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

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

New Alzheimer's drug clears FDA advisory vote despite unknowns

Jennifer Couzin-Frankel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr0291

IF: 56.9

2024-06-15

Science

Abstract:Pivotal trial of Eli Lilly's donanemab leaves questions about how to prescribe it and minimize risks

multidisciplinary sciences
Alzheimer's drug with modest benefits wins backing of FDA advisers

Sara Reardon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01726-w

IF: 64.8

2024-06-11

Nature

Abstract:Donanemab slows progression of symptoms, but questions linger about the durability of its effect. Donanemab slows progression of symptoms, but questions linger about the durability of its effect.

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
Benefits and risks of FDA-approved amyloid-targeting antibodies for treatment of early Alzheimer's disease: Navigating clinician-patient engagement

Dorene M Rentz,Paul S Aisen,Alireza Atri,Janice Hitchcock,Michael Irizarry,Jaren Landen,Brandy R Matthews,David S Miller,Simin Mahinrad,Salvatore Napoli,Hamid R Okhravi,Ronald C Petersen,Eric R Siemers,Christopher J Weber,David C Weisman,Maria C Carrillo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14199

2024-09-22

Abstract:The emergence of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved amyloid-targeting therapies for Alzheimer's disease challenges clinicians and healthcare providers with a transformative landscape. Effectively communicating the risks, benefits, burdens, costs, and available support associated with these novel disease-modifying treatments to patients, families, and other healthcare providers is essential but complex. In response, the Alzheimer's Association's Clinical Meaningfulness Workgroup has proposed language surrounding treatment eligibility, benefits, amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotyping, and treatment costs, serving as a resource to healthcare professionals in navigating discussions with patients and their families. As the landscape evolves with the approval of new Alzheimer's therapies, this resource stands poised for updates, ensuring its continued relevance in facilitating informed and meaningful patient-provider dialogues. HIGHLIGHTS: Effective communication of risks, benefits, burdens, and costs of FDA-approved amyloid-targeting antibodies is essential to patients, families, and healthcare providers. The Alzheimer's Association's Clinical Meaningfulness Workgroup provides language for physicians and healthcare providers around treatment eligibility, benefits, ARIA, APOE genotyping, and treatment costs. This supplementary resource may be updated as new AD therapies become approved.
Substantial Doubt Remains about the Efficacy of Anti-Amyloid Antibodies

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

2023-11-19

Abstract:Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a prevalent, progressive, and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disorder that is defined pathologically by the accumulation of amyloid plaques and tau neurofibrillary tangles in the brain. There remains an unmet need for therapies that can halt or slow the course of AD. To address this need, the FDA has provided a mechanism, under its Accelerated Approval pathway, for potential therapeutics to be approved based in part on their ability to reduce brain amyloid. Through this pathway, two monoclonal anti-amyloid antibodies, aducanumab and lecanemab, have been approved for clinical use. More recently, another amyloid-lowering antibody, donanemab, generated a statistically significant outcome in a phase 3 clinical trial and will shortly come under FDA review. While these monoclonal antibodies are not yet routinely used in clinical practice, the series of recent positive clinical trials has fostered enthusiasm amongst some AD experts. Here, we discuss three key limitations regarding recent anti-amyloid clinical trials: (1) there is little to no evidence that amyloid reduction correlates with clinical outcome, (2) the reported efficacy of anti-amyloid therapies may be partly, or wholly, explained by functional unblinding, and (3) donanemab in its phase 3 trial had no effect on tau burden, the pathological hallmark more closely related to cognition. Taken together, these observations call into question the efficacy of anti-amyloid therapies.

Tissues and Organs
Clinically Important Benefits and Harms of Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting Amyloid for the Treatment of Alzheimer Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ebell,M. H.,Barry,H. C.,Baduni,K.,Grasso,G.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3050

2024-01-23

The Annals of Family Medicine

Abstract:PURPOSE We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate clinically meaningful benefits and harms of monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid in patients with Alzheimer dementia. METHODS We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and 5 trial registries, as well as the reference lists of identified studies. We included randomized controlled trials comparing a monoclonal antibody with placebo at a dose consistent with that used in phase 3 trials or for Food and Drug Administration approval. Studies had to report at least 1 clinically relevant benefit or harm. Data were extracted independently by at least 2 researchers for random effects meta-analysis. Changes in cognitive and functional scales were compared between groups, and each difference was assessed to determine if it met the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). RESULTS We identified 19 publications with 23,202 total participants that evaluated 8 anti-amyloid antibodies. There were small improvements over placebo in the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS)-Cog-11 to -14 score (standardized mean difference = –0.07; 95% CI, –0.10 to –0.04), Mini Mental State Examination score (0.32 points; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.50), and Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes scale score (mean difference =–0.18 points; 95% CI, –0.34 to –0.03), and the combined functional scores (standardized mean difference = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.13). None of the changes, including those for lecanemab, aducanumab, and donanemab, exceeded the MCID. Harms included significantly increased risks of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA)-edema (relative risk [RR] = 10.29; number needed to harm [NNH] = 9), ARIA-hemorrhage (RR = 1.74; NNH = 13), and symptomatic ARIA-edema (RR = 24.3; NNH = 86). CONCLUSIONS Although monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid provide small benefits on cognitive and functional scales in patients with Alzheimer dementia, these improvements are far below the MCID for each outcome and are accompanied by clinically meaningful harms.

