Safety, tolerability, immunogenicity, and efficacy of UB-311 in participants with mild Alzheimer's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-amyloid vaccines may offer a convenient, affordable, and accessible means of preventing and treating Alzheimer's disease. UB-311 is an anti-amyloid-ß active immunotherapeutic vaccine shown to be well-tolerated and to have a durable antibody response in a phase 1 trial. This phase 2a study assessed the safety, immunogenicity, and preliminary efficacy of UB-311 in participants with mild Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: A 78-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 2a study was conducted in Taiwan. Participants were randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive seven intramuscular injections of UB-311 (Q3M arm), or five doses of U311 with two doses of placebo (Q6M arm), or seven doses of placebo (placebo arm). The primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of UB-311. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of investigational product. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02551809). FINDINGS: Between 7 December 2015 and 28 August 2018, 43 participants were randomised. UB-311 was safe, well-tolerated, and generated a robust immune response. The three treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) with the highest incidence were injection-site pain (14 TEAEs in seven [16%] participants), amyloid-related imaging abnormality with microhaemorrhages and haemosiderin deposits (12 TEAEs in six [14%] participants), and diarrhoea (five TEAEs in five [12%] participants). A 97% antibody response rate was observed and maintained at 93% by the end of the study across both UB-311 arms. INTERPRETATION: These results support the continued development of UB-311. FUNDING: Vaxxinity, Inc. (Formerly United Neuroscience Ltd.).

Avoiding future controversies in the Alzheimer's disease space through understanding the aducanumab data and FDA review.

Key points of disagreement between the aducanumab FDA statistical review, which had primarily negative conclusions, and the clinical review, which had primarily positive conclusions, were investigated. Results from secondary endpoints in positive Study 302 were significant and these endpoints provided meaningful additional information. Findings indicate the statistical review of the aducanumab data was incorrect in a number of key areas. Greater placebo decline was not responsible for the significant results in Study 302. Correlations did exist between reduction in ß-amyloid and clinical outcomes. Missing data and functional unblinding did not likely bias results. In contrast, the clinical review went too far in saying the negative results in Study 301 did not detract from the positive results in Study 302, as all clinical data should be considered in the evaluation, and the clinical review accepted the company's explanation for divergence of the results between the studies although much of the divergence remained unexplained. Interestingly, both the statistical review and the clinical review considered the available efficacy evidence despite both studies being terminated early. Implications of these findings include that the divergence in results seen in the two phase 3 aducanumab studies can be expected in other studies with similar design and analysis. Therefore, further research is needed to determine if analysis methods other than MMRM and/or optimized outcomes will provide more consistent results across studies.

Meaningful Clinical Changes in Alzheimer Disease Measured With the iADRS and Illustrated Using the Donanemab TRAILBLAZER-ALZ Study Findings.

Purpose of Review: To provide relevant background of the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS), with examples, to assist the reader with the interpretation of iADRS findings from the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study. Recent Findings: The iADRS is an integrated measure of global Alzheimer disease (AD) severity for use in the clinical trial environment. It provides a single score that captures commonalities across cognitive and functional ability domains, reflecting disease-related impairment, while minimizing noise not related to disease progression that may exist within each domain. In AD, disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are expected to slow the rate of clinical decline, changing the trajectory of disease progression. The overall percent slowing of disease progression with treatment is a more informative outcome of effect than absolute point differences between treatment and placebo groups at any given time point because the latter is influenced by treatment period and disease severity. The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ trial was a phase 2 study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of donanemab in participants with early symptomatic AD; the primary outcome measure was the change from baseline to 76 weeks on the iADRS. In the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study, donanemab slowed disease progression by 32% at 18 months (p = 0.04 vs placebo), demonstrating clinical efficacy. At the patient level, one can assess whether the DMT effect is clinically meaningful by estimating the threshold of change consistent with clinically meaningful worsening; based on the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ findings, treatment with donanemab would delay reaching this threshold by approximately 6 months. Summary: The iADRS is capable of accurately describing clinical changes associated with disease progression and detecting treatment effects and is an effective assessment tool for use in clinical trials of individuals with early symptomatic AD.

