Efficacy, safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules in patients with probable vascular dementia: the VantagE study. Rivastigmine in Chinese patients with subcortical vascular dementia. A randomized controlled trial of rivastigmine in patients with cognitive impairment no dementia because of cerebrovascular disease.
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. 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. The safety and efficacy of early acetylcholinesterase inhibitors therapy in patients with cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND) after a cerebrovascular accident have not been examined. In this study, we investigated the safety and efficacy of rivastigmine in cognition, particularly executive function in patients with CIND because of cerebrovascular disease.
                This study was a 24-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of ischemic stroke patients seen at a tertiary hospital who had cognitive impairment no dementia because of cerebrovascular disease. The intervention was either rivastigmine or placebo up to 9 mg/day. The primary outcome of interest was mean change from baseline in the Ten-Point Clock Drawing and Color Trails 1 and 2.
                Fifty patients were randomized into rivastigmine (n = 25) and placebo (n = 25) arms. Patients in the rivastigmine group showed statistically significant improvement (1.70 vs 0.13, P = 0.02) on the animal subtask of the verbal fluency measure compared with placebo. There was also a trend (non-significant) towards improvement in Color Trails II.
                In this pilot study, we demonstrated that rivastigmine was well tolerated in patients with CIND because of cerebrovascular disease and may potentially improve executive functioning.
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.