medicine, general & internal,primary health care
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
Benefits and risks of FDA‐approved amyloid‐targeting antibodies for treatment of early Alzheimer's disease: Navigating clinician‐patient engagement

Dorene M. Rentz,Paul S. Aisen,Alireza Atri,Janice Hitchcock,Michael Irizarry,Jaren Landen,Brandy R. Matthews,David S. Miller,Simin Mahinrad,Salvatore Napoli,Hamid R. Okhravi,Ronald C. Petersen,Eric R. Siemers,Christopher J. Weber,David C. Weisman,Maria C. Carrillo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14199

2024-09-22

Alzheimer s & Dementia

Abstract:The emergence of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)‐approved amyloid‐targeting therapies for Alzheimer's disease challenges clinicians and healthcare providers with a transformative landscape. Effectively communicating the risks, benefits, burdens, costs, and available support associated with these novel disease‐modifying treatments to patients, families, and other healthcare providers is essential but complex. In response, the Alzheimer's Association's Clinical Meaningfulness Workgroup has proposed language surrounding treatment eligibility, benefits, amyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotyping, and treatment costs, serving as a resource to healthcare professionals in navigating discussions with patients and their families. As the landscape evolves with the approval of new Alzheimer's therapies, this resource stands poised for updates, ensuring its continued relevance in facilitating informed and meaningful patient‐provider dialogues. Highlights Effective communication of risks, benefits, burdens, and costs of FDA‐approved amyloid‐targeting antibodies is essential to patients, families, and healthcare providers. The Alzheimer's Association's Clinical Meaningfulness Workgroup provides language for physicians and healthcare providers around treatment eligibility, benefits, ARIA, APOE genotyping, and treatment costs. This supplementary resource may be updated as new AD therapies become approved.

clinical neurology
Alzheimer's disease biomarkers and the tyranny of treatment

Jason Karlawish,Joshua D. Grill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2024.105291

IF: 11.205

2024-10-05

EBioMedicine

Abstract:Summary Advances in treatment are changing not only the therapeutic options for patients with Alzheimer's disease; they're also changing their diagnostic options. Technologies to detect amyloid such as PET imaging and blood or CSF testing now have a central role in Alzheimer's disease care. Notably, this role has been made possible by regulatory approval and coverage by payers of therapies. Access to treatments and the diagnostic tests needed to prescribe them is encourageing but it reveals a problem. These tests are tailored to the needs of the therapies, not to the needs of patients. Patients and families need to understand the causes of their impairments and their prognosis. This requires access to the best available diagnostic tests and this access should not depend on the availability of treatments. These tests should be used to their fullest capacity to inform patients of the causes of their cognitive impairments and their prognosis. Unfortunately, compared to diagnostic testing, treatment options are overvalued. We call this problem the tyranny of treatment.

medicine, research & experimental
What's in It for Me? Contextualizing the Potential Clinical Impacts of Lecanemab, Donanemab, and Other Anti-β-amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer's Disease

Michelle Jin,James M Noble

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

2024-09-27

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.
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
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
High-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies in Alzheimer's disease. Part 1: Meta-analysis and review of efficacy and safety data, and medico-economical aspects

N Villain,V Planche,R Levy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurol.2022.06.012

