memantine has been researched along with Nerve Degeneration in 32 studies
Nerve Degeneration: Loss of functional activity and trophic degeneration of nerve axons and their terminal arborizations following the destruction of their cells of origin or interruption of their continuity with these cells. The pathology is characteristic of neurodegenerative diseases. Often the process of nerve degeneration is studied in research on neuroanatomical localization and correlation of the neurophysiology of neural pathways.
| Excerpt | Relevance | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| " The current study aims to investigate the anti-tremogenic and neuroprotective effects of memantine (NMDA receptor antagonist) on the harmaline model of transient action tremor." | 7.77 | The effect of memantine in harmaline-induced tremor and neurodegeneration. ( Akman, O; Ates, N; Erturk, S; Gullu, KM; Iseri, PK; Karson, A; Kokturk, S; Yardýmoglu, M, 2011) |
| "The finding that memantine protects adult visual neurons from transsynaptic atrophy in experimental glaucoma could have therapeutic value." | 7.73 | Memantine protects neurons from shrinkage in the lateral geniculate nucleus in experimental glaucoma. ( Gupta, N; Kalichman, MW; Mizisin, AP; Weinreb, RN; Yücel, YH; Zhang, Q, 2006) |
| "Memantine treatment improved spatial and recognition memory performance in the Ts65Dn mice, though not to the level of normosomic littermate controls." | 5.37 | Effects of long-term memantine on memory and neuropathology in Ts65Dn mice, a model for Down syndrome. ( Bimonte-Nelson, H; Boger, H; Granholm, AC; Lockrow, J, 2011) |
| "The mechanism of cerebral hypoxia-induced myoclonic jerks is not known." | 5.36 | Memantine exacerbates myoclonic jerks in a rat model of posthypoxic myoclonus. ( Tai, KK; Truong, DD, 2010) |
| " The current study aims to investigate the anti-tremogenic and neuroprotective effects of memantine (NMDA receptor antagonist) on the harmaline model of transient action tremor." | 3.77 | The effect of memantine in harmaline-induced tremor and neurodegeneration. ( Akman, O; Ates, N; Erturk, S; Gullu, KM; Iseri, PK; Karson, A; Kokturk, S; Yardýmoglu, M, 2011) |
| "The finding that memantine protects adult visual neurons from transsynaptic atrophy in experimental glaucoma could have therapeutic value." | 3.73 | Memantine protects neurons from shrinkage in the lateral geniculate nucleus in experimental glaucoma. ( Gupta, N; Kalichman, MW; Mizisin, AP; Weinreb, RN; Yücel, YH; Zhang, Q, 2006) |
| "Memantine, an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, reduces the clinical deterioration in moderate-to-severe Alzheimer disease (AD) for which other treatments are not available." | 3.72 | Memantine inhibits and reverses the Alzheimer type abnormal hyperphosphorylation of tau and associated neurodegeneration. ( Grundke-Iqbal, I; Haque, N; Iqbal, K; Li, L; Sengupta, A, 2004) |
| " In concert with other studies showing the anti-inflammatory and protective effect of FTY720 in some neurodegenerative disorders like ischemia, we have recently shown that FTY720 chronic administration prevents from impairment of spatial learning and memory in AD rats." | 1.39 | Neurorestorative effect of FTY720 in a rat model of Alzheimer's disease: comparison with memantine. ( Ahmadiani, A; Chik, Z; Dargahi, L; Hemmati, F; Mohamed, Z; Naidu, M; Nasoohi, S; Omidbakhsh, R, 2013) |
| "Memantine treatment improved spatial and recognition memory performance in the Ts65Dn mice, though not to the level of normosomic littermate controls." | 1.37 | Effects of long-term memantine on memory and neuropathology in Ts65Dn mice, a model for Down syndrome. ( Bimonte-Nelson, H; Boger, H; Granholm, AC; Lockrow, J, 2011) |
| "Hypoglycemia is a common complication for insulin treated people with diabetes." | 1.37 | Pharmacologic amelioration of severe hypoglycemia-induced neuronal damage. ( Bree, AJ; Daphna-Iken, D; Fisher, SJ; Musikantow, D; Puente, EC; Silverstein, JM, 2011) |
| "The mechanism of cerebral hypoxia-induced myoclonic jerks is not known." | 1.36 | Memantine exacerbates myoclonic jerks in a rat model of posthypoxic myoclonus. ( Tai, KK; Truong, DD, 2010) |
| "Memantine is a safe non-competitive NMDA receptor blocker characterized by its low affinity and fast unblocking kinetics." | 1.35 | Neuroprotective effect of memantine combined with topiramate in hypoxic-ischemic brain injury. ( Lin, N; Liu, C; Qiu, Y; Wu, B, 2009) |
