4.5 Article

A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of folic acid supplementation of cholinesterase inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.1856

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; folic acid; cholinesterase inhibitors; randomised placebo-controlled trial

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives (1) to assess the effect of 1 mg folic acid supplementation of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChI) in a 6 month double-blind placebo-controlled study of patients with Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and (2) to assess whether outcome measures were affected by changes in homocysteine levels. Method Fifty-seven consecutive outpatients with probable AD were treated concurrently with a ChI and either folic acid or placebo. None had conditions or medication known to interfere with folate metabolism. Fasting folate and homocysteine levels were measured prior to commencing ChI and 6 months later. Response was categorised using criteria of the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE). Results Twelve mates and 29 females completed treatment (mean age 76.27 SD 6.23 years, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) 23.49 SD 3.53, baseline homocysteine 18.39 SD 4.62 micromoles per litre). 23 received folic acid and 18 placebo. There were no significant baseline differences or use of individual ChI between the two arms. After 6 months a significant difference was seen in the change from baseline in combined Instrumental Activities of Daily Living and Social Behaviour scores between arms (folate + 1.50 (SD 5.32) vs placebo - 2.29 (SD 6.16) (p=0.03) but not change in MMSE scores. Sixteen of 23 subjects receiving folic acid and 7/18 placebo subjects were classified as NICE responders (p=0.05). Conclusion This pilot double blind study suggests that response to ChI in patients with AD may be improved by the use of folic acid. The relationship between any change in homocysteine levels and response to treatment is discussed. Copyright (c) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据