Abstract:In 2021, aducanumab, an immunotherapy targeting amyloid-β, was approved for Alzheimer's disease (AD) by the US Food and Drug Administration thanks to positive results on a putative biological surrogate marker. This approval has raised an unprecedented controversy. It was followed by a refusal of the European Medicine Agency, which does not allow the marketing of drugs solely on biological arguments and raised safety issues, and important US coverage limitations by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Two other anti-amyloid immunotherapies showed significant results regarding a clinical outcome in phase 2 trials, and five drugs are being studied in phase 3 trials. Compared to those tested in previous trials of the 2010s, the common feature and novelty of these anti-amyloid immunotherapies is their ability to induce a high clearance of amyloid load, as measured with positron emission tomography, in the brain of early-stage biomarker-proven AD patients. Here, we review the available evidence regarding efficacy and safety data and medico-economical aspects for high-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies. We also perform frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses of the clinical efficacy and safety of the highest dose groups from the two aducanumab phase 3 trials and the donanemab and lecanemab phase 2 trials. When pooled together, the data from high-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies trials confirm a statistically significant clinical effect of these drugs on cognitive decline after 18 months (difference in cognitive decline measured with CDR-SB after 18 months between the high dose immunotherapy groups vs. placebo = -0.24 points; P=0.04, frequentist random-effect model), with results on ADAS-Cog being the most statistically robust. However, this effect remains below the previously established minimal clinically relevant values. In parallel, the drugs significantly increased the occurrence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema (ARIA-E: risk ratio=13.39; P<0.0001), ARIA-hemorrhage (risk ratio=2.78; P=0.0002), and 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). The risk/benefit ratio of high-clearance immunotherapies in early AD is so far questionable after 18 months. Identifying subgroups of better responders, the perspective of combination therapies, and a longer follow-up may help improve their clinical relevance. Finally, the preliminary evidence from medico-economical analyses seems to indicate that the current cost of aducanumab in the US is not in reasonable alignment with its clinical benefits.
Monoclonal antibodies for treating early Alzheimer disease—a commentary on recent ‘positive’ trials

Ian A Scott

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afae023

2024-02-01

Age and Ageing

Abstract:Abstract Recent phase 3 randomised controlled trials of amyloid-targeting monoclonal antibodies in people with pre-clinical or early Alzheimer disease have reported positive results, raising hope of finally having disease-modifying drugs. Given their far-reaching implications for clinical practice, the methods and findings of these trials, and the disease causation theory underpinning the mechanism of drug action, need to be critically appraised. Key considerations are the representativeness of trial populations; balance of prognostic factors at baseline; psychometric properties and minimal clinically important differences of the primary efficacy outcome measures; level of study fidelity; consistency of subgroup analyses; replication of findings in similar trials; sponsor role and potential conflicts of interest; consistency of results with disease causation theory; cost and resource estimates; and alternative prevention and treatment strategies. In this commentary, we show shortcomings in each of these areas and conclude that monoclonal antibody treatment for early Alzheimer disease is lacking high-quality evidence of clinically meaningful impacts at an affordable cost.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Lessons Learned from Approval of Aducanumab for Alzheimer's Disease

Judith L. Heidebrink,Henry L. Paulson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-med-051022-043645

2024-01-30

Annual Review of Medicine

Abstract:When the US Food and Drug Administration used the accelerated approval process to authorize the use of the antiamyloid drug aducanumab to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD), many people hoped this signaled a new era of disease-modifying treatment. But 2 years later, aducanumab's failure to launch provides a cautionary tale about the complexities of dementia and the need for a thorough and transparent review of the role that regulatory agencies and various stakeholders play in approving AD drugs. We highlight the events leading to aducanumab's controversial approval and discuss some of the key lessons learned from the drug's failure to deliver the hoped-for benefits. These lessons include the inherent limitations of antiamyloid strategies for a complex disease in which amyloid is only one of several pathological processes, the need for clinical trials that better reflect the diversity of communities affected by AD, the potential pitfalls of futility analyses in clinical trials, the need for greater transparency and other modifications to the approval process, and the dementia field's unreadiness to move from the highly controlled environment of clinical trials to the widespread and chronic use of resource-intensive, disease-modifying drugs in real-world treatment scenarios. People with dementia desperately need effective therapies. We hope that the aducanumab story will inspire changes to the approval process—changes that restore public trust and improve future efforts to deliver disease-modifying therapies to the clinic.

medicine, research & experimental
High-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies in Alzheimer's disease. Part 2: putative scenarios and timeline in case of approval, recommendations for use, implementation, and ethical considerations in France

N Villain,V Planche,R Levy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurol.2022.08.002

