You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 63 No. 7, July 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Correspondence
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (1)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Neurology, Other
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?


Open-Label Extension Studies and Misinformation

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Claims of efficacy and safety based on open-label extensions of clinical trials create misinformation and unrealistic expectations about important treatments, can undermine otherwise compelling trials evidence, and have no place in academic journals. The evidence for the efficacy and safety of memantine rests on the well-conducted and methodologically sound randomized controlled trials as summarized by the Cochrane meta-analysis.1 Open label extension studies are essentially case series of the survivors of these trials who then choose to take the medications openly. These studies by design cannot contribute either safety or efficacy evidence no matter how we choose to analyze them.

The report by Reisberg and colleagues2 continues the tradition set by cholinesterase inhibitors of using open-label extension studies to make unwarranted efficacy claims (references on request). Without any evidentiary support, the authors state that (1) their study "provides further efficacy and safety data"; (2) "treatment initiation with memantine was effective"; (3) . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Lon S. Schneider, MD



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

Open-Label Extension Studies and Misinformation—Reply
Barry Reisberg, Rachelle Doody, Frederick Schmitt, and Steven Ferris
Arch Neurol. 2006;63(7):1036-1037.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A 24-Week Open-Label Extension Study of Memantine in Moderate to Severe Alzheimer Disease
Barry Reisberg, Rachelle Doody, Albrecht Stöffler, Frederick Schmitt, Steven Ferris, and Hans Jörg Möbius
Arch Neurol. 2006;63(1):49-54.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.