This site uses cookies to measure how you use the website so it can be updated and improved based on your needs and also uses cookies to help remember the notifications you’ve seen, like this one, so that we don’t show them to you again. If you could also tell us a little bit about yourself, this information will help us understand how we can support you better and make this site even easier for you to use and navigate.

Tolerability and efficacy of memantine add-on therapy to rivastigmine transdermal patches in mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease: a multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study


Choi, Seong Hye, Park, Kyung Won, Na, Duk L., Han, Hyun Jeong, Kim, Eun-Joo, Shim, Yong S., Lee, Jae-Hong, The EXPECT Study Group,


Current Medical Research And Opinion, Volume: 27, No.: 7, Pages.: 1375-1383

Year of Publication



Objective: To compare the tolerability and efficacy of combination therapy of memantine plus rivastigmine patch with rivastigmine patch monotherapy in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease (AD).; Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label study, patients entered an 8-week run-in period (a 5 cm 2 rivastigmine patch for 4 weeks, then a 10 cm(2) patch for 4 weeks) followed by 16 weeks of memantine plus rivastigmine patch or rivastigmine patch monotherapy. The primary outcome measure was the retention rate at the end of the trial.; Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01025466.; Results: Overall, 88 and 84 patients received rivastigmine patch with and without memantine, respectively, and of these, 77 (87.5%) and 70 (83.3%) patients completed the study. The difference in retention rate was not significant (95% confidence interval: -6.3-14.7%). The incidence of adverse events (AEs) (53.4 vs. 50.6%) and discontinuation due to AEs (6.8 vs. 4.8%) were not different between patients with and without memantine. The most frequent AEs were skin irritation in patients with and without memantine (42.0 vs. 34.9%, p = 0.71), but discontinuation due to skin irritation was rare (4.5 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.74). The incidence of gastrointestinal AEs was very low in patients with and without memantine (nausea, 2.3 vs. 1.2%; vomiting, 1.1 vs. 1.2%). The Korean Version of the Cohen Mansfield Agitation Inventory scores favored rivastigmine patch monotherapy at the end of treatment (p = 0.01). Changes in other efficacy measures were similar between the groups.; Conclusion: There were no significant differences in tolerability and safety between the treatment groups. The combination therapy of memantine plus rivastigmine patch did not show an advantage over rivastigmine patch monotherapy on efficacy analyses. The sample size for comparing tolerability may have been too small to detect a difference of efficacy between the two groups.;

Bibtex Citation

@article{Choi_2011, doi = {10.1185/03007995.2011.582484}, url = {}, year = 2011, month = {may}, publisher = {Informa Healthcare}, volume = {27}, number = {7}, pages = {1375--1383}, author = {Seong Hye Choi and Kyung Won Park and Duk L. Na and Hyun Jeong Han and Eun-Joo Kim and Yong S. Shim and Jae-Hong Lee and The EXPECT Study Group}, title = {Tolerability and efficacy of memantine add-on therapy to rivastigmine transdermal patches in mild to moderate Alzheimer{textquotesingle}s disease: a multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study}, journal = {Current Medical Research and Opinion} }


administration & dosage, administration cutaneous, adverse effects, aged, aged, 80 and over, alzheimer disease, antiparkinson agents, drug therapy, drug therapy combination, female, humans, male, medication, memantine, middle aged, neuroprotective agents, patch, phenylcarbamates, severity of illness index, tolerability, transdermal patch, treatment outcome

Types of Dementia

Alzheimer’s Disease

Types of Study

Randomised Controlled Trial

Type of Outcomes


Type of Interventions

Pharmaceutical Interventions

Pharmaceutical Interventions

Anti-Alzheimer medications, e.g.: donezepil, galantamine, rivastigmine, memantime