Two Phase 3 Trials of Gantenerumab in Early Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies that target amyloid-beta (Aß) have the potential to slow cognitive and functional decline in persons with early Alzheimer's disease. Gantenerumab is a subcutaneously administered, fully human, anti-Aß IgG1 monoclonal antibody with highest affinity for aggregated Aß that has been tested for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted two phase 3 trials (GRADUATE I and II) involving participants 50 to 90 years of age with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease and evidence of amyloid plaques on positron-emission tomography (PET) or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing. Participants were randomly assigned to receive gantenerumab or placebo every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the score on the Clinical Dementia Rating scale-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB; range, 0 to 18, with higher scores indicating greater cognitive impairment) at week 116. RESULTS: A total of 985 and 980 participants were enrolled in the GRADUATE I and II trials, respectively. The baseline CDR-SB score was 3.7 in the GRADUATE I trial and 3.6 in the GRADUATE II trial. The change from baseline in the CDR-SB score at week 116 was 3.35 with gantenerumab and 3.65 with placebo in the GRADUATE I trial (difference, -0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.66 to 0.05; P = 0.10) and was 2.82 with gantenerumab and 3.01 with placebo in the GRADUATE II trial (difference, -0.19; 95% CI, -0.55 to 0.17; P = 0.30). At week 116, the difference in the amyloid level on PET between the gantenerumab group and the placebo group was -66.44 and -56.46 centiloids in the GRADUATE I and II trials, respectively, and amyloid-negative status was attained in 28.0% and 26.8% of the participants receiving gantenerumab in the two trials. Across both trials, participants receiving gantenerumab had lower CSF levels of phosphorylated tau 181 and higher levels of Aß42 than those receiving placebo; the accumulation of aggregated tau on PET was similar in the two groups. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema (ARIA-E) occurred in 24.9% of the participants receiving gantenerumab, and symptomatic ARIA-E occurred in 5.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Among persons with early Alzheimer's disease, the use of gantenerumab led to a lower amyloid plaque burden than placebo at 116 weeks but was not associated with slower clinical decline. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; GRADUATE I and II ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03444870 and NCT03443973, respectively.).

Development of a quantitative semi-mechanistic model of Alzheimer's disease based on the amyloid/tau/neurodegeneration framework (the Q-ATN model).

INTRODUCTION: A quantitative model of Alzheimer's disease (AD) based on the amyloid/tau/neurodegeneration biomarker framework (Q-ATN model) was developed to sequentially link amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), tau PET, medial temporal cortical thickness, and clinical outcome (Clinical Dementia Rating - Sum of Boxes; CDR-SB). METHODS: Published data and biologically plausible mechanisms were used to construct, calibrate, and validate the model. Clinical trial simulations were performed for different anti-amyloid antibodies, including a 5-year simulation of subcutaneous gantenerumab treatment. RESULTS: The simulated time-course of biomarkers and CDR-SB was consistent with natural history studies and described the effects of several anti-amyloid antibodies observed in trials with positive and negative (or non-significant) outcomes. The 5-year simulation predicts that the beneficial effects of continued anti-amyloid treatment should increase markedly over time. DISCUSSION: The Q-ATN model offers a novel approach for linking amyloid PET to CDR-SB, and provides theoretical support for the potential clinical benefit of anti-amyloid therapy. HIGHLIGHTS: A semi-mechanistic model was developed to link amyloid/tau/neurodegeneration biomarkers to clinical outcome (Q-ATN model). The Q-ATN model describes the disease progression seen in natural history studies. Model simulations agree well with mean data from the aducanumab EMERGE study. A 5-year simulation of gantenerumab predicts greater benefit with longer treatment.