| "Treatment with memantine, a non-competitive N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist significantly attenuated Abeta(25-35)-induced changes of neuropeptides, their metabolizing enzymes, glial marker proteins, and activation of iNOS." | 1.35 | Effects of memantine on soluble Alphabeta(25-35)-induced changes in peptidergic and glial cells in Alzheimer's disease model rat brain regions. ( Ahmed, MM; Arif, M; Chikuma, T; Kato, T; Nakazato, M; Smith, MA, 2009) |
| " These results indicate that antagonists of NMDA-type glutamate receptors are protective during the toxic outcome associated with mitochondrial dysfunction." | 1.33 | 3-Nitropropionic acid toxicity in hippocampus: protection through N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonism. ( Bahr, BA; Baude, AS; Brown, QB; Karanian, DA; Parsons, CG, 2006) |
| "Huntington's disease has an increase in the activated calpain, which is enhanced by the NMDA receptor activation." | 1.33 | Memantine reduces striatal cell death with decreasing calpain level in 3-nitropropionic model of Huntington's disease. ( Chu, K; Jung, KH; Kang, L; Kim, M; Ko, SY; Lee, ST; Park, JE, 2006) |
| Timeframe | Studies, this research(%) | All Research% |
|---|---|---|
| pre-1990 | 0 (0.00) | 18.7374 |
| 1990's | 1 (3.13) | 18.2507 |
| 2000's | 14 (43.75) | 29.6817 |
| 2010's | 17 (53.13) | 24.3611 |
| 2020's | 0 (0.00) | 2.80 |
| Authors | Studies |
|---|---|
| Abrahamson, EE | 1 |
| Poloyac, SM | 1 |
| Dixon, CE | 1 |
| Dekosky, ST | 1 |
| Ikonomovic, MD | 1 |
| McKay, S | 1 |
| Bengtson, CP | 1 |
| Bading, H | 1 |
| Wyllie, DJ | 1 |
| Hardingham, GE | 1 |
| Wild, AR | 1 |
| Akyol, E | 1 |
| Brothwell, SL | 1 |
| Kimkool, P | 1 |
| Skepper, JN | 1 |
| Gibb, AJ | 1 |
| Jones, S | 1 |
| Hemmati, F | 1 |
| Dargahi, L | 1 |
| Nasoohi, S | 1 |
| Omidbakhsh, R | 1 |
| Mohamed, Z | 1 |
| Chik, Z | 1 |
| Naidu, M | 1 |
| Ahmadiani, A | 1 |
| Annweiler, C | 3 |
| Brugg, B | 2 |
| Peyrin, JM | 1 |
| Bartha, R | 2 |
| Beauchet, O | 2 |
| Charier, D | 1 |
| Bell, M | 1 |
| Gao, L | 1 |
| Chen, X | 1 |
| Tang, Y | 1 |
| Zhao, J | 1 |
| Li, Q | 1 |
| Fan, X | 1 |
| Xu, H | 1 |
| Yin, ZQ | 1 |
| Wei, X | 1 |
| Gao, H | 1 |
| Zou, J | 1 |
| Liu, X | 1 |
| Chen, D | 1 |
| Liao, J | 1 |
| Xu, Y | 1 |
| Ma, L | 1 |
| Tang, B | 1 |
| Zhang, Z | 1 |
| Cai, X | 1 |
| Jin, K | 1 |
| Xia, Y | 1 |
| Wang, Q | 1 |
| Nasr, P | 1 |
| Carbery, T | 1 |
| Geddes, JW | 1 |
| Ito, Y | 1 |
| Nakamura, S | 1 |
| Tanaka, H | 1 |
| Shimazawa, M | 1 |
| Araie, M | 1 |
| Hara, H | 1 |
| Liu, C | 1 |
| Lin, N | 1 |
| Wu, B | 1 |
| Qiu, Y | 1 |
| Arif, M | 1 |
| Chikuma, T | 1 |
| Ahmed, MM | 1 |
| Nakazato, M | 1 |
| Smith, MA | 1 |
| Kato, T | 1 |
| Ito, T | 1 |
| Nuriya, M | 1 |
| Yasui, M | 1 |
| Lockrow, J | 1 |
| Boger, H | 1 |
| Bimonte-Nelson, H | 1 |
| Granholm, AC | 1 |
| Tai, KK | 2 |
| Truong, DD | 2 |
| Nyakas, C | 1 |
| Granic, I | 1 |
| Halmy, LG | 1 |
| Banerjee, P | 1 |
| Luiten, PG | 1 |
| Silverstein, JM | 1 |
| Musikantow, D | 1 |
| Puente, EC | 1 |
| Daphna-Iken, D | 1 |
| Bree, AJ | 1 |
| Fisher, SJ | 1 |
| Iseri, PK | 1 |
| Karson, A | 1 |
| Gullu, KM | 1 |
| Akman, O | 1 |
| Kokturk, S | 1 |
| Yardýmoglu, M | 1 |
| Erturk, S | 1 |
| Ates, N | 1 |
| Costa, AC | 1 |
| Borre, Y | 1 |
| Bosman, E | 1 |
| Lemstra, S | 1 |
| Westphal, KG | 1 |
| Olivier, B | 1 |
| Oosting, RS | 1 |
| Diehl, RR | 1 |
| Li, L | 1 |
| Sengupta, A | 1 |
| Haque, N | 1 |
| Grundke-Iqbal, I | 1 |
| Iqbal, K | 1 |
| Engedal, K | 1 |
| Braekhus, A | 1 |
| Gjerstad, L | 1 |
| Yücel, YH | 1 |
| Gupta, N | 1 |
| Zhang, Q | 1 |
| Mizisin, AP | 1 |
| Kalichman, MW | 1 |
| Weinreb, RN | 1 |
| Karanian, DA | 1 |
| Baude, AS | 1 |
| Brown, QB | 1 |
| Parsons, CG | 1 |
| Bahr, BA | 1 |
| Lee, ST | 1 |
| Chu, K | 1 |
| Park, JE | 1 |
| Kang, L | 1 |
| Ko, SY | 1 |
| Jung, KH | 1 |
| Kim, M | 1 |
| Drever, BD | 1 |
| Anderson, WG | 1 |
| Johnson, H | 1 |
| O'Callaghan, M | 1 |
| Seo, S | 1 |
| Choi, DY | 1 |
| Riedel, G | 1 |
| Platt, B | 1 |
| Heim, C | 1 |
| Sontag, KH | 1 |
| Hergovich, N | 1 |
| Singer, E | 1 |
| Agneter, E | 1 |
| Eichler, HG | 1 |
| Graselli, U | 1 |
| Simhandl, C | 1 |
| Jilma, B | 1 |
| Rao, VL | 1 |
| Dogan, A | 1 |
| Todd, KG | 1 |
| Bowen, KK | 1 |
| Dempsey, RJ | 1 |
| Trial | Phase | Enrollment | Study Type | Start Date | Status | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phase II Multicenter 16-Week Randomized Double Blind Placebo-Controlled Evaluation of the Efficacy, Tolerability and Safety of Memantine Hydrochloride on Enhancing the Cognitive Abilities of Adolescents and Young Adults With Down Syndrome[NCT02304302] | Phase 2 | 160 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2014-10-31 | Completed | ||
