Flicker L, Grimley Evans G
Royal Perth Hospital, University of Western Australia, Box X2213 GPO, Perth, WA, Australia, 6847.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001(2):CD001011. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001011.
To determine the clinical efficacy of piracetam for the features of dementia or cognitive impairment, classified according to the major subtypes of dementia: vascular, Alzheimer's disease or mixed vascular and Alzheimer's disease, or unclassified dementia, or cognitive impairment not fulfilling the criteria for dementia.
The trials were identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 10 November 2000 using the term spiracetam, nootropic and 2-Oxo-1-pyrrolidine. In addition the pharmaceutical company responsible for marketing most of the piracetam worldwide, UCB Pharma, provided a comprehensive list of abstracts, which included many unpublished studies. As many of these unpublished, placebo-controlled studies will be reviewed as possible.
All unconfounded trials specified as randomized in which treatment with piracetam was administered for more than a day and compared with placebo in patients with dementia of Alzheimer type, vascular dementia,or mixed vascular and Alzheimer's disease, or unclassified dementia, or cognitive impairment not fulfilling the criteria for dementia.
Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Each study was independently verified as fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Studies were rated for methodological quality by assessment of blinding and loss before analysis as described by Jadad et al. (1996). Studies were pooled if appropriate and possible, and the pooled odds ratios (95%CI) or the average differences (95%CI) were estimated. Where possible, intention-to-treat analyses were undertaken. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine if successive elimination of those studies performing most poorly on these quality criteria changed the effect estimate.
Unfortunately, many of the studies were of cross-over design and first-phase data were unavailable, or could not be extracted. Global Impression of Change was the only outcoeme for which there was a significant volume of evidence from the pooled data. There was evidence of heterogeneity in the results from the individual studies, chi-square test = 20.8 (df=5). Using a fixed effects model the odds ratio for improvement in the piracetam group compared with the placebo group was 3.55, [95% CI][2.45, 5.16]. If a random effects model was used the odds ratio was 3.47 [1.29, 9.30]. If one single-blind study was excluded, the fixed effects model yielded an odds ratio of 3.36 [2.29, 4.99] and if a random effects model was applied then the odds ratio was 2.89 [1.01, 8.24]. The evidence of effects on cognition and other measures, was inconclusive.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: At this stage the evidence available from the published literature does not support the use of piracetam in the treatment of people with dementia or cognitive impairment. Although effects were found on global impression of change, no benefit was shown by any of the more specific measures. There is a need for further evaluation of piracetam by : 1) Obtaining the data from the identified studies for an individual patient database review, 2) Performing a randomized trial of piracetam in patients with diagnoses made by currently accepted diagnostic criteria. The trial should extend over for a period of at least 6 months and preferably longer. Specific cognitive instruments which are sensitive to change, Clinician Global Impression of Change, levels of dependency and caregiver quality of life scales should also be incorporated in such a study.
根据痴呆的主要亚型(血管性痴呆、阿尔茨海默病、血管性与阿尔茨海默病混合型、未分类痴呆)或不符合痴呆标准的认知障碍,确定吡拉西坦对痴呆或认知障碍特征的临床疗效。
2000年11月10日,通过检索Cochrane痴呆与认知改善小组专业注册库,使用关键词“斯吡拉西坦”、“促智药”和“2-氧代-1-吡咯烷”来识别试验。此外,全球大部分吡拉西坦的营销负责药企优时比制药提供了一份全面的摘要清单,其中包括许多未发表的研究。将尽可能多地审查这些未发表的安慰剂对照研究。
所有明确为随机的无混淆试验,其中吡拉西坦治疗时间超过一天,并在阿尔茨海默型痴呆、血管性痴呆、血管性与阿尔茨海默病混合型、未分类痴呆或不符合痴呆标准的认知障碍患者中与安慰剂进行比较。
由两名评审员独立提取数据。每项研究均独立核实是否符合纳入标准。根据Jadad等人(1996年)所述,通过评估盲法和分析前失访情况对研究的方法学质量进行评分。如果合适且可行,将研究进行合并,并估计合并优势比(95%可信区间)或平均差异(95%可信区间)。在可能的情况下,进行意向性分析。进行敏感性分析,以确定连续排除在这些质量标准上表现最差的研究是否会改变效应估计值。
不幸的是,许多研究采用交叉设计,无法获取或提取一期数据。综合疗效印象是合并数据中唯一有大量证据的结果。各研究结果存在异质性,卡方检验=20.8(自由度=5)。使用固定效应模型,吡拉西坦组与安慰剂组相比改善的优势比为3.55,[95%可信区间][2.45, (此处原文有误,应为5.16)5.16]。如果使用随机效应模型,优势比为3.47 [1.29, 9.30]。如果排除一项单盲研究,固定效应模型得出的优势比为3.36 [2.29, 4.99],如果应用随机效应模型,则优势比为2.89 [1.01, 8.24]。对认知和其他指标的影响证据尚无定论。
现阶段,已发表文献中的现有证据不支持使用吡拉西坦治疗痴呆或认知障碍患者。虽然在综合疗效印象方面发现了效果,但在任何更具体的指标上均未显示出益处。需要通过以下方式对吡拉西坦进行进一步评估:1)从已识别研究中获取数据用于个体患者数据库审查;2)在符合当前公认诊断标准的患者中进行吡拉西坦的随机试验。该试验应持续至少6个月,最好更长时间。此类研究还应纳入对变化敏感的特定认知工具、临床医生综合疗效印象、依赖程度以及照顾者生活质量量表。