Updated safety results from phase 3 lecanemab study in early Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a major health problem of aging, with tremendous burden on healthcare systems, patients, and families globally. Lecanemab, an FDA-approved amyloid beta (Aß)-directed antibody indicated for the treatment of early AD, binds with high affinity to soluble Aß protofibrils, which have been shown to be more toxic to neurons than monomers or insoluble fibrils. Lecanemab has been shown to be well tolerated in multiple clinical trials, although risks include an increased rate of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) and infusion reactions relative to placebo. METHODS: Clarity AD was an 18-month treatment (Core study), multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study with open-label extension (OLE) in participants with early AD. Eligible participants were randomized 1:1 across 2 treatment groups (placebo and lecanemab 10 mg/kg biweekly). Safety evaluations included monitoring of vital signs, physical examinations, adverse events, clinical laboratory parameters, and 12-lead electrocardiograms. ARIA occurrence was monitored throughout the study by magnetic resonance imaging, read both locally and centrally. RESULTS: Overall, 1795 participants from Core and 1612 participants with at least one dose of lecanemab (Core + OLE) were included. Lecanemab was generally well-tolerated in Clarity AD, with no deaths related to lecanemab in the Core study. There were 9 deaths during the OLE, with 4 deemed possibly related to study treatment. Of the 24 deaths in Core + OLE, 3 were due to intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH): 1 placebo in the Core due to ICH, and 2 lecanemab in OLE with concurrent ICH (1 on tissue plasminogen activator and 1 on anticoagulant therapy). In the Core + OLE, the most common adverse events in the lecanemab group (> 10%) were infusion-related reactions (24.5%), ARIA with hemosiderin deposits (ARIA-H) microhemorrhages (16.0%), COVID-19 (14.7%), ARIA with edema (ARIA-E; 13.6%), and headache (10.3%). ARIA-E and ARIA-H were largely radiographically mild-to-moderate. ARIA-E generally occurred within 3-6 months of treatment, was more common in ApoE e4 carriers (16.8%) and most common in ApoE ε4 homozygous participants (34.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Lecanemab was generally well-tolerated, with the most common adverse events being infusion-related reactions, ARIA-H, ARIA-E. Clinicians, participants, and caregivers should understand the incidence, monitoring, and management of these events for optimal patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: Clarity AD NCT03887455).

Predicting clinical progression trajectories of early Alzheimer's disease patients.

BACKGROUND: Models for forecasting individual clinical progression trajectories in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) are needed for optimizing clinical studies and patient monitoring. METHODS: Prediction models were constructed using a clinical trial training cohort (TC; n = 934) via a gradient boosting algorithm and then evaluated in two validation cohorts (VC 1, n = 235; VC 2, n = 421). Model inputs included baseline clinical features (cognitive function assessments, APOE ε4 status, and demographics) and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures. RESULTS: The model using clinical features achieved R2 of 0.21 and 0.31 for predicting 2-year cognitive decline in VC 1 and VC 2, respectively. Adding MRI features improved the R2 to 0.29 in VC 1, which employed the same preprocessing pipeline as the TC. Utilizing these model-based predictions for clinical trial enrichment reduced the required sample size by 20% to 49%. DISCUSSION: Our validated prediction models enable baseline prediction of clinical progression trajectories in early AD, benefiting clinical trial enrichment and various applications.

Eligibility Rates among Racially and Ethnically Diverse US Participants in Phase 2 and Phase 3 Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Randomized Trials of Lecanemab and Elenbecestat in Early Alzheimer Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Many factors contribute to inadequate diversity in Alzheimer disease (AD) clinical trials. We evaluated eligibility rates among racial and ethnic groups at US sites in large global multisite trials in early AD. METHODS: Using screening data from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials in early AD, we assessed rates of eligibility among racial and ethnic groups controlling for other demographic covariates. Each trial incorporated positron emission tomography and/or cerebrospinal fluid to evaluate brain amyloid pathology, as well as typical eligibility criteria used in early AD trials. RESULTS: Across the trials, 10,804 US participants were screened: 193 (2%) were of Hispanic ethnicity and Black race, 2,624 (25%) were of Hispanic ethnicity and White race, 118 (1%) were of non-Hispanic ethnicity (NH) and Asian race, 696 (7%) were of NH ethnicity and Black race, and 7,017 (65%) were of NH ethnicity and White race. Data from 156 participants who did not fit into these categories were excluded. Accounting for age, sex, and trial and using NH White participants as a reference group, we observed higher probabilities of ineligibility for amyloid biomarker criteria among Hispanic Black (odds ratio [OR] = 3.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.11-4.88), Hispanic White (OR = 4.15, 95% CI = 3.58-4.83), NH Asian (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.23-4.55), and NH Black (OR = 3.75, 95% CI = 2.80-5.06) participants. INTERPRETATION: Differential eligibility may contribute to underrepresentation of some minoritized racial and ethnic groups in early AD trials. Amyloid biomarker eligibility is a requirement to confirm the diagnosis of AD and for treatment with amyloid-lowering drugs and differed among racial and ethnic groups. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:288-298.