Abstract:In 2021, aducanumab, an immunotherapy targeting amyloid-β, was approved for Alzheimer's disease (AD) by the US Food and Drug Administration thanks to positive results on a putative biological surrogate marker. This approval has raised an unprecedented controversy. It was followed by a refusal of the European Medicine Agency, which does not allow the marketing of drugs solely on biological arguments and raised safety issues, and important US coverage limitations by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Two other anti-amyloid immunotherapies showed significant results regarding a clinical outcome in phase II trials, and five drugs are being studied in phase III trials. Lecanemab is currently under examination for an 'Accelerated Approval' in the US, with an expected decision in January 2023. The common feature and novelty of these anti-amyloid immunotherapies, compared to those tested in previous trials of the 2010s, is their ability to induce a high clearance of amyloid load, as measured with positron emission tomography, in the brain of early-stage biomarker-proven AD patients. In the first part of this review, we underlined through a meta-analysis that the pooled data from high-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies trials demonstrated a significant but slight clinical effect after 18 months. Still, safety remains an issue with serious and symptomatic amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, which are seldom (∼1 per 200 treated patients) but occur beyond chance. In the second part of this review, we hypothesized that there is a high probability that some phase III trials of high-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies in early AD will finally be unarguably positive on clinical outcomes in the next five years with acceptable safety data. This may, in turn, lead to approval by the European Medicine Agency if the risk-benefit profile is deemed favorable. Such approval would be a game-changer in managing AD patients and for the organization of memory clinics in France. We review the possible timeline and scenarios for putative approval in France and make propositions regarding putative use in clinical practice, putative implementation in a real-life setting, and ethical considerations.
Amyloid-Directed Antibodies: Past, Present, and Future

Keith Noorda,Kevin Noorda,Marwan N. Sabbagh,John Bertelson,Jonathan Singer,Boris Decourt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-240189

2024-10-19

Journal of Alzheimer s Disease

Abstract:Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder in patient demographics over 65 years old causing debilitating cognitive impairment. Most commonly, AD is diagnosed clinically as "probable AD", and definitive diagnosis is confirmed through postmortem brain autopsies to detect extracellular amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and intraneuronal hyperphosphorylated tau tangles. The exact mechanism causing AD is still unknown, but treatments for AD have been actively investigated. Currently, immunotherapies have shown substantial promise in reducing the pathologic and clinical signs of AD. Objective: This review aims to evaluate passive immunotherapies deemed to have promise for further development and use in the treatment of AD. Methods: Immunotherapies were selected via a narrative review of medications that have potential clinical effectiveness with a status of FDA accepted, FDA fast-track, FDA status pending, or emerging therapies poised to pursue FDA approval. Results: This review has yielded two anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies (mAb) that are currently fully FDA approved, one mAb granted FDA fast-track status, two therapies on hold, three discontinued medications, and three promising emerging therapies. Conclusions: We conclude that, in the near future, passive immunotherapies will be the preferred and evidence-based method of treatment for AD with the presence of brain Aβ deposits for both symptom management and potential slowing of disease progression. Specifically, lecanemab and donanemab will require further clinical studies to optimize patient selection based on safety profiles. Despite some key limitations, these two drugs are paving the way for disease-modifying treatments in patients displaying early signs of amyloid pathology.

neurosciences
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
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
Prescribing anti‐amyloid immunotherapies to treat Alzheimer's disease: Fully informing patient decisions

Barry D. Greenberg,Cynthia A. Lemere,Lisa L. Barnes,Kathleen M. Hayden,Walter A. Kukull,Esther S. Oh,Peter J. Snyder,Mark Supiano,Peggye Dilworth‐Anderson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12426

2023-10-06

ALZHEIMER'S & DEMENTIA: TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH & CLINICAL INTERVENTIONS

Abstract:Alzheimer's &Dementia: Translational Research &Clinical Interventions, Volume 9, Issue 4, October‐December 2023.

Alzheimer's drug approvals create prescribing dilemmas

New Alzheimer's drug clears FDA advisory vote despite unknowns

Alzheimer's drug with modest benefits wins backing of FDA advisers

Landmark Alzheimer’s drug approval confounds research community

Benefits and risks of FDA-approved amyloid-targeting antibodies for treatment of early Alzheimer's disease: Navigating clinician-patient engagement

Substantial Doubt Remains about the Efficacy of Anti-Amyloid Antibodies

Clinically Important Benefits and Harms of Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting Amyloid for the Treatment of Alzheimer Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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

Benefits and risks of FDA‐approved amyloid‐targeting antibodies for treatment of early Alzheimer's disease: Navigating clinician‐patient engagement

Alzheimer's disease biomarkers and the tyranny of treatment

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

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

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

High-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies in Alzheimer's disease. Part 1: Meta-analysis and review of efficacy and safety data, and medico-economical aspects

Monoclonal antibodies for treating early Alzheimer disease—a commentary on recent ‘positive’ trials

Lessons Learned from Approval of Aducanumab for Alzheimer's Disease

High-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies in Alzheimer's disease. Part 2: putative scenarios and timeline in case of approval, recommendations for use, implementation, and ethical considerations in France

Amyloid-Directed Antibodies: Past, Present, and Future

Lecanemab Questions

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

Prescribing anti‐amyloid immunotherapies to treat Alzheimer's disease: Fully informing patient decisions