Expectations and clinical meaningfulness of randomized controlled trials

Modeling of Parkinson's Disease Progression and Implications for Detection of Disease Modification in Treatment Trials

Background

Objectively measuring Parkinson's disease (PD) signs and symptoms over time is critical for the successful development of treatments aimed at halting the disease progression of people with PD.

Objective

To create a clinical trial simulation tool that characterizes the natural history of PD progression and enables a data-driven design of randomized controlled studies testing potential disease-modifying treatments (DMT) in early-stage PD.

Methods

Data from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) were analyzed with nonlinear mixed-effect modeling techniques to characterize the progression of MDS-UPDRS part I (non-motor aspects of experiences of daily living), part II (motor aspects of experiences of daily living), and part III (motor signs). A clinical trial simulation tool was built from these disease models and used to predict probability of success as a function of trial design.

Results

MDS-UPDRS part III progresses approximately 3 times faster than MDS-UPDRS part II and I, with an increase of 3 versus 1 points/year. Higher amounts of symptomatic therapy is associated with slower progression of MDS-UPDRS part II and III. The modeling framework predicts that a DMT effect on MDS-UPDRS part III could precede effect on part II by approximately 2 to 3 years.

Conclusions

Our clinical trial simulation tool predicted that in a two-year randomized controlled trial, MDS-UPDRS part III could be used to evaluate a potential novel DMT, while part II would require longer trials of a minimum duration of 3 to 5 years underscoring the need for innovative trial design approaches including novel patient-centric measures.

Care partner-informed meaningful change thresholds for the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes for trials of early Alzheimer's disease

INTRODUCTION

Consensus definitions of meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) on the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) are needed. Existing estimates use clinician-rated anchors in clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease (AD) populations. Incorporating the care partner perspective offers important insights, and evaluating biomarker-confirmed cohorts aligns estimates with ongoing trials.

METHODS

Anchor-based analyses were conducted to evaluate MWPC on the CDR-SB in early AD (Tauriel; NCT03289143) using Caregiver Global Impression of Change in memory or daily activities.

RESULTS

Across time points and anchors, mean CDR-SB changes associated with the "somewhat worse" category ranged from 1.50 to 2.12 in early AD, 1.07 to 2.06 in mild cognitive impairment-AD, and 1.79 to 2.25 in mild AD.

DISCUSSION

The proposed ranges are appropriate to define meaningful progression on the CDR-SB in similar cohorts and support the interpretation of treatment benefit through MWPC analyses. Thresholds should be calibrated to the context of use; lower/higher thresholds may be applicable in studies of earlier/later disease over shorter/longer durations.

HIGHLIGHTS

Within-patient CDR-SB change thresholds are provided using caregiver-rated anchors. 1.5 to 2.5 points may be an appropriate range in early AD trials of similar durations. Cumulative distribution function plots illustrate the benefit of a given treatment. When selecting thresholds, the target population and study design should be considered.

Meaningful benefit of disease-modifying treatment: Evaluating changes in health-related resource use

INTRODUCTION

Are reductions in the rate of decline from the new disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) meaningful? We examined whether such reductions may be reflected in changes in health-related resource use.

METHODS

Patients with Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) = 0.5 or 1 with a clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or AD, reflecting clinical trial populations. Health-related resource use was reported using the Resource Use Inventory (RUI) including direct medical care, non-medical care, unpaid informal care, and time use.

RESULTS

Faster decline in CDR-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) from baseline was independently associated with higher likelihood and hours of informal care received, and lower likelihood of employment/volunteer work, but not with direct medical care.

DISCUSSION

Reductions in the rate of decline in CDR-SB seen from DMTs significantly affect patients' work capacity and need for informal care, indicators of economic impact meaningful to patients, families, and health systems. These measures are not readily captured in administrative data sets.