GenoRisk: A polygenic risk score for Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Recent clinical trials are considering inclusion of more than just apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 genotype as a way of reducing variability in analysis of outcomes. METHODS: Case-control data were used to compare the capacity of age, sex, and 58 Alzheimer's disease (AD)-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to predict AD status using several statistical models. Model performance was assessed with Brier scores and tenfold cross-validation. Genotype and sex × age estimates from the best performing model were combined with age and intercept estimates from the general population to develop a personalized genetic risk score, termed age, and sex-adjusted GenoRisk. RESULTS: The elastic net model that included age, age x sex interaction, allelic APOE terms, and 29 additional SNPs performed the best. This model explained an additional 19% of the heritable risk compared to APOE genotype alone and achieved an area under the curve of 0.747. DISCUSSION: GenoRisk could improve the risk assessment of individuals identified for prevention studies.

Perspectives on statistical strategies for the regulatory biomarker qualification process.

Qualification of a biomarker for use in a medical product development program requires a statistical strategy that aligns available evidence with the proposed context of use (COU), identifies any data gaps to be filled and plans any additional research required to support the qualification. Accumulating, interpreting and analyzing available data is outlined, step-by-step, illustrated by a qualified enrichment biomarker example and a safety biomarker in the process of qualification. The detailed steps aid requestors seeking qualification of biomarkers, allowing them to organize the available evidence and identify potential gaps. This provides a statistical perspective for assessing evidence that parallels clinical considerations and is intended to guide the overall evaluation of evidentiary criteria to support a specific biomarker COU.

Value-Generating Exploratory Trials in Neurodegenerative Dementias.

Drug development for Alzheimer disease and other neurodegenerative dementias, including frontotemporal dementia, has experienced a long history of phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials that failed to show efficacy of investigational drugs. Despite differences in clinical and behavioral characteristics, these disorders have shared pathologies and face common challenges in designing early-phase trials that are predictive of late-stage success. Here, we discuss exploratory clinical trials in neurodegenerative dementias. These are generally phase 1b or phase 2a trials that are designed to assess pharmacologic effects and rely on biomarker outcomes, with shorter treatment durations and fewer patients than traditional phase 2 studies. Exploratory trials can establish go/no-go decision points, support proof of concept and dose selection, and terminate drugs that fail to show target engagement with suitable exposure and acceptable safety profiles. Early failure saves valuable resources including opportunity costs. This is especially important for programs in academia and small biotechnology companies but may be applied to high-risk projects in large pharmaceutical companies to achieve proof of concept more rapidly at lower costs than traditional approaches. Exploratory studies in a staged clinical development program may provide promising data to warrant the substantial resources needed to advance compounds through late-stage development. To optimize the design and application of exploratory trials, the Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation and the Association for Frontotemporal Degeneration convened an advisory panel to provide recommendations on outcome measures and statistical considerations for these types of studies and study designs that can improve efficiency in clinical development.

36-month LipiDiDiet multinutrient clinical trial in prodromal Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: The LipiDiDiet trial investigates the effects of the specific multinutrient combination Fortasyn Connect on cognition and related measures in prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD). Based on previous results we hypothesized that benefits increase with long-term intervention. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 311 people with prodromal AD were recruited using the International Working Group-1 criteria and assigned to active product (125 mL once-a-day drink) or an isocaloric, same tasting, placebo control drink. Main outcome was change in cognition (Neuropsychological Test Battery [NTB] 5-item composite). Analyses were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding (ie, censoring) data collected after the start of open-label active product and/or AD medication. RESULTS: Of the 382 assessed for eligibility, 311 were randomized, of those 162 participants completed the 36-month study, including 81 with 36-month data eligible for efficacy analysis. Over 36 months, significant reductions in decline were observed for the NTB 5-item composite (-60%; between-group difference 0.212 [95% confidence interval: 0.044 to 0.380]; P = 0.014), Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (-45%; P = 0.014), memory (-76%; P = 0.008), and brain atrophy measures; small to medium Cohen's d effect size (0.25-0.31) similar to established clinically relevant AD treatment. DISCUSSION: This multinutrient intervention slowed decline on clinical and other measures related to cognition, function, brain atrophy, and disease progression. These results indicate that intervention benefits increased with long-term use.

The Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Composite Cognitive Test: a practical measure for tracking cognitive decline in preclinical Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in identifying sensitive composite cognitive tests to serve as primary endpoints in preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatment trials. We reported previously a composite cognitive test score sensitive to tracking preclinical AD decline up to 5 years prior to clinical diagnosis. Here we expand upon and refine this work, empirically deriving a composite cognitive test score sensitive to tracking preclinical AD decline up to 11 years prior to diagnosis and suitable for use as a primary endpoint in a preclinical AD trial. METHODS: This study used a longitudinal approach to maximize sensitivity to tracking progressive cognitive decline in people who progressed to the clinical stages of AD (n = 868) compared to those who remained cognitively unimpaired during the same time period (n = 989), thereby correcting for normal aging and practice effects. Specifically, we developed the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Preclinical Composite Cognitive test (APCC) to measure very early longitudinal cognitive decline in older adults with preclinical AD. Data from three cohorts from Rush University were analyzed using a partial least squares (PLS) regression model to identify optimal composites within different time periods prior to diagnosis, up to 11 years prior to diagnosis. The mean-to-standard deviation ratio (MSDRs) is an indicator of sensitivity to change and was used to inform the final calculation of the composite score. RESULTS: The optimal composite, the APCC, is calculated: 0.26*Symbol Digit Modalities + 2.24*MMSE Orientation to Time + 2.14*MMSE Orientation to Place + 0.53*Logical Memory Delayed Recall + 1.36* Word List-Delayed Recall + 0.68*Judgment of Line Orientation + 1.39*Raven's Progressive Matrices Matrices (subset of 9 items from A and B). The MSDR of the APCC in a population of preclinical AD individuals who eventually progress to cognitive impairment, compared to those who remained cognitively unimpaired during the same time period, was - 1.10 over 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The APCC is an empirically derived composite cognitive test score with high face validity that is sensitive to preclinical AD decline up to 11 years prior to diagnosis of the clinical stages of AD. The components of the APCC are supported by theoretical understanding of cognitive decline that occurs during preclinical AD. The APCC was used as a primary outcome in the API Generation Program trials.

24-month intervention with a specific multinutrient in people with prodromal Alzheimer's disease (LipiDiDiet): a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition is an important modifiable risk factor in Alzheimer's disease. Previous trials of the multinutrient Fortasyn Connect showed benefits in mild Alzheimer's disease dementia. LipiDiDiet investigated the effects of Fortasyn Connect on cognition and related measures in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. Here, we report the 24-month results of the trial. METHODS: LipiDiDiet was a 24-month randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial (11 sites in Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden), with optional 12-month double-blind extensions. The trial enrolled individuals with prodromal Alzheimer's disease, defined according to the International Working Group (IWG)-1 criteria. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to active product (125 mL once-a-day drink containing Fortasyn Connect) or control product. Randomisation was computer-generated centrally in blocks of four, stratified by site. All study personnel and participants were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was change in a neuropsychological test battery (NTB) score. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. Safety analyses included all participants who consumed at least one study product dose. This trial is registered with the Dutch Trial Register, number NTR1705. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2009, and July 3, 2013, 311 of 382 participants screened were randomly assigned to the active group (n=153) or control group (n=158). Mean change in NTB primary endpoint was -0·028 (SD 0·453) in the active group and -0·108 (0·528) in the control group; estimated mean treatment difference was 0·098 (95% CI -0·041 to 0·237; p=0·166). The decline in the control group was less than the prestudy estimate of -0·4 during 24 months. 66 (21%) participants dropped out of the study. Serious adverse events occurred in 34 (22%) participants in the active group and 30 (19%) in control group (p=0·487), none of which were regarded as related to the study intervention. INTERPRETATION: The intervention had no significant effect on the NTB primary endpoint over 2 years in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. However, cognitive decline in this population was much lower than expected, rendering the primary endpoint inadequately powered. Group differences on secondary endpoints of disease progression measuring cognition and function and hippocampal atrophy were observed. Further study of nutritional approaches with larger sample sizes, longer duration, or a primary endpoint more sensitive in this pre-dementia population, is needed. FUNDING: European Commission 7th Framework Programme.

