A comprehensive assessment of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease based on drug selection recommendations for Chinese medical institutions.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jieqiong Lv, Xianbin Cai, Zhaopeng Yang, Bin Li, Yanqiong Zhou, Fenge Li, Hongbo Fu
{"title":"A comprehensive assessment of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease based on drug selection recommendations for Chinese medical institutions.","authors":"Jieqiong Lv, Xianbin Cai, Zhaopeng Yang, Bin Li, Yanqiong Zhou, Fenge Li, Hongbo Fu","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2026.2715983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) are widely used to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD), yet the optimal choice remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the overall clinical value of seven ChEI formulations to provide evidence‑based guidance for rational AD pharmacotherapy selection. We constructed an evaluation framework based on the Rapid Guide for Drug Evaluation and Selection in Chinese Medical Institutions (Second Edition), which combined mini‑health technology assessment with the System of Objectified Judgment Analysis (SOJA). Seven formulations were assessed across five weighted dimensions: pharmacological properties, efficacy, safety, economy, and other attributes. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, CNKI, Wanfang, and official regulatory databases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Within this assessment framework, donepezil tablets achieved the highest score (74.86), followed by rivastigmine patches (73.50) and rivastigmine capsules (72.28). These three formulations are recommended as priority options for inclusion in Chinese hospital formularies. The remaining four drugs may be prescribed according to individual patient conditions and available institutional resources.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides evidence‑based guidance for clinical and institutional decision‑making in AD management and delivers a generalizable assessment framework adaptable to local real‑world data for healthcare institutions globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2026.2715983","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) are widely used to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD), yet the optimal choice remains unclear.

Research design and methods: This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the overall clinical value of seven ChEI formulations to provide evidence‑based guidance for rational AD pharmacotherapy selection. We constructed an evaluation framework based on the Rapid Guide for Drug Evaluation and Selection in Chinese Medical Institutions (Second Edition), which combined mini‑health technology assessment with the System of Objectified Judgment Analysis (SOJA). Seven formulations were assessed across five weighted dimensions: pharmacological properties, efficacy, safety, economy, and other attributes. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, CNKI, Wanfang, and official regulatory databases.

Results: Within this assessment framework, donepezil tablets achieved the highest score (74.86), followed by rivastigmine patches (73.50) and rivastigmine capsules (72.28). These three formulations are recommended as priority options for inclusion in Chinese hospital formularies. The remaining four drugs may be prescribed according to individual patient conditions and available institutional resources.

Conclusions: This study provides evidence‑based guidance for clinical and institutional decision‑making in AD management and delivers a generalizable assessment framework adaptable to local real‑world data for healthcare institutions globally.

基于我国医疗机构药物选择建议的胆碱酯酶抑制剂治疗阿尔茨海默病的综合评价
背景:胆碱酯酶抑制剂(ChEIs)被广泛用于治疗阿尔茨海默病(AD),但最佳选择尚不清楚。研究设计与方法:本研究旨在综合评价多奈哌齐片、利瓦斯蒂明胶囊、利瓦斯蒂明贴片、加兰他明片、加兰他明口腔崩解片和两种石杉碱A制剂7种ChEI制剂的整体临床价值,为AD药物治疗的合理选择提供循证指导。本研究使用的评价框架来源于《中国医疗机构药品评价与选择快速指南(第二版)》。该框架将小型卫生技术评估(mini-HTA)与客观判断分析系统(SOJA)相结合。七个配方在五个加权维度上进行评估:药理学性质(28分),疗效(27分),安全性(25分),经济性(10分)和其他属性(10分)。使用PubMed、CNKI、万方和官方监管数据库进行系统文献检索。结果:在该评价框架内,多奈哌齐片剂得分最高(74.86分),其次是利瓦斯替明贴片(73.50分)和利瓦斯替明胶囊(72.28分)。建议将这三种制剂作为优先选择纳入中国医院处方。其余四种药物可根据患者个人情况和机构现有资源开处方。结论:该评估为阿尔茨海默病管理的临床和机构决策提供了循证指导,并为全球医疗机构提供了一个适用于当地实际数据的通用评估框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书