Efficacy of Dihydroergocristine 20mg Once Daily in Patients with Organic Brain Psychosyndrome
Forty outpatients (20 men and 20 women) aged 60 to 80 years (mean age 69.9 ±5.5 years) with a diagnosis of organic brain psychosyndrome took part in a 3-month randomised, double-blind study aimed at comparing the effectiveness and safety of dihydroergocristine 20mg once daily and placebo. The patients had experienced memory impairment and reduced concentration and clarity of thought, and/or personality and affective disorders for at least 6 months. Patients had a Hachinski Dementia Score ≤15, a Hachinski Ischemic Score <5, and a Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score of ≤22. The Sandoz Clinical Assessment-Geriatric (SCAG) scale, used as the efficacy variable, was administered on study entry and during (45 days) and after (90 days) treatment. Safety evaluations (routine laboratory tests and measurements of systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate) were performed before and at the end of the study period. All patients fulfilled the entry criteria and completed the study protocol. In the dihydroergocristine group, there was a marked improvement in the SCAG total score and in most partial scores compared with baseline values. Most symptoms had already improved significantly after 45 days of treatment with dihydroergocristine.
In the placebo group, no clinically relevant or statistically significant changes in SCAG scores relative to baseline values were seen at the end of the study period. Safety was assessed as very good in all patients. No adverse events were reported, except for one case of mild self-limiting nausea during dihydroergocristine treatment. No clinically relevant or statistically significant changes relative to baseline values were found in laboratory parameters or in blood pressure and heart rate measurements performed at the end of each treatment. The results of this study suggest that dihydroergocristine 20mg once daily is effective and safe in the treatment of organic brain psychosyndrome.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Brizzee KR. Neuron aging and neuron pathology. In: Johnson HA, editor. Relations between normal aging and disease. New York: Raven Press, 1985: 191–224Google Scholar
- 2.Carlsson A. Aging and neurotrasmitters. In: Platt G, editor. Functionsstorungen des gehirns im alter. Stuttgart: Schattaner, 1981: 67–81Google Scholar
- 3.Sohal RS, Allen RG. Relationship between metabolic rate, free radicals, differentiation and aging: a unified theory. In: Woodhead AD, Blackett AD, Hollaender A, editors. The molecular basis of aging. New York: Plenum Press, 1985: 75–104Google Scholar
- 4.Sapolsky R, Krey L, McEwen B. The neuroendocrinology of stress and aging: the glucocorticoid cascade hypothesis. EndrocrRev 1986; 7: 284–301Google Scholar
- 5.Robinson DS. Aging and neuropsychopharmacology. In: Yevit JZ, Bianchine JR, editors. Recent advances in clinical therapeutics. New York: Grune & Stratton Inc., 1983: 127–42Google Scholar
- 10.Gorini A, Arnaboldi R, Vercesi L, et al. Influence of some ergot alkaloids on the cerebral reduced glutathione. Il Farmaco Ed Sci 1988; 43 Suppl. 11: 887–90Google Scholar
- 13.Martucci N, Manna V, Mailland F. EEG-pharmacological and neuropsychological study of dihydroergocristine mesylate in patients with chronic cerebrovascular disease. Adv Ther 1986; 3 Suppl. 4: 210–23Google Scholar
- 18.Mailland F, Poli A, Zottino G. Drug surveillance of dihydroergocristine in long-term use. Curr Ther Res 1987; 42 Suppl. 5: 857–61Google Scholar
- 19.Poli M, Caviezel F, Girardi AM, et al. Inhibition of sulpirideinduced prolactin secretion by dihydroergocristine in man. In: Cattabeni F, et al., editors. Long-term effects of neuroleptics. New York: Raven Press, 1980: 445Google Scholar
- 23.Yesavage JA, Adey M. Design aspects of clinical trials with ergot alkaloids: a comparison of two geriatric behavioral rating scales. In: Goldstein M, et al., editors. Ergot Compounds and Brain function. New York: Raven Press, 1980: 357Google Scholar
- 24.Reisberg B. The brief cognitive rating scale and global deterioration scale. In: Crook T, et al., editors. Assessment in geriatric psychopharmacology. New Canaan: Mark Powley Associates, 1983: 19Google Scholar
- 25.Mohs RC, Rosen WG, Greenwald BS, et al. Neuropathological validated scales for Alzheimers disease. In: Crook T, et al., editors. Assessment in geriatric psychopharmacology. New Canaan: Mark Powley Associates, 1983: 37Google Scholar
- 26.Salzman C. The Sandoz Clinical Assessment-Geriatric Scale. In: Crook T, et al., editors. Assessment in geriatric psychopharmacology. New Canaan: Mark Powley Associates, 1983: 53Google Scholar
- 27.Petrie WM. Psychiatric rating scales for inpatient research. In: Crook T, et al., editors. Assessment in geriatric psychopharmacology. New Canaan: Mark Powley Associates, 1983: 59Google Scholar
- 28.Overall JE. Psychiatric rating scales: state of the art and directions for future research. In: Crook T, et al., editors. Assessment in geriatric psychopharmacology. New Canaan: Mark Powley Associates 1983: 49Google Scholar
- 29.Rosen WG, Mohs R, Davis KL. Assessing symptom severity in Alzheimers disease. Interdiscip Top Gerontol 1985; 20: 35Google Scholar
- 32.Malacco E, Di Cesare F. Effect of dihydroergocristine treatment on carbohydrate tolerance and cognitive function in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes. Curr Ther Res 1992; 51: 515–23Google Scholar