Highlights

Following a cohort of participants with MCI or mild dementia due to AD that mimics participants targeted for AD trials, this study showed slower decline in CDR-SB have significant effects on patients' work capacity and need for informal care, but not on their direct medical care utilization such as hospitalizations, ED use, and doctors' visits.Capturing potential benefits in health-related resource use may require direct measures of informal care and work/volunteer effort which are meaningful outcomes to patients, families and health systems.Caution is needed in our effort to assess benefits of recently developed disease modifying treatment in AD using electronic health records and administrative data from which utilization of direct medical care are routinely collected as these data sources may not capture the most apparent changes in resource utilization during early disease stages.

Statistical considerations when estimating time-saving treatment effects in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Estimating treatment effects as time savings in disease progression may be more easily interpretable than assessing the absolute difference or a percentage reduction. In this study, we investigate the statistical considerations of the existing method for estimating time savings and propose alternative complementary methods.

METHODS

We propose five alternative methods to estimate the time savings from different perspectives. These methods are applied to simulated clinical trial data that mimic or modify the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes progression trajectories observed in the Clarity AD lecanemab trial.

RESULTS

Our study demonstrates that the proposed methods can generate more precise estimates by considering two crucial factors: (1) the absolute difference between treatment arms, and (2) the observed progression rate in the treatment arm.

DISCUSSION

Quantifying treatment effects as time savings in disease progression offers distinct advantages. To provide comprehensive estimations, it is important to use various methods.

HIGHLIGHTS

We explore the statistical considerations of the current method for estimating time savings. We proposed alternative methods that provide time savings estimations based on the observed absolute differences. By using various methods, a more comprehensive estimation of time savings can be achieved.

Fosgonimeton attenuates amyloid-beta toxicity in preclinical models of Alzheimer's disease

Positive modulation of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) signaling may represent a promising therapeutic strategy for Alzheimer's disease (AD) based on its multimodal neurotrophic, neuroprotective, and anti-inflammatory effects addressing the complex pathophysiology of neurodegeneration. Fosgonimeton is a small-molecule positive modulator of the HGF system that has demonstrated neurotrophic and pro-cognitive effects in preclinical models of dementia. Herein, we evaluate the neuroprotective potential of fosgonimeton, or its active metabolite, fosgo-AM, in amyloid-beta (Aβ)-driven preclinical models of AD, providing mechanistic insight into its mode of action. In primary rat cortical neurons challenged with Aβ (Aβ1-42), fosgo-AM treatment significantly improved neuronal survival, protected neurite networks, and reduced tau hyperphosphorylation. Interrogation of intracellular events indicated that cortical neurons treated with fosgo-AM exhibited a significant decrease in mitochondrial oxidative stress and cytochrome c release. Following Aβ injury, fosgo-AM significantly enhanced activation of pro-survival effectors ERK and AKT, and reduced activity of GSK3β, one of the main kinases involved in tau hyperphosphorylation. Fosgo-AM also mitigated Aβ-induced deficits in Unc-like kinase 1 (ULK1) and Beclin-1, suggesting a potential effect on autophagy. Treatment with fosgo-AM protected cortical neurons from glutamate excitotoxicity, and such effects were abolished in the presence of an AKT or MEK/ERK inhibitor. In vivo, fosgonimeton administration led to functional improvement in an intracerebroventricular Aβ25-35 rat model of AD, as it significantly rescued cognitive function in the passive avoidance test. Together, our data demonstrate the ability of fosgonimeton to counteract mechanisms of Aβ-induced toxicity. Fosgonimeton is currently in clinical trials for mild-to-moderate AD (NCT04488419; NCT04886063).