Lecanemab for Patients With Early Alzheimer Disease: Bayesian Analysis of a Phase 2b Dose-Finding Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Bayesian clinical trial designs are increasingly common; given their promotion by the US Food and Drug Administration, the future use of the bayesian approach will only continue to increase. Innovations possible when using the bayesian approach improve the efficiency of drug development and the accuracy of clinical trials, especially in the context of substantial data missingness. Objective: To explain the foundations, interpretations, and scientific justification of the bayesian approach in the setting of lecanemab trial 201, a bayesian-designed phase 2 dose-finding trial; to demonstrate the efficiency of using a bayesian design; and to show how it accommodates innovations in the prospective design and also treatment-dependent types of missing data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a bayesian analysis of a clinical trial comparing the efficacy of 5 lecanemab 201 dosages for treatment of early Alzheimer disease. The goal of the lecanemab 201 trial was to identify the effective dose 90 (ED90), the dose achieving at least 90% of the maximum effectiveness of doses considered in the trial. This study assessed the bayesian adaptive randomization used, in which patients were preferentially assigned to doses that would give more information about the ED90 and its efficacy. Interventions: Patients in the lecanemab 201 trial were adaptively randomized to 1 of 5 dose regimens or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of lecanemab 201 was the Alzheimer Disease Composite Clinical Score (ADCOMS) at 12 months with continued treatment and follow-up out to 18 months. Results: A total 854 patients were included in trial treatment: 238 were in the placebo group (median age, 72 years [range, 50-89 years]; 137 female [58%]) and 587 were assigned to a lecanemab 201 treatment group (median age, 72 years [range, 50-90 years]; 272 female [46%]). The bayesian approach improved the efficiency of a clinical trial by prospectively adapting to the trial's interim results. By the trial's end more patients had been assigned to the better-performing doses: 253 (30%) and 161 (19%) patients to 10 mg/kg monthly and 10 mg/kg biweekly vs 51 (6%), 52 (6%), and 92 (11%) patients to 5 mg/kg monthly, 2.5 mg/kg biweekly, and 5 mg/kg biweekly, respectively. The trial identified 10 mg/kg biweekly as the ED90. The change in ADCOMS of the ED90 vs placebo was -0.037 at 12 months and -0.047 at 18 months. The bayesian posterior probability that the ED90 was superior to placebo was 97.5% at 12 months and 97.7% at 18 months. The respective probabilities of super-superiority were 63.8% and 76.0%. The primary analysis of the randomized bayesian lecanemab 201 trial found in the context of missing data that the most effective dose of lecanemab nearly doubles its estimated efficacy at 18 months of follow-up in comparison with restricting analysis to patients who completed the full 18 months of the trial. Conclusions and Relevance: Innovations associated with the bayesian approach can improve the efficiency of drug development and the accuracy of clinical trials, even in the context of substantial data missingness. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01767311.

ARIA in patients treated with lecanemab (BAN2401) in a phase 2 study in early Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Lecanemab is a humanized immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) monoclonal antibody that preferentially targets soluble aggregated Aß species (protofibrils) with activity at amyloid plaques. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) profiles appear to differ for various anti-amyloid antibodies. Here, we present ARIA data from a large phase 2 lecanemab trial (Study 201) in early Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: Study 201 trial was double-blind, placebo-controlled (core) with an open-label extension (OLE). Observed ARIA events were summarized and modeled via Kaplan-Meier graphs. An exposure response model was developed. RESULTS: In the phase 2 core and OLE, there was a low incidence of ARIA-E (<10%), with <3% symptomatic cases. ARIA-E was generally asymptomatic, mild-to-moderate in severity, and occurred early (<3 months). ARIA-E was correlated with maximum lecanemab serum concentration and incidence was higher in apolipoprotein E4 (ApoE4) homozygous carriers. ARIA-H and ARIA-E occurred with similar frequency in core and OLE. DISCUSSION: Lecanemab can be administered without titration with modest incidence of ARIA.