Phase 3 trials of solanezumab for mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is characterized by amyloid-beta plaques, neurofibrillary tangles, gliosis, and neuronal loss. Solanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, preferentially binds soluble forms of amyloid and in preclinical studies promoted its clearance from the brain. METHODS: In two phase 3, double-blind trials (EXPEDITION 1 and EXPEDITION 2), we randomly assigned 1012 and 1040 patients, respectively, with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease to receive placebo or solanezumab (administered intravenously at a dose of 400 mg) every 4 weeks for 18 months. The primary outcomes were the changes from baseline to week 80 in scores on the 11-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog11; range, 0 to 70, with higher scores indicating greater cognitive impairment) and the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living scale (ADCS-ADL; range, 0 to 78, with lower scores indicating worse functioning). After analysis of data from EXPEDITION 1, the primary outcome for EXPEDITION 2 was revised to the change in scores on the 14-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog14; range, 0 to 90, with higher scores indicating greater impairment), in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease. RESULTS: Neither study showed significant improvement in the primary outcomes. The modeled difference between groups (solanezumab group minus placebo group) in the change from baseline was -0.8 points for the ADAS-cog11 score (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1 to 0.5; P=0.24) and -0.4 points for the ADCS-ADL score (95% CI, -2.3 to 1.4; P=0.64) in EXPEDITION 1 and -1.3 points (95% CI, -2.5 to 0.3; P=0.06) and 1.6 points (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.3; P=0.08), respectively, in EXPEDITION 2. Between-group differences in the changes in the ADAS-cog14 score were -1.7 points in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (95% CI, -3.5 to 0.1; P=0.06) and -1.5 in patients with moderate Alzheimer's disease (95% CI, -4.1 to 1.1; P=0.26). In the combined safety data set, the incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema or hemorrhage was 0.9% with solanezumab and 0.4% with placebo for edema (P=0.27) and 4.9% and 5.6%, respectively, for hemorrhage (P=0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Solanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds amyloid, failed to improve cognition or functional ability. (Funded by Eli Lilly; EXPEDITION 1 and 2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00905372 and NCT00904683.).

A phase 3 trial of semagacestat for treatment of Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is characterized by the presence of cortical amyloid-beta (Aß) protein plaques, which result from the sequential action of ß-secretase and γ-secretase on amyloid precursor protein. Semagacestat is a small-molecule γ-secretase inhibitor that was developed as a potential treatment for Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which 1537 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease underwent randomization to receive 100 mg of semagacestat, 140 mg of semagacestat, or placebo daily. Changes in cognition from baseline to week 76 were assessed with the use of the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale for cognition (ADAS-cog), on which scores range from 0 to 70 and higher scores indicate greater cognitive impairment, and changes in functioning were assessed with the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale, on which scores range from 0 to 78 and higher scores indicate better functioning. A mixed-model repeated-measures analysis was used. RESULTS: The trial was terminated before completion on the basis of a recommendation by the data and safety monitoring board. At termination, there were 189 patients in the group receiving placebo, 153 patients in the group receiving 100 mg of semagacestat, and 121 patients in the group receiving 140 mg of semagacestat. The ADAS-cog scores worsened in all three groups (mean change, 6.4 points in the placebo group, 7.5 points in the group receiving 100 mg of the study drug, and 7.8 points in the group receiving 140 mg; P=0.15 and P=0.07, respectively, for the comparison with placebo). The ADCS-ADL scores also worsened in all groups (mean change at week 76, -9.0 points in the placebo group, -10.5 points in the 100-mg group, and -12.6 points in the 140-mg group; P=0.14 and P<0.001, respectively, for the comparison with placebo). Patients treated with semagacestat lost more weight and had more skin cancers and infections, treatment discontinuations due to adverse events, and serious adverse events (P<0.001 for all comparisons with placebo). Laboratory abnormalities included reduced levels of lymphocytes, T cells, immunoglobulins, albumin, total protein, and uric acid and elevated levels of eosinophils, monocytes, and cholesterol; the urine pH was also elevated. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with placebo, semagacestat did not improve cognitive status, and patients receiving the higher dose had significant worsening of functional ability. Semagacestat was associated with more adverse events, including skin cancers and infections. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00594568.)