How donanemab data address the coverage with evidence development questions

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) established a class-based National Coverage Determination (NCD) for monoclonal antibodies directed against amyloid for Alzheimer's disease (AD) with patient access through Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) based on three questions. This review, focused on donanemab, answers each of these CED questions with quality evidence. TRAILBLAZER-ALZ registration trials are presented with supporting literature and real-world data to answer CED questions for donanemab. TRAILBLAZER-ALZ registration trials demonstrated that donanemab significantly slowed cognitive and functional decline in amyloid-positive early symptomatic AD participants, and lowered their risk of disease progression while key safety risks occurred primarily within the first 6 months and then declined. Donanemab meaningfully improved health outcomes with a manageable safety profile in an early symptomatic AD population, representative of Medicare populations across diverse practice settings. The donanemab data provide the necessary level of evidence for CMS to open a reconsideration of their NCD. HIGHLIGHTS: Donanemab meaningfully improved outcomes in trial participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease. Comorbidities in trial participants were consistent with the Medicare population. Co-medications in trial participants were consistent with the Medicare population. Risks associated with treatment tended to occur in the first 6 months. Risks of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities were managed with careful observation and magnetic resonance imaging monitoring.

Progression analysis versus traditional methods to quantify slowing of disease progression in Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

The clinical meaningfulness of the effects of recently approved disease-modifying treatments (DMT) in Alzheimer's disease is under debate. Available evidence is limited to short-term effects on clinical rating scales which may be difficult to interpret and have limited intrinsic meaning to patients. The main value of DMTs accrues over the long term as they are expected to cause a delay or slowing of disease progression. While awaiting such evidence, the translation of short-term effects to time delays or slowing of progression could offer a powerful and readily interpretable representation of clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We simulated disease progression trajectories representing two arms, active and placebo, of a hypothetical clinical trial of a DMT. The placebo arm was simulated based on estimated mean trajectories of clinical dementia rating scale-sum of boxes (CDR-SB) recordings from amyloid-positive subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). The active arm was simulated to show an average slowing of disease progression versus placebo of 20% at each visit. The treatment effects in the simulated trials were estimated with a progression model for repeated measures (PMRM) and a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) for comparison. For PMRM, the treatment effect is expressed in units of time (e.g., days) and for MMRM in units of the outcome (e.g., CDR-SB points). PMRM results were implemented in a health economics Markov model extrapolating disease progression and death over 15 years.

RESULTS

The PMRM model estimated a 19% delay in disease progression at 18 months and 20% (~ 7 months delay) at 36 months, while the MMRM model estimated a 25% reduction in CDR-SB (~ 0.5 points) at 36 months. The PMRM model had slightly greater power compared to MMRM. The health economic model based on the estimated time delay suggested an increase in life expectancy (10 months) without extending time in severe stages of disease.

CONCLUSION

PMRM methods can be used to estimate treatment effects in terms of slowing of progression which translates to time metrics that can be readily interpreted and appreciated as meaningful outcomes for patients, care partners, and health care practitioners.

The search for clarity regarding "clinically meaningful outcomes" in Alzheimer disease clinical trials: CLARITY-AD and Beyond

CLARITY-AD is an 18-month, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial which examined the safety and efficacy of the anti-amyloid agent, lecanemab, in mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia due to Alzheimer disease (AD). Lecanemab effectively reduced mean brain amyloid burden and was associated with statistically significant favorable effects, reflected by moderately less decline in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes, at 18 months compared to placebo. However, there is controversy within the AD community regarding the clinical significance of these results and whether they translate into clinically meaningful and tangible benefits on cognition or daily functions.We here review the primary and secondary clinical outcomes of CLARITY-AD and present our interpretation of the potential clinical meaningfulness of the group-level differences in study outcomes in the context of the 18-month study duration. We propose that the validation of stage-appropriate group-level thresholds for clinical meaningfulness of AD trial outcomes in biologically confirmed cohorts will allow objective interpretation of trial results and guide clinical decision-making. Further, in accordance with FDA guidance which emphasizes patient-focused drug development, the contextualization of AD clinical trial outcomes can be facilitated by supplementary individual-level data analyses which measure the risk of disease progression or summarize intraindividual change, using prespecified thresholds of clinically meaningful change, in each of the study groups over the trial period. The concepts of "time-saved" and "time-based" slowing in disease progression can be used to communicate clinical outcomes associated with emerging disease-modifying AD therapies to various stakeholders. We also describe several factors that need to be considered when evaluating outcomes of emerging AD therapies, including disease stage, the neuropathologic complexity of AD, time-based effects of disease-modifying therapies, and the possible influence of individual factors on treatment response and/or risk for adverse events. The consideration of these factors in the design and reporting of future trials of emerging AD therapies will guide clinicians regarding their appropriateness for use in various patient populations.Finally, we emphasize that data from clinical cohorts with longer durations of treatment and follow-up, including extension studies and patient registries, is needed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of lecanemab in early symptomatic AD.