Cognitive Composites Domain Scores Related to Neuroimaging Biomarkers within Probable-Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment-Storage Subtype.

The probable-amnestic (Pr-a) mild cognitive impairment (MCI)-storage subtype is a phenotype with 8.5 times more risk of conversion to dementia, mainly Alzheimer's disease (AD), than the possible non-amnestic (Pss-na) MCI. The aim of this study was to find the optimized cognitive composites (CCs) domain scores most related to neuroimaging biomarkers within Pr-aMCI-storage subtype patients. The Fundació ACE (ACE) study with 20 Pr-aMCI-storage subtype subjects (MCI) were analyzed. All subjects underwent a neuropsychological assessment, a structural MRI, FDG-PET, and PIB-PET. The adjusted hippocampal volume (aHV) on MRI, the standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) on FDG-PET and PIB-PET SUVR measures were analyzed. The construction of the CCs domain scores, and the aHV on MRI and FDG-PET SUVR measures, were replicated in the parental AB255 study database (n = 133 MCI). Partial correlations adjusted by age, gender, and education were calculated with the associated p-value among every CC domain score and the neuroimaging biomarkers. The results were replicated in the "MCI due to AD" with memory storage impairments from ADNI. Delayed Recall CC domain score was significantly correlated with PIB-PET SUVR (ß= -0.61, p = 0.003) in the ACE study and also with aHV on MRI (ß= 0.27, p = 0.01) and FDG-PET SUVR (ß= 0.27, p = 0.01) in the AB255 study. After a median survival time of 20.6 months, 85% from the ACE MCI converted to AD. The replication of our results in the ADNI dataset also confirmed our findings. Delayed Recall is the CC domain score best correlated with neuroimaging biomarkers associated with prodromal AD diagnosis.

ADCOMS: a composite clinical outcome for prodromal Alzheimer's disease trials.

BACKGROUND: Development of new therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) is increasingly focused on more mildly affected populations, and requires new assessment and outcome strategies. Patients in early stages of AD have mild cognitive decline and no, or limited, functional impairment. To respond to these assessment challenges, we developed a measurement approach based on established scale items that exhibited change in previous amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI) trials. METHODS: Partial least squares regression with a longitudinal clinical decline model identified items from commonly used clinical scales with the highest combined sensitivity to change over time in aMCI and weighted these items according to their relative contribution to detecting clinical progression in patients' early stages of AD. The resultant AD Composite Score (ADCOMS) was assessed for its ability to detect treatment effect in aMCI/prodromal AD (pAD) clinical trial populations. RESULTS: ADCOMS consists of 4 Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale items, 2 Mini-Mental State Examination items, and all 6 Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes items. ADCOMS demonstrated improved sensitivity to clinical decline over individual scales in pAD, aMCI and in mild AD dementia. ADCOMS also detected treatment effects associated with the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in these populations. Improved sensitivity predicts smaller sample size requirements when ADCOMS is used in early AD trials. CONCLUSIONS: ADCOMS is proposed as new standard outcome for pAD and mild AD dementia trials, and is progressing in a CAMD-sponsored qualification process for use in registration trials of pAD.