Lecanemab in Early Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: The accumulation of soluble and insoluble aggregated amyloid-beta (Aß) may initiate or potentiate pathologic processes in Alzheimer's disease. Lecanemab, a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds with high affinity to Aß soluble protofibrils, is being tested in persons with early Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted an 18-month, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial involving persons 50 to 90 years of age with early Alzheimer's disease (mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease) with evidence of amyloid on positron-emission tomography (PET) or by cerebrospinal fluid testing. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous lecanemab (10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks) or placebo. The primary end point was the change from baseline at 18 months in the score on the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB; range, 0 to 18, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). Key secondary end points were the change in amyloid burden on PET, the score on the 14-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog14; range, 0 to 90; higher scores indicate greater impairment), the Alzheimer's Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS; range, 0 to 1.97; higher scores indicate greater impairment), and the score on the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Scale for Mild Cognitive Impairment (ADCS-MCI-ADL; range, 0 to 53; lower scores indicate greater impairment). RESULTS: A total of 1795 participants were enrolled, with 898 assigned to receive lecanemab and 897 to receive placebo. The mean CDR-SB score at baseline was approximately 3.2 in both groups. The adjusted least-squares mean change from baseline at 18 months was 1.21 with lecanemab and 1.66 with placebo (difference, -0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.67 to -0.23; P<0.001). In a substudy involving 698 participants, there were greater reductions in brain amyloid burden with lecanemab than with placebo (difference, -59.1 centiloids; 95% CI, -62.6 to -55.6). Other mean differences between the two groups in the change from baseline favoring lecanemab were as follows: for the ADAS-cog14 score, -1.44 (95% CI, -2.27 to -0.61; P<0.001); for the ADCOMS, -0.050 (95% CI, -0.074 to -0.027; P<0.001); and for the ADCS-MCI-ADL score, 2.0 (95% CI, 1.2 to 2.8; P<0.001). Lecanemab resulted in infusion-related reactions in 26.4% of the participants and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema or effusions in 12.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Lecanemab reduced markers of amyloid in early Alzheimer's disease and resulted in moderately less decline on measures of cognition and function than placebo at 18 months but was associated with adverse events. Longer trials are warranted to determine the efficacy and safety of lecanemab in early Alzheimer's disease. (Funded by Eisai and Biogen; Clarity AD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03887455.).

The AHEAD 3-45 Study: Design of a prevention trial for Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: The Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum begins with a long asymptomatic or preclinical stage, during which amyloid beta (Aß) is accumulating for more than a decade prior to widespread cortical tauopathy, neurodegeneration, and manifestation of clinical symptoms. The AHEAD 3-45 Study (BAN2401-G000-303) is testing whether intervention with lecanemab (BAN2401), a humanized immunoglobulin 1 (IgG1) monoclonal antibody that preferentially targets soluble aggregated Aß, initiated during this asymptomatic stage can slow biomarker changes and/or cognitive decline. The AHEAD 3-45 Study is conducted as a Public-Private Partnership of the Alzheimer's Clinical Trial Consortium (ACTC), funded by the National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Eisai Inc. METHODS: The AHEAD 3-45 Study was launched on July 14, 2020, and consists of two sister trials (A3 and A45) in cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals ages 55 to 80 with specific dosing regimens tailored to baseline brain amyloid levels on screening positron emission tomography (PET) scans: intermediate amyloid (≈20 to 40 Centiloids) for A3 and elevated amyloid (>40 Centiloids) for A45. Both trials are being conducted under a single protocol, with a shared screening process and common schedule of assessments. A3 is a Phase 2 trial with PET-imaging end points, whereas A45 is a Phase 3 trial with a cognitive composite primary end point. The treatment period is 4 years. The study utilizes innovative approaches to enriching the sample with individuals who have elevated brain amyloid. These include recruiting from the Trial-Ready Cohort for Preclinical and Prodromal Alzheimer's disease (TRC-PAD), the Australian Dementia Network (ADNeT) Registry, and the Japanese Trial Ready Cohort (J-TRC), as well as incorporation of plasma screening with the C2N mass spectrometry platform to quantitate the Aß 42/40 ratio (Aß 42/40), which has been shown previously to reliably identify cognitively normal participants not likely to have elevated brain amyloid levels. A blood sample collected at a brief first visit is utilized to "screen out" individuals who are less likely to have elevated brain amyloid, and to determine the participant's eligibility to proceed to PET imaging. Eligibility to randomize into the A3 Trial or A45 Trial is based on the screening PET imaging results. RESULT: The focus of this article is on the innovative design of the study. DISCUSSION: The AHEAD 3-45 Study will test whether with lecanemab (BAN2401) can slow the accumulation of tau and prevent the cognitive decline associated with AD during its preclinical stage. It is specifically targeting both the preclinical and the early preclinical (intermediate amyloid) stages of AD and is the first secondary prevention trial to employ plasma-based biomarkers to accelerate the screening process and potentially substantially reduce the number of screening PET scans.

