥4). Attention was measured with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Digit Span (DS) subtest (DS forward, selective attention) and apathy with the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). A mixed effects linear regression estimated the difference in change from baseline between treatment groups, defined as δ {[MPH (DS week 6–DS baseline)] - [placebo (DS week 6–DS baseline)]}. Results In 60 patients (37 females, age=76±8, Mini-Mental State Exam [MMSE]=20±5, NPI Apathy=7±2), the change in DS forward (δ=0.87 (95% CI: 0.06–1.68), p=0.03) and DS total (δ=1.01 (95% CI: 0.09–1.93), p=0.03) favoured MPH over placebo. Of 57 completers, 17 patients had improved apathy (≥3.3 points on the AES from baseline to end point) and 40 did not. There were no significant associations between AES and NPI Apathy with DS change scores in the MPH, placebo, AES responder or non-responder groups. DS scores did not predict apathy response to MPH treatment. Conclusion These results suggest MPH can improve attention and apathy in AD; however, the effects appear independent in this population. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01117181

No abstract