Cumulative, additive benefits of memantine-donepezil combination over component monotherapies in moderate to severe Alzheimer's dementia: a pooled area under the curve analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment in moderate or severe Alzheimer's disease (AD) often involves adding memantine to a cholinesterase-inhibitor (ChEI: donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine). Evidence from six-month randomized trials and long-term observational studies supports superiority of memantine-ChEI combination to ChEI monotherapy. We utilized area-under-the-curve (AUC) analysis to assess six-month cumulative treatment efficacy of memantine-donepezil combination versus component monotherapies on individual clinical domains and on a composite index. METHODS: Data were pooled from 1,408 individuals with moderate to severe AD from four six-month randomized trials of memantine monotherapy (n = 570) or add-on therapy (donepezil-only subset: n = 847). AUC changes from baseline on measures of cognition (SIB), function (ADCS-ADL19), behavior (NPI), global status (CIBIC-Plus), and a composite index (4D-CI: equally weighted composite of four domain measures) were calculated using the trapezoidal rule and evaluated via analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) (2-sided-α = 0.05). AUC results were contrasted with visit-by-visit changes from baseline ("snapshot analysis"), performed using a mixed-effects model with repeated measures (MMRM). RESULTS: Over the entire six-month period, placebo-only treatment was associated with significant cumulative worsening on all outcomes. Memantine-donepezil combination showed significantly greater AUC improvements (point x week) on the SIB, NPI, and CIBIC-Plus than placebo-donepezil (SIB: 68.4 versus 32.0, P = 0.019; NPI: -74.3 versus -28.2, P = 0.003; CIBIC-Plus: -2.5 versus 1.4, P = 0.006) and memantine-only monotherapies (SIB: 68.4 versus 12.0, P <0.001; NPI: -74.3 versus -7.4, P <0.001; CIBIC-Plus: -2.5 versus 2.7, P <0.001), whereas these comparisons were not significant for the ADCS-ADL19 (memantine-donepezil (1.4) versus placebo-donepezil (-0.9), P = 0.407; versus memantine-only (-12.2), P = 0.310). Composite index analysis demonstrated significant cumulative advantages of memantine-donepezil combination (630.0) over placebo-donepezil (344.7, P <0.001) and memantine-only (152.1, P <0.001) treatments. Combining memantine and donepezil had an additive effect. Compared with AUC analysis, baseline-to-endpoint change-score analysis underestimated effects of combination therapy, monotherapies, or both. CONCLUSIONS: This large pooled area-under-the-curve analysis of randomized-trial data in moderate to severe AD provides ecologically valid support that adding memantine to stable donepezil results in overall clinical benefits that are additive compared with individual monotherapies, continue to accumulate through six-month treatment, and are at least 50% greater than those of monotherapies.

The Alzheimer's prevention initiative composite cognitive test score: sample size estimates for the evaluation of preclinical Alzheimer's disease treatments in presenilin 1 E280A mutation carriers.

OBJECTIVE: To identify a cognitive composite that is sensitive to tracking preclinical Alzheimer's disease decline to be used as a primary end point in treatment trials. METHOD: We capitalized on longitudinal data collected from 1995 to 2010 from cognitively unimpaired presenilin 1 (PSEN1) E280A mutation carriers from the world's largest known early-onset autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease kindred to identify a composite cognitive test with the greatest statistical power to track preclinical Alzheimer's disease decline and estimate the number of carriers age 30 years and older needed to detect a treatment effect in the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative's (API) preclinical Alzheimer's disease treatment trial. The mean-to-standard-deviation ratios (MSDRs) of change over time were calculated in a search for the optimal combination of 1 to 7 cognitive tests/subtests drawn from the neuropsychological test battery in cognitively unimpaired mutation carriers during a 2- and 5-year follow-up period (n = 78 and 57), using data from noncarriers (n = 31 and 56) during the same time period to correct for aging and practice effects. Combinations that performed well were then evaluated for robustness across follow-up years, occurrence of selected items within top-performing combinations, and representation of relevant cognitive domains. RESULTS: The optimal test combination included Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) Word List Recall, CERAD Boston Naming Test (high frequency items), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) Orientation to Time, CERAD Constructional Praxis, and Raven's Progressive Matrices (Set A), with an MSDR of 1.62. This composite is more sensitive than using either the CERAD Word List Recall (MSDR = 0.38) or the entire CERAD-Col battery (MSDR = 0.76). A sample size of 75 cognitively normal PSEN1 E280A mutation carriers aged 30 years and older per treatment arm allows for a detectable treatment effect of 29% in a 60-month trial (80% power, P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a composite cognitive test score representing multiple cognitive domains that, compared to the most sensitive single test item, has improved power to track preclinical Alzheimer's disease decline in autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease mutation carriers and to evaluate preclinical Alzheimer's disease treatments. This API composite cognitive test score will be used as the primary end point in the first API trial in cognitively unimpaired autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease carriers within 15 years of their estimated age at clinical onset. We have independently confirmed our findings in a separate cohort of cognitively healthy older adults who progressed to the clinical stages of late-onset Alzheimer's disease, described in a separate report, and continue to refine the composite in independent cohorts and compared with other analytic approaches.