Bayesian meta-analysis of phase 3 results of aducanumab, lecanemab, donanemab, and high-dose gantenerumab in prodromal and mild Alzheimer's disease

INTRODUCTION

Phase 3 trials using the anti-amyloid antibodies aducanumab, lecanemab, donanemab, and high-dose gantenerumab in prodromal and mild Alzheimer's disease dementia were heterogeneous in respect to statistical significance of effects. However, heterogeneity of results has not yet directly be quantified.

METHODS

We used Bayesian random effects meta-analysis to quantify evidence for or against a treatment effect, and assessed the size of the effect and its heterogeneity. Data were extracted from published studies where available and Web based data reports, assuming a Gaussian data generation process.

RESULTS

We found moderate evidence in favor of a treatment effect (Bayes factor = 13.2). The effect was moderate to small with -0.33 (95% credible interval -0.54 to -0.10) points on the Clinical Dementia Rating - Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) scale. The heterogeneity parameter was low to moderate with 0.21 (0.04 to 0.45) CDR-SB points.

DISCUSSION

Heterogeneity across studies was moderate despite some trials reaching statistical significance, while others did not. This suggests that the negative aducanumab and gantenerumab trials are in full agreement with the expected effect sizes.

Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease

Two monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), aducanumab and lecanemab, have received accelerated approval from the US FDA for initiation of treatment in early Alzheimer's disease patients who have proven β-amyloid pathology (Aβ). One of these, lecanemab, has subsequently received full approval and other monoclonal antibodies are poised for positive review and approval. Anti-amyloid mAbs share the feature of producing a marked reduction in total brain Aβ revealed by amyloid positron emission tomography. Trials associated with slowing of cognitive decline have achieved a reduction in measurable plaque Aβ in the range of 15-25 centiloids; trials of agents that did not reach this threshold were not associated with cognitive benefit. mAbs have differences in terms of titration schedules, MRI monitoring schedules for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and continuing versus interrupted therapy. The approximate 30% slowing of decline observed with mAbs is clinically meaningful in terms of extended cognitive integrity and delay of onset of the more severe dementia phases of Alzheimer's disease. Approval of these agents initiates a new era in Alzheimer's disease therapeutics with disease-modifying properties. Further advances are needed, i.e. greater efficacy, improved safety, enhanced convenience, and better understanding of ill-understood observations such as brain volume loss.

Focusing on Earlier Management of Alzheimer Disease: Expert Opinion Based on a Modified Nominal Group Technique

BACKGROUND

Despite the number of people living with Alzheimer disease (AD), awareness of the early stages of this condition, including mild cognitive impairment due to AD-which poses management challenges-continues to be low. To identify areas for improvement in early AD management, dementia specialists convened in a virtual roundtable meeting.

METHODOLOGY

A modified version of the nominal group technique was followed to prioritize specific topics and allow experts to provide their opinions. The overarching topics prioritized and discussed were (1) education and support for primary care physicians on cognitive assessment, detection of mild cognitive impairment, and patient monitoring; (2) nonpharmacological interventions; (3) and the introduction of disease-modifying therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus was achieved regarding the need for educating primary care physicians on identifying people with cognitive impairment and for better diagnostic tools for its detection and early management. Management of mild cognitive impairment due to AD should encompass an adequate follow-up schedule aiming to maintain function for as long as possible, and primary care physicians and patients should be aware of the benefits of nonpharmacological interventions.