Lecanemab in patients with early Alzheimer's disease: detailed results on biomarker, cognitive, and clinical effects from the randomized and open-label extension of the phase 2 proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Lecanemab, a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets soluble aggregated Aß species (protofibrils), has demonstrated robust brain fibrillar amyloid reduction and slowing of clinical decline in early AD. The objective of this analysis is to report results from study 201 blinded period (core), the open-label extension (OLE), and gap period (between core and OLE) supporting the effectiveness of lecanemab. METHODS: The lecanemab study 201 core was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of 856 patients randomized to one of five dose regimens or placebo. An OLE of study 201 was initiated to allow patients to receive open-label lecanemab 10mg/kg biweekly for up to 24 months, with an intervening off-treatment period (gap period) ranging from 9 to 59 months (mean 24 months). RESULTS: At 12 and 18 months of treatment in the core, lecanemab 10 mg/kg biweekly demonstrated dose-dependent reductions of brain amyloid measured PET and corresponding changes in plasma biomarkers and slowing of cognitive decline. The rates of clinical progression during the gap were similar in lecanemab and placebo subjects, with clinical treatment differences maintained after discontinued dosing over an average of 24 months in the gap period. During the gap, plasma Aß42/40 ratio and p-tau181 levels began to return towards pre-randomization levels more quickly than amyloid PET. At OLE baseline, treatment differences vs placebo at 18 months in the randomized period were maintained across 3 clinical assessments. In the OLE, lecanemab 10 mg/kg biweekly treatment produced dose-dependent reductions in amyloid PET SUVr, improvements in plasma Aß42/40 ratio, and reductions in plasma p-tau181. CONCLUSIONS: Lecanemab treatment resulted in significant reduction in amyloid plaques and a slowing of clinical decline. Data indicate that rapid and pronounced amyloid reduction correlates with clinical benefit and potential disease-modifying effects, as well as the potential to use plasma biomarkers to monitor for lecanemab treatment effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01767311 .

Consistency of efficacy results across various clinical measures and statistical methods in the lecanemab phase 2 trial of early Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Lecanemab (BAN2401) is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that preferentially targets soluble aggregated Aß species (protofibrils) with activity at insoluble fibrils and slowed clinical decline in an 18-month phase 2 proof-of-concept study (Study 201; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01767311) in 856 subjects with early Alzheimer's disease (AD). In this trial, subjects were randomized to five lecanemab dose regimens or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the Alzheimer's Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS) at 12 months with Bayesian analyses. The key secondary endpoints were ADCOMS at 18 months and Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum-of-Boxes (CDR-SB) and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog14) at 18 months. The results have been published previously. Herein, we describe the results of sensitivity analyses evaluating the consistency of the lecanemab efficacy results in Study 201 at the identified dose, the ED90, across multiple statistical methods and multiple endpoints over the duration of the study. METHODS: The protocol-specified analysis model was a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM). Sensitivity analyses address the consistency of the conclusions using multiple statistical methods. These include a disease progression model (DPM), a natural cubic spline (NCS) model, a quadratic mixed model (QMM), and 2 MMRMs with additional covariates. RESULTS: The sensitivity analyses showed positive lecanemab treatment effects for all endpoints and all statistical models considered. The protocol-specified ADCOMS analysis showed a 29.7% slower decline than placebo for ADCOMS at 18 months. The various other analyses of 3 key endpoints showed declines ranging from 26.5 to 55.9%. The results at 12 months are also consistent with those at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusion of the primary analysis of the lecanemab Study 201 is strengthened by the consistently positive conclusions across multiple statistical models, across efficacy endpoints, and over time, despite missing data. The 18-month data from this trial was utilized in the design of the confirmatory phase 3 trial (Clarity AD) and allowed for proper powering for multiple, robust outcomes.

