Cholinesterase inhibitors are beneficial for people with Parkinson's disease and dementia

The clinical features of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) have much in common. As patients with DLB and PDD have particularly severe deficits in cortical levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, blocking its breakdown using a group of chemicals known as cholinesterase inhibitors may lead to clinical improvement. Six trials showed a statistically significant improvement in global assessment, cognitive function, behavioural disturbance and activities of daily living rating scales in PDD and cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease (CIND-PD) patients treated with cholinesterase inhibitors. There was no current disaggregated evidence to support their use in CIND-PD. In a single trial, no statistically significant improvement was observed in patients with DLB who were treated with cholinesterase inhibitors and further trials are necessary to clarify the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors in this patient group.

Authors' conclusions: 

The currently available evidence supports the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in patients with PDD, with a positive impact on global assessment, cognitive function, behavioural disturbance and activities of daily living rating scales. However, almost half of the trial data, which could potentially change this conclusion, have not been made public. The effect in DLB remains unclear. There is no current disaggregated evidence to support their use in CIND-PD.

Read the full abstract...
Background: 

Previous Cochrane reviews have considered the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in both Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). The clinical features of DLB and PDD have much in common and are distinguished primarily on the basis of whether or not parkinsonism precedes dementia by more than a year. Patients with both conditions have particularly severe deficits in cortical levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Therefore, blocking its breakdown using cholinesterase inhibitors may lead to clinical improvement.

Objectives: 

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of cholinesterase inhibitors in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease with dementia (PDD), and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease falling short of dementia (CIND-PD) (considered as separate phenomena and also grouped together as Lewy body disease).

Search strategy: 

The trials were identified from a search of ALOIS, the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (on 30 August 2011) using the search terms Lewy, Parkinson, PDD, DLB, LBD. This register consists of records from major healthcare databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL) and many ongoing trial databases and is updated regularly.

Reference lists of relevant studies were searched for additional trials.

Selection criteria: 

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy of treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors in DLB, PDD and CIND-PD.

Data collection and analysis: 

Data were extracted from published reports by one review author (MR). The data for each 'condition' (that is DLB, PDD or CIND-PD) were considered separately and, where possible, also pooled. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.0.

Main results: 

Six trials met the inclusion criteria for this review, in which a total of 1236 participants were randomised. Four of the trials were of a parallel group design and two cross-over trials were included. Four of the trials included participants with a diagnosis of PDD (Aarsland 2002a; Dubois 2007; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005), of which Dubois 2007 remains unpublished (n = 550). Leroi 2004 included patients with cognitive impairment and Parkinson's disease (both with and without dementia). Patients with DLB were included in only one of the trials (McKeith 2000).

For global assessment, three trials comparing cholinesterase inhibitor treatment to placebo in PDD (Aarsland 2002a; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005) reported a difference in the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) score of -0.38, favouring the cholinesterase inhibitors (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.56 to -0.24, P < 0.0001). A clinically meaningful improvement was observed in 19.8% of patients receiving cholinesterase inhibitors, compared to 14.5% of those in the placebo group.

For cognitive function, a pooled estimate of the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on cognitive function measures was consistent with the presence of a therapeutic benefit (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.34, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.23, P < 0.00001). There was evidence of a positive effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in patients with PDD (weighted mean difference (WMD) 1.09, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.73, P = 0.0008) and in the single PDD and CIND-PD trial (WMD 1.05, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.68, P = 0.01) but not in the single DLB trial.

For behavioural disturbance, analysis of the pooled continuous data relating to behavioural disturbance rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.04, P = 0.01).

For activities of daily living, combined data for the ADCS and the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) activities of daily living rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.02, P = 0.03).

For safety and tolerability, those taking a cholinesterase inhibitor were more likely to experience an adverse event (318/452 versus 668/842; odds ratio (OR) 1.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.15, P = 0.0003) and to drop out (128/465 versus 45/279; OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.84, P = 0.0006). Adverse events were more common amongst those taking rivastigmine (357/421 versus 173/240; OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.38, P < 0.0001) but not those taking donepezil (311/421 versus 145/212; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.80, P = 0.25). Parkinsonian symptoms in particular tremor (64/739 versus 12/352; OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.44 to 5.09, P = 0.002), but not falls (P = 0.39), were reported more commonly in the treatment group but this did not have a significant impact on the UPDRS (total and motor) scores (P = 0.71). Fewer deaths occurred in the treatment group than in the placebo group (4/465 versus 9/279; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.84, P = 0.03).