PRISM II: an open-label study to assess effectiveness of dextromethorphan/quinidine for pseudobulbar affect in patients with dementia, stroke or traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Phase 3 trials supporting dextromethorphan/quinidine (DM/Q) use as a treatment for pseudobulbar affect (PBA) were conducted in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or multiple sclerosis (MS). The PRISM II study provides additional DM/Q experience with PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: Participants in this open-label, multicenter, 90-day trial received DM/Q 20/10 mg twice daily. The primary outcome was the Center for Neurologic Study-Lability Scale (CNS-LS), assessing change in PBA episode frequency and severity. The CNS-LS final visit score was compared to baseline (primary analysis) and to the response in a previously conducted placebo-controlled trial with DM/Q in patients with ALS or MS. Secondary outcomes included change in PBA episode count and Clinical Global Impression of Change with respect to PBA as rated by a clinician (CGI-C) and by the patient or caregiver (PGI-C). RESULTS: The study enrolled 367 participants with PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or TBI. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) CNS-LS score improved significantly from 20.4 (4.4) at baseline to 12.8 (5.0) at Day 90/Final Visit (change, -7.7 [6.1]; P < .001, 95 % CI: -8.4, -7.0). This magnitude of improvement was consistent with DM/Q improvement in the earlier phase-3, placebo-controlled trial (mean [95 % CI] change from baseline, -8.2 [-9.4, -7.0]) and numerically exceeds the improvement seen with placebo in that study (-5.7 [-6.8, -4.7]). Reduction in PBA episode count was 72.3 % at Day 90/Final Visit compared with baseline (P < .001). Scores on CGI-C and PGI-C showed that 76.6 and 72.4 % of participants, respectively, were "much" or "very much" improved with respect to PBA. The most frequently occurring adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (5.4 %), headache (4.1 %), urinary tract infection (2.7 %), and dizziness (2.5 %); 9.8 % had AEs that led to discontinuation. Serious AEs were reported in 6.3 %; however, none were considered treatment related. CONCLUSIONS: DM/Q was shown to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or TBI. The magnitude of PBA improvement was similar to that reported in patients with PBA secondary to ALS or MS, and the adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of DM/Q. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01799941, registered on 25 February 2013.

An open-label study to assess safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of dextromethorphan/quinidine for pseudobulbar affect in dementia: PRISM II results.

BACKGROUND: Dextromethorphan (DM)/quinidine (Q) is an approved treatment for pseudobulbar affect (PBA) based on trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or multiple sclerosis. PRISM II evaluated DM/Q effectiveness and tolerability for PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or traumatic brain injury; dementia cohort results are reported. METHODS: This was an open-label, multicenter, 90 day trial; patients received DM/Q 20/10 mg twice daily. Primary outcome was change in Center for Neurologic Study-Lability Scale (CNS-LS) score. Secondary outcomes included PBA episode count and Clinical and Patient/Caregiver Global Impression of Change scores with respect to PBA (CGI-C/PGI-C). RESULTS: 134 patients were treated. CNS-LS improved by a mean (SD) of 7.2 (6.0) points at Day 90/Endpoint (P<.001) vs. baseline. PBA episodes were reduced 67.7% (P<.001) vs. baseline; global measures showed 77.5% CGI-C and 76.5% PGI-C "much"/"very much" improved. Adverse events included headache (7.5%), urinary tract infection (4.5%), and diarrhea (3.7%); few patients dropped out for adverse events (10.4%). CONCLUSIONS: DM/Q significantly reduced PBA symptoms in patients with dementia; reported adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of DM/Q. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01799941.

Development of a patient-reported outcome instrument to assess complex activities of daily living and interpersonal functioning in persons with mild cognitive impairment: The qualitative research phase.

INTRODUCTION: As drug development research efforts move toward studying patients earlier in the course of Alzheimer's disease (AD), it is important to incorporate the patient's perspective into measurement of outcomes. METHODS: This article summarizes the qualitative work of the Patient-Reported Outcome Consortium's Cognition Working Group in the development of a new self-reported outcome measure in persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to suspected AD, herein referred to as MCI. RESULTS: The draft measure captures the patient's voice for two functional domains, complex activities of daily living and interpersonal functioning. DISCUSSION: This work represents a series of initial steps in the development of this rating scale. The next steps are to conduct psychometric analysis and evaluate the role of insight.

The Dementia and Disability Project in Thai Elderly: rational, design, methodology and early results.