| Effects of Combined Memantine (Namenda) Plus Escitalopram (Lexapro) Treatment in Elderly Depressed Patients With Cognitive Impairment[NCT01876823] | Phase 2/Phase 3 | 60 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2006-04-30 | Completed | ||
| [information is prepared from clinicaltrials.gov, extracted Sep-2024] | |||||||
This is a measure of adaptive functioning that integrates information from 13 different domains (e.g., gross motor, social interaction, eating, toileting, dressing, personal self-care, etc.). It is in a questionnaire format, which a caregiver can complete while the participant is being tested. Standard scores for all indices will be derived from age norms that extend from birth to age 80, as these were used as dependent variables. We report here on the Broad Independence Score recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). The minimum value of the SIB-R Score Scale in this study was -24 (this number is below 0 because -24 was the minimum value for the worst performing participant in the trial) and the maximum value of this scale is 153; higher scores mean better outcomes. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 6.88 |
| Memantine | 3.23 |
The primary efficacy measure is focused on episodic memory. The CVLT-II short form assesses supraspan word learning ability as an index of episodic verbal long-term memory. We hypothesize that treatment with memantine will produce significant improvements in this test. The main dependent variable selected, based on prior literature was the total number of target items correct summed across learning trials 1-4. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). Scale Range: from 0 to 36; higher scores represent better outcomes. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 3.3 |
| Memantine | 3.49 |
This is a measure of non-verbal memory that requires the participant to learn associations between an abstract visual pattern and its location. Two dependent variables have been selected: Total number of items correct on the first trial of each stage, and total number of stages completed. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). The minimum value of the PAL Memory Score Scale is 0 and the maximum value is 21; higher scores mean better outcomes. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 1 |
| Memantine | 0.67 |
This is a measure of non-verbal memory. Total number correct across the two series of items presented was used as the dependent variable. We used the PRM total scale in this study, which represents the sum of the PRM correct scores (ranging from 0 to 24) and the PRM delayed scores (ranging from 0 to 24). Therefore, the range of the PRM total scale is from 0 to 48; higher values mean better outcomes. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 0.45 |
| Memantine | -0.05 |
This is a measure of rote short-term verbal memory. Total number of items correct were used as the dependent variable. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). The minimum value for this scale is 0 and the maximum value is 38; higher scores mean a better outcome. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 0.03 |
| Memantine | -0.01 |
This measure is a computerized version of the Corsi Blocks task, a long-standing neuropsychological test. The main dependent variables selected for this test was the span length, which is the longest sequence of numbers recalled accurately. The minimum value of the Spatial Span Length Score Scale is 0 and the maximum value is 9; higher scores mean better outcomes. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 0.13 |
| Memantine | 0.03 |
"The test requires participants to search under a series of colored boxes to locate a blue token hidden underneath one of them. During a series of trials, the participant is told that the token will be in a new location each time and that they should not go back to a location he or she has looked in previously. The main dependent variable was the total number of errors (between errors), which indexes the number of times a participant went back to a box where a token had already been found, lower scores mean better performance. The minimum value of the Spatial Working Memory scale is 0 and the maximum value is 137 (which was computed as the equivalent to -4 standard deviations from the mean of this measure); higher scores mean worse outcomes. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2)." (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | -0.09 |