EEG parameters as endpoints in epilepsy clinical trials - An expert panel opinion paper.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of ideal measurement of treatment efficacy is a well acknowledged problem in the epilepsy community, both in clinical care and clinical trials. Whilst still the current gold-standard, self-reported seizure frequency significantly underestimates the true number of seizures and does not account for any other at least equally important outcome parameters, such as neurodevelopment and cognition. With the rise of disease modifying treatments, the need for more reliable endpoints in practice and clinical trials becomes more pressing. In this paper we assembled an expert panel to discuss the nature of these needs, current limitations, and obstacles based on a survey amongst these experts who were queried about the most important issues regarding the use of electroencephalography (EEG) parameters as endpoints in clinical drug and device development. METHODS: A structured survey was sent to a group of experts in the design and conduct of epilepsy trials in adults and children. This was followed by a virtual in-person meeting discussing the results of the trial and identifying a list of most important issues. RESULTS: Six clinical trialists and 5 individuals from pharmaceutical companies returned the survey containing 14 questions, and 8 clinical trialists and 10 pharma-representatives attended the meeting. Three main issues were identified (1) lack of accuracy of seizure diaries due to nocturnal seizures, subtle motor seizures, impairment of consciousness and lack of awareness of the seizure by the patient (2) inter-rater variability of EEG assessment (3) lack of standardization regarding definition(s) of seizures (clinical and electrographic), EEG recording methods and EEG data management. Recommended solutions included (1) validation of EEG parameters as biomarkers and use of wearables (2) development of a manual that describes EEG rating criteria, protocol for validation by > 1 central reader and use of a resolution of disagreements reporting template (3) standardization of EEG recording, data management and reporting. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: Current developments in research and technology seem promising to advance the use of EEG parameters as potential endpoints and offer partial solutions to the current needs. However, continuous, focused and collaborative efforts of all stakeholders (academia, industry and regulatory agencies) are needed to formulate guidelines, validate emerging technologies and approve them for use in trials. It is the intent of this opinion "position paper" to stimulate those efforts.

Time to exceed pre-randomization monthly seizure count for perampanel in participants with primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures: A potential clinical end point.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the exploratory time to exceed pre-randomization seizure count (T-PSC) in the determination of efficacy of adjunctive perampanel in participants with primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures in generalized-onset epilepsy. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01393743), participants ≥12 years of age with treatment-resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy were randomized to receive placebo or adjunctive perampanel (≤8 mg/day) across a 17-week double-blind treatment phase (4-week titration; 13-week maintenance). We evaluated the pre-planned exploratory end point of the T-PSC using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. We also re-evaluated the correspondence of the primary end points of median percent seizure frequency change (MPC) and 50% responder rate (50RR) calculated at T-PSC and at the end of the trial. RESULTS: The exploratory end point of median T-PSC on placebo was 43 days and >120 days on perampanel (log-rank p < .001). The primary end points calculated at T-PSC did not differ significantly from the end points at the end of the trial (MPC -31% vs -42% at T-PSC; 50RR 32% vs 51% at T-PSC). After T-PSC was reached, participants had a median (interquartile range) of 5 (3-13) additional seizures on placebo and 5 (2-10) on perampanel. SIGNIFICANCE: The exploratory end point of T-PSC demonstrated the effectiveness of perampanel despite a shorter duration of monitoring. The seizures that occurred after T-PSC did not influence the conclusions of the trial; therefore, T-PSC may be a viable alternative to traditional trial end points that reduces the risk to participants.

A randomized, double-blind, phase 2b proof-of-concept clinical trial in early Alzheimer's disease with lecanemab, an anti-Aß protofibril antibody.