An empirically derived composite cognitive test score with improved power to track and evaluate treatments for preclinical Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the evaluation of preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatments. As a result, there is a need to identify a cognitive composite that is sensitive to track preclinical AD decline to be used as a primary endpoint in treatment trials. METHODS: Longitudinal data from initially cognitively normal, 70- to 85-year-old participants in three cohort studies of aging and dementia from the Rush Alzheimer's Disease Center were examined to empirically define a composite cognitive endpoint that is sensitive to detect and track cognitive decline before the onset of cognitive impairment. The mean-to-standard deviation ratios (MSDRs) of change over time were calculated in a search for the optimal combination of cognitive tests/subtests drawn from the neuropsychological battery in cognitively normal participants who subsequently progressed to clinical stages of AD during 2- and 5-year periods, using data from those who remained unimpaired during the same period to correct for aging and practice effects. Combinations that performed well were then evaluated for representation of relevant cognitive domains, robustness across individual years before diagnosis, and occurrence of selected items within top performing combinations. RESULTS: The optimal composite cognitive test score comprised seven cognitive tests/subtests with an MSDR = 0.964. By comparison, the most sensitive individual test score was Logical Memory Delayed Recall with an MSDR = 0.64. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a composite cognitive test score representing multiple cognitive domains that has improved power compared with the most sensitive single test item to track preclinical AD decline and evaluate preclinical AD treatments. We are confirming the power of the composite in independent cohorts and with other analytical approaches, which may result in refinements, have designated it as the primary endpoint in the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative's preclinical treatment trials for individuals at high imminent risk for developing symptoms due to late-onset AD.

Separation of cognitive domains to improve prediction of progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease.

Addressing causes of heterogeneity in cognitive outcomes is becoming more critical as Alzheimer's disease (AD) research focuses on earlier disease. One of the causes of this heterogeneity may be that individuals with deficiencies in different cognitive domains may perform similarly on a neuropsychological (NP) test for very different reasons. Tatsuoka and colleagues have applied a Bayesian model in order to integrate knowledge about cognitive domains relevant to each NP test with the observed outcomes from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) mild cognitive impairment data. This approach resulted in better prediction of AD diagnosis than more traditional approaches.

Measuring clinical progression in MCI and pre-MCI populations: enrichment and optimizing clinical outcomes over time.

Recent biomarker research has improved the identification of individuals with very early stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and has demonstrated that biomarkers are sensitive for measuring progression in the pre-dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) stage and even pre-symptomatic or pre-MCI stage of AD. Because there are no validated biomarkers in AD, it is important to seek out clinical outcomes that are also sensitive for measuring progression in these very early stages of disease. Clinical outcomes are more subjective and more affected by measurement error than biomarkers but represent the core aspects of the disease and are critical for validation of biomarkers and for evaluation of clinical relevance. Identification of individuals with pre-MCI stages of AD will need to continue to rely on biomarkers, but the identification of individuals with MCI who will progress to AD can be achieved with biomarkers or clinical criteria. Although standard clinical outcomes have been shown to be less sensitive to progression than biomarker outcomes in MCI and pre-MCI populations, non-standard scoring has improved the performance of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale, making it more sensitive to progression. Neuropsychological cognitive testing items are optimal for measuring progression in pre-MCI populations, and current research is exploring the best ways to combine these items into a composite cognitive score with maximum responsiveness. In an MCI stage, cognitive, functional, and global items all change, and the best single composite score for measuring progression may involve all of these aspects of the disease. The best chance of success in demonstrating treatment effects in clinical trials will be achieved in a well-defined pre-MCI or MCI population and with an outcome that tracks well with clinical progression over time and with time. A partial least squares model can be used to identify these optimal weighted combinations.

Requiring an amyloid-ß1-42 biomarker may improve the efficiency of a study, and simulations may help in planning studies.