BACKGROUND: A strong inverse relationship of functional limitation and socioeconomic status has been established in western ageing society. Functional limitation can be related to chronic diseases, disuse, cognitive decline, and ageing. Among chronic diseases in the Thai population, cerebrovascular diseases, diabetes, and arthritis are common. These factors are known to contribute to disability and poor quality of life in the elder population. Neuropsychiatric problems, cognitive decline, dementia, and cultural issues in elderly people also can alter the quality of life of the elderly. METHODS: The Dementia and Disability Project in Thai Elderly (DDP) aims at comprehensively assessing community dwelling Thai elderly to understand the relationship between disability and motor function, neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognitive function, and chronic diseases. The DDP is the first study to look at the prevalence and etiology of dementia and of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in Thai elders and to explore the relationship of cognition, disability, small vessel diseases and cortical degeneration with neuroimaging in Thai elderly people. 1998 Thai elders were screened in 2004-2006 and diagnosed as having MCI or dementia. 223 elders with MCI or dementia and cognitively normal elderly had brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or at baseline. 319 elders from the 3 groups had blood tests to investigate the risks and possible etiologies of dementia including genotyping at baseline. RESULTS: The mean age of elders in this study is 69.51(SD=6.71, min=60, max=95) years. 689(34.9%) are men and 1284(65.1%) are women. Mean body weight was 58.36(SD=11.20) kgs. The regression model reveals that performance on gait and balance and serum triglyceride predicts activity of daily living performance (adjusted r2 = 0.280, f=2.644, p=0.003). The majority of abnormal gait in Thai elders was lower level gait disturbance. Only 1.5% (29/1952) had highest level gait disorders. 39.5% of 1964 subjects were free of chronic diseases. Treatment gap (indicating those who have untreated or inadequate treatment) of diabetes mellitus and hypertension in Thai elders in this study was 37% and 55.5% respectively. 62.6% of Thai elders have ApoE3E3 allele. Prevalence of positive ApoE4 gene in this study is 22.85%. 38.6% of Thai elders who had MRI brain study have moderate to severe white matter lesions. CONCLUSION: The large and comprehensive set of measurements in DDP allows a wide-ranging explanation of the functional and clinical features to be investigated in relation to white matter lesions or cortical atrophy of the brain in Thai elderly population. An almost 2 year follow up was made available to those with MCI and dementia and some of the cognitively normal elderly. The longitudinal design will provide great understanding of the possible contributors to disability in the elderly and to the progression of cognitive decline in Thai elders.

Effectiveness of antidementia drugs in delaying Alzheimer's disease progression.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide safety and efficacy data for regulatory approval of antidementia drugs, but offer limited data regarding real-world effectiveness. Long-term observational controlled studies (LTOCs) extend our understanding by providing longitudinal data across multiple stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Comparisons of strengths, limitations, evidence level, and results for monotherapy (cholinesterase inhibitors) and combination therapy (cholinesterase inhibitors + memantine) in RCTs versus LTOCs were made. RESULTS: Similar to RCTs, LTOCs have shown that both monotherapy and combination therapy are associated with slower cognitive and functional decline. Combination therapy is associated with better cognitive outcomes and greater delays in time to nursing home admission versus monotherapy or no treatment. Persistent antidementia drug treatment is associated with slower decline in cognition, daily function, and global severity, even in patients with advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: LTOCs provide complementary evidence regarding effectiveness of antidementia therapy over many years, a time course relevant to AD management. These findings also provide compelling arguments in favor of using LTOCs to estimate effectiveness, risk-benefit, and costs of AD treatments.

Efficacy and safety of donepezil 23 mg versus donepezil 10 mg for moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease: a subgroup analysis in patients already taking or not taking concomitant memantine.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: A large multicenter trial of donepezil 23 mg/day versus donepezil 10 mg/day for moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease allowed patients taking concomitant memantine. We evaluated the efficacy/safety of donepezil 23 and 10 mg/day in this trial, with respect to concomitant memantine use. METHODS: Prespecified analysis of data from a 24-week, randomized, double-blind trial. Patients were randomized to donepezil doses (23 vs. 10 mg/day) and stratified by concomitant memantine use (yes or no). Efficacy and safety were assessed for each donepezil dose in subgroups taking or not taking concomitant memantine. RESULTS: At week 24, donepezil 23 mg/day provided significant cognitive benefits over 10 mg/day (p < 0.01) on the Severe Impairment Battery, with or without concomitant memantine (ANCOVA adjusted for baseline score, country and treatment). The higher dose showed no benefit on the global function, Mini-Mental State Examination or activities of daily living measures in either memantine subgroup. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were higher for donepezil 23 mg/day with memantine (80.7%) than 23 mg/day without memantine (69.7%) or 10 mg/day with/without memantine (66.7/62.0%); across all treatment groups, most events were mild/moderate in severity. Individual rates of serious AEs were low (<1.0%), regardless of concomitant memantine use. CONCLUSION: In this population, concomitant memantine use did not alter the response profile of donepezil 23 vs. 10 mg/day. Donepezil 23 mg was generally safe and well tolerated among patients receiving donepezil alone and among patients receiving a combination of donepezil and memantine therapy.