BACKGROUND: Lecanemab (BAN2401), an IgG1 monoclonal antibody, preferentially targets soluble aggregated amyloid beta (Aß), with activity across oligomers, protofibrils, and insoluble fibrils. BAN2401-G000-201, a randomized double-blind clinical trial, utilized a Bayesian design with response-adaptive randomization to assess 3 doses across 2 regimens of lecanemab versus placebo in early Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild AD dementia. METHODS: BAN2401-G000-201 aimed to establish the effective dose 90% (ED90), defined as the simplest dose that achieves ≥90% of the maximum treatment effect. The primary endpoint was Bayesian analysis of 12-month clinical change on the Alzheimer's Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS) for the ED90 dose, which required an 80% probability of ≥25% clinical reduction in decline versus placebo. Key secondary endpoints included 18-month Bayesian and frequentist analyses of brain amyloid reduction using positron emission tomography; clinical decline on ADCOMS, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum-of-Boxes (CDR-SB), and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog14); changes in CSF core biomarkers; and total hippocampal volume (HV) using volumetric magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: A total of 854 randomized subjects were treated (lecanemab, 609; placebo, 245). At 12 months, the 10-mg/kg biweekly ED90 dose showed a 64% probability to be better than placebo by 25% on ADCOMS, which missed the 80% threshold for the primary outcome. At 18 months, 10-mg/kg biweekly lecanemab reduced brain amyloid (-0.306 SUVr units) while showing a drug-placebo difference in favor of active treatment by 27% and 30% on ADCOMS, 56% and 47% on ADAS-Cog14, and 33% and 26% on CDR-SB versus placebo according to Bayesian and frequentist analyses, respectively. CSF biomarkers were supportive of a treatment effect. Lecanemab was well-tolerated with 9.9% incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema/effusion at 10 mg/kg biweekly. CONCLUSIONS: BAN2401-G000-201 did not meet the 12-month primary endpoint. However, prespecified 18-month Bayesian and frequentist analyses demonstrated reduction in brain amyloid accompanied by a consistent reduction of clinical decline across several clinical and biomarker endpoints. A phase 3 study (Clarity AD) in early Alzheimer's disease is underway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01767311 .

The ß-Secretase BACE1 in Alzheimer's Disease.

BACE1 (beta-site amyloid precursor protein cleaving enzyme 1) was initially cloned and characterized in 1999. It is required for the generation of all monomeric forms of amyloid-ß (Aß), including Aß42, which aggregates into bioactive conformational species and likely initiates toxicity in Alzheimer's disease (AD). BACE1 concentrations and rates of activity are increased in AD brains and body fluids, thereby supporting the hypothesis that BACE1 plays a critical role in AD pathophysiology. Therefore, BACE1 is a prime drug target for slowing down Aß production in early AD. Besides the amyloidogenic pathway, BACE1 has other substrates that may be important for synaptic plasticity and synaptic homeostasis. Indeed, germline and adult conditional BACE1 knockout mice display complex neurological phenotypes. Despite BACE1 inhibitor clinical trials conducted so far being discontinued for futility or safety reasons, BACE1 remains a well-validated therapeutic target for AD. A safe and efficacious compound with high substrate selectivity as well as a more accurate dose regimen, patient population, and disease stage may yet be found. Further research should focus on the role of Aß and BACE1 in physiological processes and key pathophysiological mechanisms of AD. The functions of BACE1 and the homologue BACE2, as well as the biology of Aß in neurons and glia, deserve further investigation. Cellular and molecular studies of BACE1 and BACE2 knockout mice coupled with biomarker-based human research will help elucidate the biological functions of these important enzymes and identify their substrates and downstream effects. Such studies will have critical implications for BACE1 inhibition as a therapeutic approach for AD.

