Sunday, February 12, 2012

Site Search

Forget to take your Ginkgo biloba? Turns out, it doesn’t matter

Among the natural products on pharmacy shelves, I was rooting for Ginkgo biloba for the prevention of dementia. For one, dementia is a horrible illness. Secondly, currently available drugs for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have little meaningful effect. Thirdly, preliminary data with ginkgo for AD looked encouraging. I recall reading this systematic review back in 2000. One sentence jumped out at me (the bolding is mine):

We conclude that for selegiline, vitamin E, lecithin, linopirdine, and propentofylline the published data do not provide support for efficacy. Based on the evidence we reviewed, it is our conclusion that donepezil, metrifonate and rivastigmine, however, all provide statistically significant modest benefit on cognitive performance and global functioning to the elderly with probable AD who are eligible for inclusion in clinical trials. The magnitude of the effect is similar for all of the medications. The results from the trials of ginkgo biloba are promising but the effects are smaller than those from the above mentioned therapies.

So the effect, while weak, was just about as bad as the prescription alternatives. For a “natural” remedy, that’s pretty good. But as with most small clinical trials, what appears to be clinically and statistically significant usually disappears when larger, more rigorous trials are conducted. And that seems to be the case now, with a publication in the December 23, 2009 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. But before we dive into the trial, let’s look at why ginkgo is even being studied at all.

The Background