| Memantine | -1.4 |
"This is a measure of inhibitory control, often used as a marker for prefrontal-striatal function integrity. Specifically, it measures the participant's ability to inhibit pre-potent behavioral responses that have been established by provision of prior go or no-go cues in a classical conditioning paradigm. The main dependent variables selected was speed of response of execution to Go targets. The minimum value of the speed of response of execution to Go targets is 280 milliseconds (ms) and the maximum value is 1000 ms; higher scores mean worse outcomes. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2)." (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | ms (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | -2.52 |
| Memantine | 0.22 |
This test provides a measure of non-verbal reasoning ability that requires subjects to visually inspect a matrix of 4 or 9 pictures that has a missing piece. Participants have to infer a rule or pattern in the stimuli and select the appropriate response from a range of 4-6 possibilities. Since age norms are not available for individuals older than 17y11m, the ability score will be used as the dependent variable. This is an intermediate score based on Rasch modeling that corrects for different items set being administered to participants. The minimum value of the DAS-II Rasch Score Scale is 0 and the maximum value is 153; higher scores mean better outcomes. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 0.75 |
| Memantine | 2.66 |
This is a measure of receptive semantics, whereby the participant is asked to point to a picture (out of 4) that corresponds to a word spoken by the examiner. As this test has a 0.85 correlation with composite measures of Verbal IQ (i.e. from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale series), it can be used in conjunction with the Matrices subtest to estimate overall intellectual functioning. The total number of items correct was used as the dependent variable, following the administration manual's rules for basals and ceilings. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). The minimum value for this scale is 0 and the maximum value is 192, higher scores mean a better outcome. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 4.46 |
| Memantine | 5.63 |
This is a measure of receptive syntax skills (Bishop, 1983). Participants are asked to point to a picture (out of 4) that corresponds to a phrase or sentence spoken by the examiner. The total number of items correct (rather than blocks passed) will be used as the dependent variable, following the administration manual's ceiling rule. The values for this measure have been recorded as change in score from baseline (T1) to after the treatment (T2). The minimum value of the scores is 0 and the maximum value is 40; with higher scores considered to be a better outcome. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | score on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | 0.49 |
| Memantine | 0.89 |
Incidence of adverse events was monitored by clinical history, physical examinations, electrocardiograms (ECGs), clinical laboratory tests, the Screen for Childhood Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders (SCARED). Here, we report the analysis of the effect of memantine treatment on QTc intervals because of its clinical importance for this analysis for potential drug toxicity. QTc intervals ≥ 450 ms are generally considered long, and drug-induced QTc interval prolongations ≥ 60 ms are generally considered clinically relevant. (NCT02304302)
Timeframe: baseline and 16 weeks from start of treatment
| Intervention | ms (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Placebo | -1.30 |
| Memantine | -0.11 |
Change in 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) scores from baseline to Week 48: HAMD measures depression severity based on a series of 24 items items. The range of HAMD total score is 0-74; 0 indicates no depressive symptoms and a maximum HAMD score is a 74, where the greater the score indicates more significant psychopathology. In this study, moderate to severe depression is considered a HAMD-24 greater than 14. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | scores on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | -15.2 |
Change in Selective Reminding Test-Delayed Recall scores from baseline to Week 48: SRT Delay is administered 15 minutes after the immediate recall portion. Patients are asked to remember as many of the words as they can from the 6 trials. Maximum raw score is a 12 for free recall. If a patient is unable to recall a word, they are given a chance to recognize it among three incorrect word choices. Maximum raw score for recognition is 12. The greater the score on the delayed recall portion, the better the patient does on the assessment. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 1.2 |
Change in Selective Reminding Test-Total Immediate Recall (SRT-IR) scores from baseline to Week 48: Measures word recall (maximum 12 words per trial, across 6 trials). Maximum total recall score across 6 trials is 72; minimum recall is 0 across 6 trials. The higher the raw score, the better the patient did at recalling the target words. The unit of measure is the raw score, or the sum of the number of words recalled across all 6 trials. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: baseline, 48 weeks
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 7.5 |
Change in Trails A scores from baseline to Week 48: Measures attention and executive function. It asks patients to connect numbers from 1-25 in numerical order as fast as they can. Patients are timed; the longer it takes for the patient to connect the numbers, the worse their score. Unit of measure is in seconds. The amount of errors that the patient makes during trails is also recorded. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | seconds (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 1.9 |
Change from baseline to Week 48 on Trails B: Measures attention and executive function. It asks patients to connect numbers and letters in numerical to alphabetical order from (1-13 and A-L) as fast as they can. Patients are timed; the longer it takes for the patient to connect the numbers and letters, the worse their score. Unit of measure is in seconds. The amount of errors that the patient makes during trails is also recorded. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | seconds (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | -36.3 |
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale-III scores from baseline to Week 48: The WMS-III Visual Reproduction sub-test was used to measure visual working memory and delayed memory. Patients were shown pictures of four drawings and were asked to reproduce them from memory immediately after seeing them, and 25 minutes after seeing them. The four scores are summed and the greater the total raw score, the better the patient did on the assessment. The maximum raw score for this test is a 41 on both the immediate and delayed portions (the overall range is 0-82 points). The change score is calculated using the total scores of both the immediate and delayed portions. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 9.9 |
The CDR is a numeric rating scale that is used to quantify the severity of one's cognitive function. The scale goes from 0=normal; 0.5=mild cognitive impairment; 1 to 3=mild to moderate/severe dementia. CDR was used a dichotomous outcome measure (no=0; yes=1). (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 1 |
The CGI Cognitive Change follows a seven-point likert scale. Compared to the patient's condition at baseline in the study [prior to medication initiation], the patient's condition is rated as: 1=very much improved since the initiation of treatment; 2=much improved; 3=minimally improved; 4=no change from baseline (the initiation of treatment); 5=minimally worse; 6= much worse; 7=very much worse since the initiation of treatment. Responses from the entire group were calculated. Mean at final visit and baseline is reported below. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) | |
|---|---|---|
| CGI-Cognitive Change (Baseline) | Clinical Global Impression-Cogntive Change (WK 48) | |
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 3.6 | 2.7 |
The CGI Depression Change follows a seven-point likert scale. Compared to the patient's condition at baseline in the study [prior to medication initiation], the patient's condition is rated as: 1=very much improved since the initiation of treatment; 2=much improved; 3=minimally improved; 4=no change from baseline (the initiation of treatment); 5=minimally worse; 6= much worse; 7=very much worse since the initiation of treatment. Responses were calculated for the entire group. Mean at final visit has been reported below. Higher mean at baseline indicates a decrease in depression scores. (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) | |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive Global Impression at Baseline | Cognitive Global Impression at Final Visit (WK 48) | |