Time to prerandomization monthly seizure count in perampanel trials: A novel epilepsy endpoint.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a novel endpoint of time to prerandomization monthly seizure count could be used to differentiate efficacious and nonefficacious therapies in clinical trials of new add-on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHODS: This analysis used data from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trials of perampanel as an add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy who were experiencing refractory partial seizures: studies 304 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00699972), 305 (NCT00699582), and 306 (NCT00700310). Time to prerandomization monthly seizure count was evaluated post hoc for each trial, and findings were compared with the original primary outcomes (median percent change in seizure frequency and 50% responder rate). Outcomes were assessed for all partial-onset seizures, secondarily generalized (SG) tonic-clonic seizures only, and complex partial plus SG (CP + SG) seizures. RESULTS: Perampanel 4-12 mg significantly prolonged median time to prerandomization monthly seizure count, generally by more than 1 week, compared with placebo, across all 3 studies, consistent with the original primary outcomes. Analysis of SG seizures only, and CP + SG seizures, also indicated a significantly prolonged median time to prerandomization monthly seizure count with perampanel 8 mg and 12 mg compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Time to prerandomization monthly seizure count is a promising novel alternative to the standard endpoints of median percent change in seizure frequency and 50% responder rates used in trials of add-on AEDs. Use of this endpoint could reduce exposure to placebo or ineffective treatments, thereby facilitating trial recruitment and improving safety.

Perampanel for adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures: a pooled dose-response analysis of phase III studies.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the relationship between efficacy and perampanel dose, integrated actual (last) dose data from three phase III trials and an extension study (blinded Conversion Period; open-label Maintenance Period) were analyzed. METHODS: Seizure frequency data were analyzed in patients who were randomized to and completed the 13-week Maintenance Period of the phase III studies on perampanel 8 mg, and who received an actual (last) dose of 12 mg during (1) the extension 16-week blinded Conversion Period or (2) weeks 1-13 of the extension Maintenance Period. Due to a treatment-by-region interaction (p = 0.042), analyses excluded patients from the Latin America region (n = 162/1,480; 10.9% of the treated cohort). RESULTS: Of 372 patients randomized to 8 mg in the phase III studies, 273 completed the Maintenance Period at 8 mg and 267 entered the extension study. In patients who then had an actual (last) dose of 12 mg during the extension blinded Conversion Period (n = 217), median percent change in seizure frequency per 28 days improved from -32.4% (8 mg, phase III Maintenance Period) to -44.2% (12 mg, extension blinded Conversion Period); 50% responder rates increased slightly from 37.3% to 42.9%. In patients who completed the phase III studies on 8 mg and had an actual (last) dose of 12 mg during weeks 1-13 of the extension Maintenance Period (n = 181), median percent change in seizure frequency per 28 days improved from -34.1% (phase III Maintenance Period) to -46.0% (weeks 1-13 extension Maintenance Period); 50% responder rates were 39.2% and 46.4%. Seizure control remained substantially unchanged in patients who completed the phase III studies at 12 mg and continued on that dose during the extension. SIGNIFICANCE: Increasing perampanel dose from 8 to 12 mg can produce additional benefits in seizure control in at least some patients who tolerate the higher dose.

Alzheimer's disease pathology in the neocortex and hippocampus of the western lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla).

The two major histopathologic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) are amyloid beta protein (Aß) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles (NFT). Aß pathology is a common feature in the aged nonhuman primate brain, whereas NFT are found almost exclusively in humans. Few studies have examined AD-related pathology in great apes, which are the closest phylogenetic relatives of humans. In the present study, we examined Aß and tau-like lesions in the neocortex and hippocampus of aged male and female western lowland gorillas using immunohistochemistry and histochemistry. Analysis revealed an age-related increase in Aß-immunoreactive plaques and vasculature in the gorilla brain. Aß plaques were more abundant in the neocortex and hippocampus of females, whereas Aß-positive blood vessels were more widespread in male gorillas. Plaques were also Aß40-, Aß42-, and Aß oligomer-immunoreactive, but only weakly thioflavine S- or 6-CN-PiB-positive in both sexes, indicative of the less fibrillar (diffuse) nature of Aß plaques in gorillas. Although phosphorylated neurofilament immunostaining revealed a few dystrophic neurites and neurons, choline acetyltransferase-immunoreactive fibers were not dystrophic. Neurons stained for the tau marker Alz50 were found in the neocortex and hippocampus of gorillas at all ages. Occasional Alz50-, MC1-, and AT8-immunoreactive astrocyte and oligodendrocyte coiled bodies and neuritic clusters were seen in the neocortex and hippocampus of the oldest gorillas. This study demonstrates the spontaneous presence of both Aß plaques and tau-like lesions in the neocortex and hippocampus in old male and female western lowland gorillas, placing this species at relevance in the context of AD research.

Efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel for the treatment of refractory partial seizures: a pooled analysis of three phase III studies.

