Page 334 - Drug Class Review

Final Report Update 1 Drug Effectiveness Review Project

APPENDIX D. Characteristics of Excluded Studies

Study Design Sample Intervention Reason for exclusion
size

95
Anand et al., 1996 pooled data analysis 566 RIV vs. placebo no systematic literature search
96
Farlow et al., 2003 pooled analysis of 3 3550 RIV vs. placebo selection bias
placebo-controlled
trials
97
Forette et al., 1999 RCT 114 RIV vs. placebo high differential loss to follow up;
no ITT analysis
Geldmacher et al., pooled data analysis 1115 DON vs. placebo selection bias
98
2003
*Gillette-Guyonnet et Cohort study 486 AChEI vs no insufficient drug exposure data
83
al., 2005 AChEI
*Knapp et al., 1994 68, randomized, double- 663 TAC vs. placebo high loss to follow up
86-88 blind, placebo-
controlled, parallel
group trial
99
Pratt et al., 2002 pooled data analysis 1920 DON vs. placebo no systematic literature search
100
Sano et al., 2003 pooled data analysis 825 GAL vs. placebo pooled data, trials not identical; no
systematic literature search
101
Stahl et al., 2004 pooled data analysis 1698 GAL vs. placebo no systematic literature search
67
*Wong et al., 1999 RCT 100 TAC vs. placebo high loss to follow up
69
*Wood et al., 1994 RCT 154 TAC vs. placebo high loss to follow up

*Poor quality rating for efficacy but included for adverse events

Alzheimer's Drugs Page 201 of 205