Greater precision when measuring dementia severity: establishing item parameters for the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: An item response theory (IRT)-based scoring approach to the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR) can account for the pattern of scores across the CDR items (domains) and their differential abilities to indicate dementia severity. In doing so, an IRT-based approach can provide greater precision than other CDR scoring algorithms. However, neither a good set of item parameters nor an easily digestible set of instructions needed to implement this approach is readily available. METHODS: Participants were 1,326 patients at the Baylor College of Medicine Alzheimer's Disease and Memory Disorders Clinic. RESULTS: The item parameters necessary for an IRT-based scoring approach were identified (a parameters ranged from 3.01 to 6.22; b parameters ranged from -2.46 to 2.07). CONCLUSION: This study provides, and demonstrates how to easily apply, IRT-based item parameters for the CDR

Validity, significance, strengths, limitations, and evidentiary value of real-world clinical data for combination therapy in Alzheimer's disease: comparison of efficacy and effectiveness studies.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled efficacy trials (RCTs), the scientific gold standard, are required for regulatory approval of Alzheimer's disease (AD) interventions, yet provide limited information regarding real-world therapeutic effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To compare the nature of evidence regarding the combination of approved AD treatments from RCTs versus long-term observational controlled studies (LTOCs). METHODS: Comparisons of strengths, limitations, and evidence level for monotherapy [cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI) or memantine] and combination therapy (ChEI + memantine) in RCTs versus LTOCs. RESULTS: RCTs examined highly selected populations over months. LTOCs collected data across multiple AD stages in large populations over many years. RCTs and LTOCs show similar patterns favoring combination over monotherapy over placebo/no treatment. Long-term combination therapy compared to monotherapy reduced cognitive and functional decline and delayed time to nursing home admission. Persistent treatment was associated with slower decline. While LTOCs used control groups, adjusted for multiple covariates, had higher external validity, and favorable ethical, practical and cost considerations, their limitations included potential selection bias due to lack of placebo comparisons and randomization. CONCLUSIONS: Naturalistic LTOCs provide complementary long-term level II evidence to complement level I evidence from short-term RCTs regarding therapeutic effectiveness in AD that may otherwise be unobtainable. A coordinated strategy/consortium to pool LTOC data from multiple centers to estimate long-term comparative effectiveness, risks/benefits, and costs of AD treatments is needed.

Gaining precision on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive: a comparison of item response theory-based scores and total scores.

BACKGROUND: The Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive (ADAS-cog) is a commonly used measure for assessing cognitive dysfunction in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). The measure has 11 subscales, each of which captures an important aspect of cognitive dysfunction in AD. Traditional scoring of the ADAS-cog involves adding up the scores from the subscales without regarding their varying difficulty or their strength of relationship to AD-associated cognitive dysfunction. The present article analyzes problems associated with this approach and offers solutions for gaining measurement precision by modeling how the subscales function. METHODS: We analyzed data collected at the Baylor College of Medicine Alzheimer's Disease and Memory Disorders Clinic from 1240 patients diagnosed with varying degrees of dementia. Item response theory was used to determine the relationship between total scores on the ADAS-cog and the underlying level of cognitive dysfunction reflected by the scores. RESULTS: Results revealed that each total score corresponded to a spectrum of cognitive dysfunction, indicating that total scores were relatively imprecise indicators of underlying cognitive dysfunction. Furthermore, it was common for two individuals with the same total score to have significantly different degrees of cognitive dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that item response theory scoring of the ADAS-cog may measure cognitive dysfunction more precisely than a total score method.

