Aims: To determine and to compare the tolerability and effectiveness of a slow escalation of the dose of rivastigmine in patients with Alzheimer's disease with respect to using it with a faster escalation.
Patients and methods: We conducted a multi-centre, naturalistic, open-label, randomised trial with 429 hospital outpatients diagnosed with Alzheimer-type dementia (according to DSM-IV and NINCDS-ADRA criteria) and in whom treatment with rivastigmine was clinically indicated. Two study groups were established: slow escalation and fast escalation (in accordance with usual clinical practice); effectiveness and tolerability variables were analysed in the two groups, as was the proportion of patients who reached therapeutic doses (> 6 mg/day). The scores obtained on the CGI, MMSE, NPI and Barthel index scales were analysed, together with adverse events and reactions concerning spontaneous communication, and scores on the UKU scale.
Results: The slow escalation group displayed slightly higher percentages of sub-therapeutic anticipated interruptions than the fast escalation group (chi-square test; p < 0.05). On comparing the two treatment groups, no statistically significant differences were observed for the evolution of the scores on the different scales of effectiveness; no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in the safety and tolerability analyses (chi-square test, exact test; p > 0.05) for most of the parameters that were studied (adverse reactions in spontaneous communication and the modified UKU scale).
Conclusion: Slow escalation of the dose of rivastigmine did not display greater effectiveness or tolerability in comparison to an escalation applied in accordance with usual clinical practice.