Evaluation of Clinical Meaningfulness of Fortasyn Connect in Terms of "Time Saved"

Assessment of meaningfulness in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is challenging, particularly in early disease. Converting clinical outcomes to disease progression time allows assessment of treatment effects using a metric that is understandable and meaningful: time. We demonstrate time savings assessments using meta time component tests (TCTs) in the LipiDiDiet multinutrient RCT. Dietary patterns are important for dementia prevention, likely due to individual cumulative nutrient effects. LipiDiDiet used a multinutrient (Fortasyn Connect) formulation in patients with prodromal AD, benefitting cognition (5-item composite NTB, effect 0.089), cognition and function (CDR-SB, -0.605), and slowing hippocampal atrophy (0.122 cm3). Meaningfulness of point differences is unclear. However, a combination TCT showed 9-month disease time savings at 24 months (38% slowing of disease time): 9.0, 10.5, and 7.2 months for NTB, CDR-SB, and hippocampal volume, underscoring the value of TCTs in AD RCTs and the need for continued validation of this approach.

Comparison of relative change with effect size metrics in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Per cent slowing of decline is frequently used as a metric of outcome in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials, but it may be misleading. Our objective was to determine whether per cent slowing of decline or Cohen's d is the more valid and informative measure of efficacy.

METHODS

Outcome measures of interest were per cent slowing of decline; Cohen's d effect size and number-needed-to-treat (NNT). Data from a graphic were used to model the inter-relationships among Cohen's d, placebo decline in raw score units and per cent slowing of decline with active treatment. NNTs were computed based on different magnitudes of d. Last, we tabulated recent AD anti-amyloid clinical trials that reported per cent slowing and for which we computed their respective d's and NNTs.

RESULTS

We demonstrated that d and per cent slowing were potentially independent. While per cent slowing of decline was dependent on placebo decline and did not include variance in its computation, d was dependent on both group mean difference and pooled SD. We next showed that d was a critical determinant of NNT, such that NNT was uniformly smaller when d was larger. In recent AD associated trials including those focused on anti-amyloid biologics, d's were below 0.23 and thus considered small, while per cent slowing was in the 22-29% range and NNTs ranged from 14 to 18.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardised effect size is a more meaningful outcome than per cent slowing of decline because it determines group overlap, which can directly influence NNT computations, and yield information on the likelihood of minimum clinically important differences. In AD, greater use of effect sizes, NNTs, rather than relative per cent slowing, will improve the ability to interpret clinical trial results and evaluate the clinical meaningfulness of statistically significant results.

Alzheimer's Targeted Treatments: Focus on Amyloid and Inflammation

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the major cause of dementia that is now threatening the lives of billions of elderly people on the globe, and recent progress in the elucidation of the pathomechanism of AD is now opening venue to tackle the disease by developing and implementing "disease-modifying therapies" that directly act on the pathophysiology and slow down the progression of neurodegeneration. A recent example is the success of clinical trials of anti-amyloid b antibody drugs, whereas other therapeutic targets, e.g., inflammation and tau, are being actively investigated. In this dual perspective session, we plan to have speakers from leading pharmas in the field representing distinct investments in the AD space, which will be followed by the comment from scientific leadership of the Alzheimer's Association who will speak on behalf of all stakeholders. Neuroscientists participating in the Society for Neuroscience may be able to gain insights into the cutting edge of the therapeutic approaches to AD and neurodegenerative disorders, and discuss future contribution of neuroscience to this field.

Antiamyloid Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Alzheimer Disease: Emerging Issues in Neurology