Gantenerumab: an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody with potential disease-modifying effects in early Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: This review describes the research and development process of gantenerumab, a fully human anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody in development to treat early symptomatic and asymptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD). Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies can substantially reverse amyloid plaque pathology and may modify the course of the disease by slowing or stopping its clinical progression. Several molecules targeting amyloid have failed in clinical development due to drug-related factors (e.g., treatment-limiting adverse events, low potency, poor brain penetration), study design/methodological issues (e.g., disease stage, lack of AD pathology confirmation), and other factors. The US Food and Drug Administration's approval of aducanumab, an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody as the first potential disease-modifying therapy for AD, signaled the value of more than 20 years of drug development, adding to the available therapies the first nominal success since cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine were approved. BODY: Here, we review over 2 decades of gantenerumab development in the context of scientific discoveries in the broader AD field. Key learnings from the field were incorporated into the gantenerumab phase 3 program, including confirmed amyloid positivity as an entry criterion, an enriched clinical trial population to ensure measurable clinical decline, data-driven exposure-response models to inform a safe and efficacious dosing regimen, and the use of several blood-based biomarkers. Subcutaneous formulation for more pragmatic implementation was prioritized as a key feature from the beginning of the gantenerumab development program. CONCLUSION: The results from the gantenerumab phase 3 programs are expected by the end of 2022 and will add critical information to the collective knowledge on the search for effective AD treatments.

Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Crenezumab vs Placebo in Adults With Early Alzheimer Disease: Two Phase 3 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.

Importance: Alzheimer disease (AD), a neurodegenerative disease characterized by ß-amyloid plaques and τ tangles in the brain, represents an unmet medical need with no fully approved therapeutics to modify disease progression. Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of crenezumab, a humanized monoclonal immunoglobulin G4 antibody targeting ß-amyloid oligomers, in participants with prodromal to mild (early) AD. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two phase 3 multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled parallel-group efficacy and safety studies of crenezumab in participants with early AD, CREAD and CREAD2, were initiated in 2016 and 2017, respectively, and were designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of crenezumab in participants with early AD. CREAD (194 sites in 30 countries) and CREAD2 (209 sites in 27 countries) were global multicenter studies. A total of 3736 and 3664 participants were screened in CREAD and CREAD2, respectively. A total of 3736 and 3664 participants were screened in CREAD and CREAD2, respectively. Both trials enrolled individuals aged 50 to 85 years with early AD. Participants with some comorbidities and evidence of cerebral infarction or more than 4 microbleeds or areas of leptomeningeal hemosiderosis on magnetic resonance imaging were excluded. After 2923 and 2858 were excluded, respectively, 813 participants in CREAD and 806 in CREAD2 were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either placebo or crenezumab. In the final analysis, there were 409 participants in the placebo group and 404 in the crenezumab group in CREAD and 399 in the placebo group and 407 in the crenezumab group in CREAD2. Data were analyzed up until January 2019 and August 2019, respectively. Interventions: Participants received placebo or 60 mg/kg crenezumab intravenously every 4 weeks for up to 100 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 105 in Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) score. Results: There were 813 participants in CREAD (mean [SD] age, 70.7 [8.2] years; 483 female and 330 male) and 806 in CREAD2 (mean [SD] age, 70.9 [7.7] years; 456 female and 350 male). Baseline characteristics were balanced between both groups. The between-group difference in mean change from baseline in CDR-SB score (placebo minus crenezumab) was -0.17 (95% CI, -0.86 to 0.53; P = .63) at week 105 in the CREAD study (88 placebo; 86 crenezumab). Compared with previous trials, no new safety signals were identified, and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema were rare, mild, and transient. No meaningful changes in AD biomarkers were observed. Both studies were discontinued following a preplanned interim analysis indicating that CREAD was unlikely to meet the primary end point. Conclusions and Relevance: Crenezumab was well tolerated but did not reduce clinical decline in participants with early AD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: CREAD, NCT02670083; CREAD2, NCT03114657.

Dementia staging across three different methods.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To investigate the effectiveness of an item response theory (IRT)-based approach to staging dementia. METHODS: IRT estimates of dementia severity in 1,485 patients were used to stage dementia and then compared to dementia staging using the classic Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR) algorithm and the Sum of the Boxes (SOB) approach. RESULTS: Measurement imprecision was highest when dementia stages were determined based on the classic algorithm (48% of sample), lower when they were determined based on the SOB approach (12%), and lowest when determined using IRT-based staging (0%). CONCLUSION: The classic CDR algorithm weights boxes largely according to clinical experience. The SOB approach weights all boxes equally. The IRT approach weights boxes according to their actual ability to identify dementia severity and therefore provides the most precise information for staging dementia.