A recent article by Schneider and colleagues has generated a lot of interest in simulation studies as a way to improve study design. The study also illustrates the foremost principal in simulation studies, which is that the results of a simulation are an embodiment of the assumptions that went into it. This simulation study assumes that the effect size is proportional to the mean to standard deviation ratio of the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale - cognitive subscale in the population being studied. Under this assumption, selecting a subgroup for a clinical trial based on biomarkers will not affect the efficiency of the study, despite achieving the desired increase in the mean to standard deviation ratio.

Efficacy and safety of tarenflurbil in mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease: a randomised phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: The amyloid-beta peptide Abeta(42) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). We aimed to test the effects of tarenflurbil, a selective Abeta(42)-lowering agent (SALA), on cognition and function in patients with mild to moderate AD. METHODS: 210 patients living in the community who had a mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score of 15-26 were randomly assigned to receive tarenflurbil twice per day (400 mg [n=69] or 800 mg [n=70]) or placebo (n=71) for 12 months in a phase II, multicentre, double-blind study. Primary efficacy outcomes were the AD assessment scale cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study activities of daily living scale (ADCS-ADL), and the clinical dementia rating sum of boxes (CDR-sb). In a 12-month extended treatment phase, patients who had received tarenflurbil continued to receive the same dose, and patients who had received placebo were randomly assigned to tarenflurbil at 800 mg or 400 mg twice per day. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Health Canada (084527) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in the UK (20365/0001/A 69316). FINDINGS: A prespecified interaction analysis revealed that patients with mild AD (baseline MMSE 20-26) and moderate AD (baseline MMSE 15-19) responded differently to tarenflurbil in the ADAS-cog and the ADCS-ADL (p>or=0.10); therefore, these groups were analysed separately. Patients with mild AD in the 800 mg tarenflurbil group had lower rates of decline than did those in the placebo group in activities of daily living (ADCS-ADL difference in slope 3.98 [95% CI 0.33 to 7.62] points per year, effect size [reduction from placebo decline rate] 46.4%, Cohen's d 0.45; p=0.033) and global function (CDR-sb difference -0.80 [-1.57 to -0.03] points per year, effect size 35.7%, Cohen's d 0.42; p=0.042); slowing of cognitive decline did not differ significantly (ADAS-cog difference -1.36 [-4.07 to 1.36] points per year, effect size 33.7%, Cohen's d 0.20; p=0.327). In patients with moderate AD, 800 mg tarenflurbil twice per day had no significant effects on ADCS-ADL and ADAS-cog and had a negative effect on CDR-sb (-52%, Cohen's d -1.08; p=0.003). The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (in seven, nine, and five patients in the 800 mg, 400 mg, and placebo groups, respectively), nausea (in seven, seven, and four patients), and dizziness (in five, nine, and four patients). Patients with mild AD who were in the 800 mg tarenflurbil group for 24 months had lower rates of decline for all three primary outcomes than did patients who were in the placebo group for months 0-12 and a tarenflurbil group for months 12-24 (all p<0.001), and had better outcomes than did patients who were in the placebo group for months 0-12 and the 800 mg tarenflurbil group for months 12-24 (all p<0.05). INTERPRETATION: 800 mg tarenflurbil twice per day was well tolerated for up to 24 months of treatment, with evidence of a dose-related effect on measures of daily activities and global function in patients with mild AD. FUNDING: Myriad Pharmaceuticals.

Witness and nonwitness children's violent and peaceful behavior in different types of simulated conflict with peers.

The violent and peaceful behaviors of 115 children who had or had not witnessed domestic violence were measured in five types of simulated conflict. Witnesses did not differ from nonwitnesses in conflicts involving limited resources, jealousy over possessions, or intimidation; witnesses were significantly more violent in conflicts involving aggression and exclusion. The most violent responses were found among abusers' sons who had been excluded by peers.

Gender, types of conflict, and individual differences in the use of violent and peaceful strategies among children who have and have not witnessed interparental violence.

Child witnesses' use of violent or peaceful strategies to resolve conflicts with peers were compared with strategies used by nonwitnesses. Stories depicting 5 types of peer conflicts were presented to each child, and the strategies used by the child to reach peaceful resolutions were scored. Findings include differences between witnesses and nonwitnesses, differences between genders, differences according to types of conflicts, and individual differences.