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 4.1 | 2.1 |
"Somatic side effect rating scale which includes 26 common somatic side effects associated with previous medication clinical trials; rated by the study physician. Factors were dichotomized to yes or no responses on this scale, which equated to the symptom being either present or not present. Yes and no responses were given a value of 0 (no) or 1 (yes). Responses from the entire group were calculated and the mean at baseline and the last visit is reported below." (NCT01876823)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) | |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment Emergent Side Effects (Baseline) | Treatment Emergent Side Effects (WK 48) | |
| Es-citalopram and Memantine Treatment | 6.6 | 3.2 |
3 reviews available for memantine and Nerve Degeneration
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
[Vitamin D and Alzheimer's disease: from an intriguing idea to a therapeutic option].
Topics: Acetylcholine; Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid; Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antioxidants; Atrophy; | 2014 |
On the promise of pharmacotherapies targeted at cognitive and neurodegenerative components of Down syndrome.
Topics: Animals; Cognition Disorders; Disease Models, Animal; Down Syndrome; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonis | 2011 |
[Dementia].
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Alzheimer Disease; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Cognition Disorders; | 2003 |
1 trial available for memantine and Nerve Degeneration
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Comparison of the effects of ketamine and memantine on prolactin and cortisol release in men. a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Topics: Adult; Blood Pressure; Cross-Over Studies; Drug Tolerance; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; Heart | 2001 |
28 other studies available for memantine and Nerve Degeneration
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Acute and chronic effects of single dose memantine after controlled cortical impact injury in adult rats.
Topics: Animals; Behavior, Animal; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Cerebral Cortex; Disease Models, Animal; Excit | 2019 |
Recovery of NMDA receptor currents from MK-801 blockade is accelerated by Mg2+ and memantine under conditions of agonist exposure.
Topics: Animals; Cations; Cells, Cultured; Dizocilpine Maleate; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Inter | 2013 |
Memantine block depends on agonist presentation at the NMDA receptor in substantia nigra pars compacta dopamine neurones.
Topics: Animals; Cell Count; Dizocilpine Maleate; Dopaminergic Neurons; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Ex | 2013 |
Neurorestorative effect of FTY720 in a rat model of Alzheimer's disease: comparison with memantine.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid beta-Peptides; Animals; Avoidance Learning; Cytokines; Disease Models, An | 2013 |
Combination of memantine and vitamin D prevents axon degeneration induced by amyloid-beta and glutamate.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid beta-Peptides; Animals; Axons; Cells, Cultured; Drug Synergism; Drug Ther | 2014 |
Memantine plus vitamin D prevents axonal degeneration caused by lysed blood.
Topics: Animals; Axons; Blood Cells; Blood Coagulation; Cell Fractionation; Cells, Cultured; Cerebral Cortex | 2015 |
Neuroprotective effect of memantine on the retinal ganglion cells of APPswe/PS1ΔE9 mice and its immunomodulatory mechanisms.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Analysis of Variance; Animals; Disease Models, Animal; Electroretinography; Epend | 2015 |
Contra-directional Coupling of Nur77 and Nurr1 in Neurodegeneration: A Novel Mechanism for Memantine-Induced Anti-inflammation and Anti-mitochondrial Impairment.
Topics: Animals; Cell Survival; Cytochromes c; Dopamine Plasma Membrane Transport Proteins; Gene Knockdown T | 2016 |
N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists have variable affect in 3-nitropropionic acid toxicity.
