Neurology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Correspondence:
Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Correspondence are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krupp, L. B.
Right arrow Articles by Grimson, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krupp, L. B.
Right arrow Articles by Grimson, R.

Neurology, Vol 45, Issue 11 1956-1961, Copyright © 1995 by American Academy of Neurology

ARTICLES

Fatigue therapy in multiple sclerosis: results of a double-blind, randomized, parallel trial of amantadine, pemoline, and placebo

LB Krupp, PK Coyle, C Doscher, A Miller, AH Cross, L Jandorf, J Halper, B Johnson, L Morgante and R Grimson
Multiple Sclerosis Comprehensive Care Center, State University of New York (SUNY) at Stony Brook, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative efficacy of amantadine, pemoline, and placebo in treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS)-related fatigue. BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a complication of MS. Both pemoline and amantadine have been used to treat MS fatigue, but their relative efficacy is not known. METHODS: Amantadine, pemoline, and placebo were compared in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study using a parallel-group design. Ninety-three ambulatory MS patients completed the study. Primary outcome measures were the fatigue severity scale (FSS); the MS-specific fatigue scale (MS-FS); and subjective response determined by verbal self-report. Secondary outcome measures consisted of assessments of sleep, depression, and vitality. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with planned post-hoc contrasts and Fisher's exact test were used to compare treatment response. RESULTS: Amantadine- treated patients showed a significantly greater reduction in fatigue, as measured by the MS-FS, than did patients treated with placebo (p = 0.04). By verbal report at the end of the study, 79% of patients treated with amantadine versus 52% treated with placebo and 32% treated with pemoline preferred drug therapy compared with no treatment (p = 0.03). No significant differences in any primary outcome measures were noted between pemoline and placebo. Neither amantadine nor pemoline affected sleep or depression relative to placebo. CONCLUSION: Amantadine was significantly better than placebo in treating fatigue in MS patients, whereas pemoline was not. The benefit of amantadine was not due to changes in sleep, depression, or neurologic disability.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1995 by AAN Enterprises, Inc.