PURPOSE: Three phase III studies (304 [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00699972], 305 [NCT00699582], 306 [NCT00700310]) evaluated perampanel, an α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist, as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures. We report post hoc analyses of pooled study data by randomized dose. METHODS: Patients with partial seizures despite receiving 1-3 antiepileptic drugs were randomized to once-daily placebo, perampanel 8 or 12 mg (studies 304, 305), or placebo, perampanel 2, 4, or 8 mg (study 306). Studies included a 6-week baseline period and double-blind treatment phase (6-week titration; 13-week maintenance). Primary end points were median change in partial seizure frequency (baseline vs. double-blind phase) and percentage of patients achieving ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency (baseline vs. maintenance). Here, these end points, together with secondary, exploratory, and safety end points, were assessed using pooled study data. KEY FINDINGS: The pooled intent-to-treat analysis set (randomized, treated patients with any seizure data) included 1,478 patients. Median changes in partial seizure frequency were greater with perampanel than placebo (perampanel 4 mg, -23.3%; 8 mg, -28.8%; 12 mg, -27.2%; placebo, -12.8%; p < 0.01, each dose vs. placebo), as were 50% responder rates (perampanel 4 mg, 28.5%; 8 mg, 35.3%; 12 mg, 35.0%; placebo, 19.3%; p < 0.05, each dose vs. placebo). In addition, median changes in complex partial plus secondary generalized seizure frequency were also greater with perampanel than placebo (perampanel 4 mg, -31.2%; 8 mg, -35.6%; 12 mg, -28.6%; placebo, -13.9%). Perampanel was generally well tolerated. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were dizziness, somnolence, and headache. Most TEAEs were mild/moderate; relatively few patients experienced severe TEAEs (placebo, 5.4%; perampanel, 8.9%) or serious TEAEs (placebo, 5.0%; perampanel, 5.5%). There were no deaths and no clinically important mean changes in laboratory values, electrocardiography (ECG) findings, or vital signs. SIGNIFICANCE: Perampanel reduced partial seizure frequency and improved responder rates compared with placebo, with an acceptable tolerability profile.

Abomasal impaction in captive bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus).

Fatal abomasal impaction, often combined with omasal impaction, was diagnosed in 11 bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus) from five different zoologic collections in the United States between 1981 and 2009. Nine of 11 cases occurred in young females (10 mo-7 yr old) and typical clinical signs prior to diagnosis or death included partial or complete anorexia, dehydration, and scant fecal production. Although the clinical histories in several of the earlier cases are incomplete, clinical signs were known to begin shortly after an anesthetic event in five of 11 bongo (45%). Pedigree analysis indicates that affected bongo were descendants of multiple founders and not from a single family line, suggesting that the development of abomasal impaction is not a strictly inheritable trait. Treatment, when attempted, was variable and included abomasotomy and removal of impacted ingesta, drug therapy (prokinetic drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, antimicrobials), fluid therapy, and administration of oral lubricants or intralesional stool softeners. Based on the outcomes in the cases presented here, the prognosis for bongo with abomasal impaction is considered poor to grave.

Interpreting the clinical importance of treatment outcomes in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.

UNLABELLED: A consensus meeting was convened by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to provide recommendations for interpreting clinical importance of treatment outcomes in clinical trials of the efficacy and effectiveness of chronic pain treatments. A group of 40 participants from universities, governmental agencies, a patient self-help organization, and the pharmaceutical industry considered methodologic issues and research results relevant to determining the clinical importance of changes in the specific outcome measures previously recommended by IMMPACT for 4 core chronic pain outcome domains: (1) Pain intensity, assessed by a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale; (2) physical functioning, assessed by the Multidimensional Pain Inventory and Brief Pain Inventory interference scales; (3) emotional functioning, assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory and Profile of Mood States; and (4) participant ratings of overall improvement, assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Change scale. It is recommended that 2 or more different methods be used to evaluate the clinical importance of improvement or worsening for chronic pain clinical trial outcome measures. Provisional benchmarks for identifying clinically important changes in specific outcome measures that can be used for outcome studies of treatments for chronic pain are proposed. PERSPECTIVE: Systematically collecting and reporting the recommended information needed to evaluate the clinical importance of treatment outcomes of chronic pain clinical trials will allow additional validation of proposed benchmarks and provide more meaningful comparisons of chronic pain treatments.