Topics: Adenosine Diphosphate; Animals; Corpus Striatum; Dizocilpine Maleate; Drug Interactions; Male; Meman | 2009 |
Memantine protects against secondary neuronal degeneration in lateral geniculate nucleus and superior colliculus after retinal damage in mice.
Topics: Animals; Cell Death; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Administration Schedule; Excitatory Amino Acid Ant | 2008 |
Neuroprotective effect of memantine combined with topiramate in hypoxic-ischemic brain injury.
Topics: Animals; Animals, Newborn; Anticonvulsants; Apoptosis; Brain; Brain Infarction; Disease Models, Anim | 2009 |
Effects of memantine on soluble Alphabeta(25-35)-induced changes in peptidergic and glial cells in Alzheimer's disease model rat brain regions.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid beta-Peptides; Animals; Biomarkers; Brain; CD11 Antigens; Disease Models, | 2009 |
Regulation of Kv2.1 phosphorylation in an animal model of anoxia.
Topics: Animals; Brain; Brain Chemistry; Cell Survival; Disease Models, Animal; Excitatory Amino Acid Antago | 2010 |
Effects of long-term memantine on memory and neuropathology in Ts65Dn mice, a model for Down syndrome.
Topics: Animals; Brain; Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor; Cholinergic Fibers; Chromosomes, Mammalian; Disea | 2011 |
Memantine exacerbates myoclonic jerks in a rat model of posthypoxic myoclonus.
Topics: Animals; Cerebellum; Disease Models, Animal; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Excitatory Amino Acid | 2010 |
The basal forebrain cholinergic system in aging and dementia. Rescuing cholinergic neurons from neurotoxic amyloid-β42 with memantine.
Topics: Aging; Amyloid beta-Peptides; Animals; Attention; Avoidance Learning; Cholinergic Fibers; Dementia; | 2011 |
Pharmacologic amelioration of severe hypoglycemia-induced neuronal damage.
Topics: Animals; Cell Count; Cerebral Cortex; Erythropoietin; Hippocampus; Hypoglycemia; Insulin; Male; Mema | 2011 |
The effect of memantine in harmaline-induced tremor and neurodegeneration.
Topics: Animals; Cerebellum; Ethanol; Harmaline; Male; Memantine; Nerve Degeneration; Neuroprotective Agents | 2011 |
Memantine partly rescues behavioral and cognitive deficits in an animal model of neurodegeneration.
Topics: Animals; Avoidance Learning; Behavior, Animal; Cognition; Cognition Disorders; Excitatory Amino Acid | 2012 |
Memantine inhibits and reverses the Alzheimer type abnormal hyperphosphorylation of tau and associated neurodegeneration.
Topics: 2-Amino-5-phosphonovalerate; Alzheimer Disease; Animals; Calcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase | 2004 |
[Effect of drugs against dementia].
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Antiparkinson Agents; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Dementia; Humans; Memantine; Ner | 2004 |
Memantine protects neurons from shrinkage in the lateral geniculate nucleus in experimental glaucoma.
Topics: Animals; Atrophy; Cell Count; Cytoprotection; Disease Models, Animal; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagoni | 2006 |
3-Nitropropionic acid toxicity in hippocampus: protection through N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonism.
Topics: Animals; Animals, Newborn; Cytoskeleton; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Excitatory Amino Acid Ant | 2006 |
Memantine reduces striatal cell death with decreasing calpain level in 3-nitropropionic model of Huntington's disease.
Topics: Animals; Apoptosis Regulatory Proteins; Calpain; Cell Death; Corpus Striatum; Disease Models, Animal | 2006 |
NMDA receptor-mediated excitotoxicity contributes to the cerebral hypoxic injury of a rat model of posthypoxic myoclonus.
Topics: Animals; Brain Damage, Chronic; Cerebellum; Disease Models, Animal; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonist | 2007 |
Memantine acts as a cholinergic stimulant in the mouse hippocampus.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Animals; Antiparkinson Agents; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cholinergic Fib | 2007 |
Memantine prevents progressive functional neurodegeneration in rats.
Topics: Analysis of Variance; Animals; Antiparkinson Agents; Apomorphine; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; | 1995 |
Neuroprotection by memantine, a non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist after traumatic brain injury in rats.
Topics: Animals; Brain Injuries; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; Hippoc | 2001 |