Memantine for Parkinson’s Disease: Does It Make a Difference?
Aswathi Sajeendran1, Jamir Pitton Rissardo1, Ana Leticia Fornari Caprara1, Ian M. Walker1
1Cooper University Hospital
Objective:

To evaluate the efficacy of memantine in improving clinical outcomes in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD).

Background:

Memantine, an NMDA receptor antagonist, has been investigated for its potential benefits in PD, particularly for cognitive and motor symptoms. Despite several clinical trials, its overall impact remains uncertain.

Design/Methods:

PubMed was searched for randomized controlled trials of memantine in Parkinson’s disease. Outcomes included UPDRS-III (ON), NPI, ADL (DAD, ADL23, UPDRS-II), PDQ-39, and CGIC. Studies reporting sample size, mean, and SD for both groups were analyzed. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and mean differences (MD) were pooled using an inverse-variance method under fixed- and random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistic.

Results:

Five trials (PMID: 6734455, 19520613, 20729148, 21193343, 23077087) were included, with memantine doses ranging from 10 to 20 mg/day. Pooled analyses showed no significant effect on motor function (UPDRS-III ON: MD 0.17; 95% CI –1.27 to 1.61; I² = 0%) or neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI: MD –1.88; 95% CI –5.09 to 1.34; I² = 0%). Similarly, activities of daily living were unchanged (ADL: SMD –0.01; 95% CI –0.24 to 0.22; I² = 0%). However, a small but statistically significant improvement was observed in global clinical impression (CGIC: MD –0.40; 95% CI –0.77 to –0.03; I² = 0%). No heterogeneity was detected across outcomes.

Conclusions:

Memantine showed no significant benefit for motor symptoms, neuropsychiatric outcomes, or activities of daily living in PD. A small but statistically significant improvement was observed in global clinical impression, though its clinical relevance remains uncertain. Larger, high-quality trials are needed to clarify the role of memantine in PD management.

10.1212/WNL.0000000000213022
Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff.