Preprint on Alzheimer's drug deaths ignites author dispute

Jennifer Couzin-Frankel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adu5824

IF: 56.9

2024-11-18

Science

Abstract:Co-authors say preliminary data on lecanemab fatalities don't support the paper's claims

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Alzheimer's drug approvals create prescribing dilemmas

Jennifer Couzin-Frankel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adu2383

IF: 56.9

2024-11-01

Science

Abstract:Clinicians and patients weigh modest benefits of the antibodies against sometimes-serious side effects

multidisciplinary sciences
Landmark Alzheimer’s drug approval confounds research community

Asher Mullard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01546-2

IF: 64.8

2021-06-08

Nature

Abstract:Many scientists say there is not enough evidence that Biogen's aducanumab is an effective therapy for the disease. Many scientists say there is not enough evidence that Biogen's aducanumab is an effective therapy for the disease.

multidisciplinary sciences
Lecanemab Questions

Stephen E Nadeau,Stephen E. Nadeau

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000209320

IF: 9.9

2024-04-09

Neurology

Abstract:The recently published results of the 18-month randomized controlled trial of lecanemab, reporting the efficacy of the drug in slowing the progression of early Alzheimer disease, quickly led to approval by the FDA and widespread acceptance of lecanemab treatment. However, there are a number of matters that deserve further consideration. The success of blinding was not assessed, even as infusion reactions and the cerebral pathology underlying amyloid-related imaging abnormalities could have signaled to many participants that they were on drug, potentially exerting a potent placebo effect. The value of the outcome to participants is not defined in the absolute terms necessary for clinical decision-making, and the difference attributable to lecanemab was between 18% and 46% of estimates of the minimal clinically important difference on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes. The attenuation of change on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive 14 achieved by lecanemab at 18 months was 50% of that achieved by donepezil at 6 months. Lecanemab treatment imposes a high treatment burden. The fact that the burden commences at the initiation of lecanemab treatment, whereas the benefit accrues years later requires us to take into account value discounting over time, which would significantly reduce the benefit/burden ratio. Finally, treatment with monoclonal antibodies to cerebral amyloid has consistently been associated with progressive cerebral atrophy. At the least, these issues should be raised in treatment discussions with patients. They also suggest a need to very seriously reconsider how we evaluate clinical trial results preparatory to translating them into clinical practice. Some suggestions are provided.

clinical neurology
Donanemab in Early Alzheimer's Disease

Mark A Mintun,Albert C Lo,Cynthia Duggan Evans,Alette M Wessels,Paul A Ardayfio,Scott W Andersen,Sergey Shcherbinin,JonDavid Sparks,John R Sims,Miroslaw Brys,Liana G Apostolova,Stephen P Salloway,Daniel M Skovronsky,Mark A. Mintun,Albert C. Lo,Alette M. Wessels,Paul A. Ardayfio,Scott W. Andersen,John R. Sims,Liana G. Apostolova,Stephen P. Salloway,Daniel M. Skovronsky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2100708

2021-03-15

Abstract:This article was published on March 13, 2021, at NEJM.org. A data sharing statement provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
Authors move to retract discredited Alzheimer's study

Charles Piller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq8855

IF: 56.9

2024-06-07

Science

Abstract:The high-profile paper contains manipulated images, senior author acknowledges

multidisciplinary sciences
Russian Roulette with Alzheimer's Disease Patients: Do the Cognitive Benefits of Lecanemab Outweigh the Risk of Edema and Stroke?

Craig S. Atwood,George Perry

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-230040

2023-02-25

Abstract:The questionable approval of aducanumab and the recent approval of lecanemab (Leqembi; Eisai and Biogen) by the FDA has raised the issue of safety (stroke, meningitis, and encephalitis) over efficacy (slowing of cognitive decline). This communication recounts the important physiological functions of the amyloid-β as a barrier protein with unique sealant and anti-pathogenic activities important for maintaining vascular integrity coupled with innate immune functions that prevent encephalitis and meningitis. With the approval of a drug that obviates both of these purposive functions of amyloid-β, the risk of insufficient amyloid-β blockage can lead to hemorrhage, edema and downstream pathogenic outcomes that should be clearly outlined to patients.

neurosciences
Use of Lecanemab and Donanemab in the Canadian Healthcare System: Evidence, Challenges, and Areas for Future Research

Eric E. Smith,Natalie Phillips,Howard H Feldman,Michael Borrie,Aravind Ganesh,Alex Henri-Bhargava,Philippe Desmarais,Andrew Frank,AmanPreet Badhwar,Laura Barlow,Robet Bartha,Sarah Best,Jennifer Bethell,Jaspreet Bhangu,Sandra E. Black,Christian Bocti,Susan E. Bronskill,Amer M Burhan,Frederic Calon,Richard Camicioli,Barry Campbell,D. Louis M Collins,Mahsa Dadar,Mari DeMarco,Simon Ducharme,Simon Duchesne,Gillian Einstein,John D. Fisk,Jodie R Gawryluk,Linda Grossman,Zahinoor Ismail,Inbal Itzhak,Manish Joshi,Arthur Kootenay,Edeltraut Kroger,Sanjeev Kumar,Robert LaForce Jr.,Krista L. Lanctot,Meghan Lau,Linda Lee,Mario Masellis,Fadi Massoud,Sara Mitchell,Manuel Montero-Odasso,Karen Myers,Haakon B. Nygaard,Stephen Pasternak,Jody Peters,M. Natasha Rajah,Julie Robillard,Ken Rockwood,Pedro Rosa-Neto,Dallas Seitz,Jean-Paul Soucy,Shanna C. Trenaman,Cheryl Wellington,Aicha Zadem,Howard Chertkow,Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.11.18.24317292

2024-11-23

Abstract:Lecanemab and donanemab are monoclonal antibody therapies that remove amyloid-beta from the brain. They are the first therapies that alter a fundamental mechanism, amyloid-beta deposition, in Alzheimer disease (AD). To inform Canadian decisions on approval and use of these drugs, the Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging commissioned Work Groups to review evidence on the efficacy, and safety of these new therapies, as well as their projected impacts on Canadian dementia systems of care. We included persons with lived experience with Alzheimer disease in the discussion about the benefits and harms. Our review of the trial publications found strong support for statistically significant group differences, but also recognized that there are mixed views on the clinical relevance of the observed differences and the value of therapy for individual patients. The drugs are intended for persons with early AD, at a stage of mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia. If patients are treated, then confirmation of AD by positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid analysis and monitoring for risk of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities was recommended, as done in the clinical trials, although it would strain Canadian resource capacity. More data are needed to determine the size of the potentially eligible treatment population in Canada.
Updated safety results from phase 3 lecanemab study in early Alzheimer's disease

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-024-01441-8

2024-05-11

Alzheimer s Research & Therapy

Abstract: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 (Aβ)-directed antibody indicated for the treatment of early AD, binds with high affinity to soluble Aβ 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.

neurosciences,clinical neurology
Lecanemab's Path Forward: Navigating the Future of Alzheimer's Treatment in Europe Amidst the EMA's Rejection

Alessandro Martorana,Chiara Giuseppina Bonomi,Martina Gaia Di Donna,Caterina Motta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-024-00675-w

2024-11-04

Neurology and Therapy

Abstract:Lecanemab (Leqembi © , Biogen), a humanized anti-amyloid-beta monoclonal antibody, has been approved for early-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) in several countries, including the US and Japan. However, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recently issued a negative opinion on its marketing authorization, reflecting concerns over the clinical value and manageability of anti-amyloid treatments. This decision highlights the ongoing disconnect between research advancements and clinical practice, where the focus on biological markers over tangible clinical improvements remains contentious. Despite promising biological effects, lecanemab's clinical outcomes have been modest, raising questions about its therapeutic role. The EMA's refusal underscores the need to address doubts surrounding the real-world effectiveness and safety of such treatments, especially concerning amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIAs), a common side effect observed in clinical trials. The recent approval of lecanemab by the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, despite the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's rejection on cost-effectiveness grounds, further fuels the debate on the feasibility of anti-amyloid therapies. This commentary emphasizes the importance of real-world data on lecanemab's impact on cognitive decline, daily functioning, and side-effect management. As the global clinical use of lecanemab increases, continuous and standardized reporting on its outcomes is crucial for guiding future regulatory decisions and for potentially bridging the gap between research and practice in AD treatment.

clinical neurology
More failure with solanezumab – this time in preclinical Alzheimer's disease

Sheila A Doggrell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2024.2325551

2024-03-05

Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy

Abstract:Introduction There is no cure for Alzheimer's disease, which is the sixth leading cause of death in the USA. Lecanemab is anti-Aβ monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of early Alzheimer's disease but is only marginally effective. Other antibodies are being developed including solanezumab.

medicine, research & experimental,biotechnology & applied microbiology
Safety and efficacy of lecanemab for Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Yue Qiao,Yuewei Chi,Qingyuan Zhang,Ying Ma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1169499

IF: 4.8

2023-05-06

Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience

Abstract:Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the cognitive effectiveness and safety of lecanemab on subjects with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Methods: We screened the literature published before February 2023 in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane that were searched for randomized controlled trials testing lecanemab for the treatment of cognitive decline in patients with MCI or AD. Outcomes measured were CDR Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), Alzheimer's Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS), AD Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog), Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), amyloid PET Standardized Uptake Volume Ratio (SUVr), amyloid burden on PET, and risks for adverse events. Results: A total of four randomized controlled trials were included, involving 3,108 AD patients (1,695 lecanemab groups and 1,413 placebo groups) to synthesize evidence. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar in all outcomes except that ApoE 4 status and higher MMSE score were observed in the lecanemab group. It is reported that lecanemab was beneficial to stabilize or slow down the decrease in CDR-SB (WMD: −0.45; 95% CI: −0.64, −0.25; p < 0.00001), ADCOMS (WMD: −0.05; 95% CI: −0.07, −0.03; p < 0.00001), ADAS-cog (WMD: −1.11; 95% CI: −1.64, −0.57; p < 0.0001), amyloid PET SUVr (WMD: −0.15; 95% CI: −0.48, 0.19; p = 0.38), amyloid burden on PET (WMD:−35.44; 95% CI: −65.22,−5.67; p = 0.02), adverse events (subjects with any TEAE) (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.25, 2.15; p = 0.57), ARIA-E (OR:8.95; 95% CI: 5.36, 14.95; p < 0.00001), and ARIA-H (OR:2.00; 95% CI: 1.53, 2.62; p < 0.00001) in early AD patients. Conclusion: Our analysis found that lecanemab showed significant positive statistical efficacy with respect to cognition, function, and behavior in patients with early AD though the actual clinical significance is yet to be established Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42023393393.

neurosciences,geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Substantial Doubt Remains about the Efficacy of Anti-Amyloid Antibodies

Leonardino A. Digma,Joseph R. Winer,Michael D. Greicius

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-231198

2024-01-17

Journal of Alzheimer s Disease

Abstract:With the FDA approval of aducanumab and lecanemab, and with the recent statistically significant phase 3 clinical trial for donanemab, there is growing enthusiasm for anti-amyloid antibodies in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Here, we discuss three substantial limitations regarding recent anti-amyloid clinical trials: 1) there is little evidence that amyloid reduction correlates with clinical outcome, 2) the reported efficacy of anti-amyloid therapies may be explained by functional unblinding, and 3) donanemab had no effect on tau burden in its phase 3 trial. Taken together, these observations call into question the efficacy of anti-amyloid therapies.

neurosciences
Debate rages over Alzheimer's drug lecanemab as UK limits approval

Diana Kwon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02720-y

IF: 64.8

2024-08-24

Nature

Abstract:The medicine is being assessed by agencies including the European Union regulator, but the community is divided on its efficacy and safety. The medicine is being assessed by agencies including the European Union regulator, but the community is divided on its efficacy and safety.

multidisciplinary sciences
Can we learn lessons from the FDA's approval of aducanumab?

Kathy Y Liu,Robert Howard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00557-x

Abstract:On 7 June 2021, aducanumab was granted accelerated approval for the treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD) by the FDA on the basis of amyloid-lowering effects considered reasonably likely to confer clinical benefit. This decision makes aducanumab the first new drug to be approved for the treatment of AD since 2003 and the first drug to ever be approved for modification of the course of AD. Many have questioned how scientific evidence, expert advice and the best interests of patients and families were considered in the approval decision. In this article, we argue that prior to approval, the FDA and Biogen's shared interpretation of clinical trial data - that high-dose aducanumab was substantially clinically effective - avoided conventional scientific scrutiny, was prominently advanced by patient representative groups who had been major recipients of Biogen funds, and raised concerns that safeguards were insufficient to mitigate regulatory capture within the FDA. Here, we reflect on events leading to the FDA's decision on 7 June 2021 and consider whether any lessons can be learned for the field.
Initial Experience with Lecanemab and Lessons Learned in 71 Patients in a Regional Medical Center

L B E Shields,H Hust,S D Cooley,G E Cooper,R N Hart,B C Dennis,S W Freeman,J F Cain,W Y Shang,K M Wasz,A T Orr,C B Shields,S S Barve,K G Pugh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2024.159

Abstract:Background and objectives: On July 6, 2023 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody lecanemab (Leqembi®) for treatment of patients with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD). Our early experience and lessons learned with lecanemab in a regional community medical center are described. Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective observational study highlights the first 71 patients treated with lecanemab at our multidisciplinary Norton Neuroscience Institute Memory Center. All patients had positive cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for AD and underwent at least 1 lecanemab infusion. Two patients had additional amyloid PET scans which were positive. Results: The mean age was 72 years (49-90 years), and 44 (62%) patients were female. Most were Caucasian (68 [96%]), and 54 [76%] were referred to our Memory Center by their primary care provider. Comorbidities were common, including hypertension (34 [48%]), hypercholesterolemia (51 [72%]), diabetes mellitus (17 [24%]), and cardiovascular disease excluding hypertension (22 [31%]). The mean body mass index was 27.0 (range: 17.8-45.0). A total of 36 (51%) patients were heterozygous for the ApoE4 genotype, and 9 (13%) were homozygous. A total of 61 [86%] patients had been treated with donepezil; 40 (56%) patients had received memantine. Of the 50 patients who completed 1 or more safety monitoring brain MRIs following infusion, 12 (24%) had amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) detected: solitary ARIA-H (hemorrhage) in 5, solitary ARIA-E (edema) in 3, and both ARIA-H and ARIA-E in 4. Of the 12 patients with ARIA, 9 were asymptomatic, 4 were homozygous for the ApoE4 genotype, and 6 were heterozygous for the ApoE4 genotype. Of the 9 who were homozygous for the ApoE4 genotype in this study, 4 (44%) had evidence of ARIA. Of the 36 who were heterozygous for the ApoE4 genotype, 6 (17%) were diagnosed with ARIA. Twenty-six (37%) patients experienced infusion reactions after their first lecanemab infusion: headaches (12 patients) and shaking/chills/rigors (11 patients) were most common. Twenty-three (88%) of these 26 patients reported the side effects either at the infusion center or within the first 24 hours post-infusion. One patient died shortly after the first lecanemab infusion of a myocardial infarction. It is uncertain whether or not this death was related to lecanemab treatment. Conclusion: Through our early experience with lecanemab, we have recognized several areas of improvement which have clarified and enhanced the lecanemab infusion experience.
Meta‐analysis of high‐clearance anti‐amyloid immunotherapies trials in early Alzheimer’s disease: A significant clinical effect but a low benefit/risk ratio

Nicolas Villain,Vincent Planche

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.064799

2023-06-01

Abstract:In the last three years, three over four phase II or III clinical trials using high‐dose anti‐amyloid immunotherapies in early Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have turned out to be positive on clinical outcomes: aducanumab (one of two), donanemab, and lecanemab. These results contrast with the previous failures of anti‐amyloid immunotherapies. Despite different pharmacodynamic properties, these drugs share a new characteristic: the high clearance of amyloid load as measured with amyloid positron emission tomography. In the meantime, the Food and Drug Administration’s conditional approval of aducanumab has led to unprecedented scientific controversies. We used the data from the highest dose group (i.e., the groups used for approval application or ongoing phase III trials) versus placebo after 18 months of the lecanemab and donanemab phase II trials and of the two aducanumab phase III trials to perform a meta‐analysis. Regarding clinical efficacy, we analyzed the CDR‐SB, ADASCog, and MMSE data. Regarding safety, we analyzed the occurrence of any Amyloid‐Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA), of ARIA‐edema (ARIA‐E), of ARIA‐hemorrhage (ARIA‐H), and of symptomatic and serious ARIA. The analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4.1 and a random effect model. High‐clearance anti‐amyloid immunotherapies were shown to significantly slow down cognitive decline after 18 months as measured with CDR‐SB (weighted mean = ‐0.24 points; p = 0.04), and ADAS‐Cog (weighted mean = ‐1.25 points; p = 0.0003), but not with MMSE (weighted mean = +0.31 points; p = 0.23) when compared to placebo. In parallel, the drugs significantly increased the occurrence of any ARIA (risk ratio = 3.68; p<0.0001), of ARIA‐E (risk ratio = 13.39; p<0.0001), of ARIA‐H (risk ratio = 2.78; p = 0.0002), and of symptomatic and serious ARIA (7/1321 = 0.53% in the high dose groups versus 0/1446 in the placebo groups; risk ratio = 6.44; p = 0.04). When pooled together, the data from high‐clearance anti‐amyloid immunotherapies trials confirm a significant clinical effect after 18 months. However, this effect remains below the established minimal clinically relevant values. Safety remains an issue with 0.5% of symptomatic and serious ARIA, significantly beyond chance, despite thorough in‐trial monitoring and management. The benefit/risk ratio of this class of drugs in early AD is thus questionable after 18‐months. Identifying subgroups of better responders and the perspective of combination therapies may help improve their clinical relevance.

clinical neurology
Alzheimer’s Disease: Researcher Behind “new Test” Paper Tried to Silence Critics

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3444

2018-01-01

Abstract:A researcher who made headlines with a paper that claimed to have found a genetic test to measure ageing and diagnose Alzheimer’s disease tried to suppress scientific discussion about his data by threatening legal action. Jamie Timmons and colleagues published their research in Genome Biology ,1 with widespread pick-up in UK newspapers. The story was also listed by the BBC among its 10 scientific breakthroughs of 2015. The researchers claimed that they had identified a 150 gene expression signature in blood for healthy ageing, which was also “diagnostic for” Alzheimer’s disease. The claim seemed surprising to some others in the field. The data presented on healthy ageing were based on muscle samples from 108 men, all aged around 70. But David Melzer, professor of epidemiology and public health at the University of Exeter, said that the blood sample results reported showed limited ability to distinguish Alzheimer’s from healthy control participants and failed to identify mild cognitive impairment samples correctly. Melzer and his group were part of an international collaboration on gene expression and ageing that studied 15 000 participants from 14 cohorts. That study found 1497 genes in blood associated with age,2 but only 10 overlapped with the 150 gene signature in Timmons’s paper. Melzer and colleagues posted results for …
Perspectives on the clinical use of anti-amyloid therapy for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: Insights from the fields of cancer, rheumatology, and neurology

Gregory A Jicha,Erin L Abner,Elif P Coskun,Mark J Huffmyer,Thomas C Tucker,Peter T Nelson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12500

2024-09-18

Abstract:Introduction: The advent of disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has raised many questions and debates in the field as to the clinical benefits, risks, and costs of such therapies. The controversies have resulted in the perception that many clinicians are apprehensive about prescribing these medications to their patient populations. There also remains widespread uncertainty as to the economic impact, cost benefit ratio, and safety oversight for use of these medications in standard clinical care settings. Methods: To contextualize such issues, the present study compared anti-amyloid biologic therapy (lecanemab) to four commonly used biologic agents in other fields, including trastuzumab for breast cancer, bevacizumab for lung cancer, etanercept for rheumatoid arthritis, and ocrelizumab for multiple sclerosis. Results: The data presented demonstrate comparable costs, clinical benefits, and risks for these biologic agents in their disparate disease states. Discussion: These results provide context for the costs, clinical benefits, and safety regarding the mainstream use of anti-amyloid biologic agents for the prevention of cognitive loss. While the era of disease-modifying therapies for AD is now in its infancy, there is an expectation that these discoveries will be followed by improved therapies and combination treatments leading to greater efficacy in ameliorating the clinical trajectory of AD. Highlights: Anti-amyloid therapy costs are comparable to other commonly used biologics.Anti-amyloid therapy efficacy is comparable to other commonly used biologics.Anti-amyloid therapy safety is compatible with other commonly used biologics.
What's in It for Me? Contextualizing the Potential Clinical Impacts of Lecanemab, Donanemab, and Other Anti-{beta}-amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer's Disease

Michelle Jin,James M. Noble

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/eneuro.0088-24.2024

2024-09-28

eNeuro

Abstract:A new era of disease-modifying therapy for Alzheimer's disease (AD) arrived in 2021 following the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) decision to grant accelerated approval for aducanumab, an anti-β-amyloid (Aβ) monoclonal antibody designed to target Aβ aggregates, a biological component of AD. More recently, trial outcomes for lecanemab and donanemab, two additional antibodies of this drug class, have shown favorable and significant slowing of metrics for cognitive and functional decline. Lecanemab and donanemab have since received similar FDA approval to aducanumab in January 2023 and July 2024, respectively. Given that these therapies are a clearly emerging tool in the repertoire of clinicians treating AD and related dementias, a critical dialogue has been ongoing regarding the potential impacts and place for these therapies. Here, we seek to contextualize this debate by first considering factors involved in theoretically extrapolating current randomized control trial outcomes to estimate meaningful clinical impacts. In the process of this exercise, we outline a generally useful concept termed Summative Treatment-Associated Benefit measuring Long-term Efficacy/Effectiveness Area as a metric of summative benefits of treatment over the life course of an individual. Second, we consider current real-world factors, such as conditions of FDA approval and other points involved in clinical decision-making that will influence and/or temper the actual impacts of this drug class.

neurosciences

Preprint on Alzheimer's drug deaths ignites author dispute

Alzheimer's drug approvals create prescribing dilemmas

Landmark Alzheimer’s drug approval confounds research community

Lecanemab Questions

Donanemab in Early Alzheimer's Disease

Authors move to retract discredited Alzheimer's study

Russian Roulette with Alzheimer's Disease Patients: Do the Cognitive Benefits of Lecanemab Outweigh the Risk of Edema and Stroke?

Use of Lecanemab and Donanemab in the Canadian Healthcare System: Evidence, Challenges, and Areas for Future Research

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

Lecanemab's Path Forward: Navigating the Future of Alzheimer's Treatment in Europe Amidst the EMA's Rejection

More failure with solanezumab – this time in preclinical Alzheimer's disease

Safety and efficacy of lecanemab for Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Substantial Doubt Remains about the Efficacy of Anti-Amyloid Antibodies

Debate rages over Alzheimer's drug lecanemab as UK limits approval

Can we learn lessons from the FDA's approval of aducanumab?

Initial Experience with Lecanemab and Lessons Learned in 71 Patients in a Regional Medical Center

Meta‐analysis of high‐clearance anti‐amyloid immunotherapies trials in early Alzheimer’s disease: A significant clinical effect but a low benefit/risk ratio

Alzheimer’s Disease: Researcher Behind “new Test” Paper Tried to Silence Critics

Perspectives on the clinical use of anti-amyloid therapy for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: Insights from the fields of cancer, rheumatology, and neurology

What's in It for Me? Contextualizing the Potential Clinical Impacts of Lecanemab, Donanemab, and Other Anti-{beta}-amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer's Disease