With recent data demonstrating that lecanemab treatment can slow cognitive and functional decline in early symptomatic Alzheimer disease (AD), it is widely anticipated that this drug and potentially other monoclonal antibody infusions targeting β-amyloid protein will imminently be realistic options for some patients with AD. Given that these new antiamyloid monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are associated with nontrivial risks and burdens of treatment that are radically different from current mainstays of AD management, effectively and equitably translating their use to real-world clinical care will require systematic and practice-specific modifications to existing workflows and infrastructure. In this Emerging Issues in Neurology article, we provide practical guidance for a wide audience of neurology clinicians on logistic adaptations and decision making around emerging antiamyloid mAbs. Specifically, we briefly summarize the rationale and available evidence supporting antiamyloid mAb use in AD to facilitate appropriate communication with patients and care partners on potential benefits. We also discuss pragmatic approaches to optimizing patient selection and treatment monitoring, with a particular focus on the value of incorporating shared decision making and multidisciplinary collaboration. In addition, we review some of the recognized limitations of current knowledge and highlight areas of future evolution to guide the development of sustainable and flexible models for treatment and follow-up. As the field enters a new era with disease-modifying treatment options for AD, it will be critical for neurology practices to prepare and continually innovate to ensure optimal outcomes for patients.

Evaluation of clinical benefits of treatments for Alzheimer's disease

The need for regulatory approval of new therapies for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease-a progressive neurodegenerative condition-has made the assessment of treatment efficacy an urgent priority for discussion and investigation in the field. In the first part of this Personal View, we summarise current views on what constitutes a clinically meaningful benefit from treatment for Alzheimer's disease, including the concept of a minimum treatment effect against which to compare trial outcomes and its limitations. Considering existing and divergent definitions of clinically meaningful change, we define this concept in the second part of the Personal View by proposing a new approach that consecutively considers whether a treatment benefit for Alzheimer's disease is noticeable, valuable, and worthwhile in the context of costs and risks. This approach could be a useful foundation from which the field can move forwards on this issue and address existing gaps in understanding.

Anti-Amyloid Therapy, AD, and ARIA: Untangling the Role of CAA

Anti-amyloid therapies (AATs), such as anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies, are emerging treatments for people with early Alzheimer's disease (AD). AATs target amyloid β plaques in the brain. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), abnormal signals seen on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain in patients with AD, may occur spontaneously but occur more frequently as side effects of AATs. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is a major risk factor for ARIA. Amyloid β plays a key role in the pathogenesis of AD and of CAA. Amyloid β accumulation in the brain parenchyma as plaques is a pathological hallmark of AD, whereas amyloid β accumulation in cerebral vessels leads to CAA. A better understanding of the pathophysiology of ARIA is necessary for early detection of those at highest risk. This could lead to improved risk stratification and the ultimate reduction of symptomatic ARIA. Histopathological confirmation of CAA by brain biopsy or autopsy is the gold standard but is not clinically feasible. MRI is an available in vivo tool for detecting CAA. Cerebrospinal fluid amyloid β level testing and amyloid PET imaging are available but do not offer specificity for CAA vs amyloid plaques in AD. Thus, developing and testing biomarkers as reliable and sensitive screening tools for the presence and severity of CAA is a priority to minimize ARIA complications.

Implications of the Approval of Lecanemab for Alzheimer Disease Patient Care: Incremental Step or Paradigm Shift?

The amyloid cascade model of the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease (AD) is well supported in observational studies. Its therapeutic corollary asserts that removal of amyloid-β peptide ("amyloid") would provide clinical benefits. After 2 decades of pursuing the strategy of amyloid removal without success, clinical trials of the antiamyloid monoclonal antibody (AAMA) donanemab and a phase 3 clinical trial of lecanemab have reported clinical benefits linked to amyloid removal. Lecanemab (trade name, Leqembi) is the first with published phase 3 trial results. When administered through IV every 2 weeks to patients with elevated brain amyloid and mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia, lecanemab delayed cognitive and functional worsening by approximately 5 months in an 18-month double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The trial was well conducted, and the results favoring lecanemab were internally consistent. The demonstration that lecanemab treatment delayed clinical progression in persons with mild symptoms due to AD is a major conceptual achievement, but a better appreciation of the magnitude and durability of benefits for individual patients will require extended observations from clinical practice settings. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) that were largely asymptomatic occurred in approximately 20%, slightly more than half of which were attributable to treatment and the rest to underlying AD-related amyloid angiopathy. Persons who were homozygous for the APOE ε4 allele had greater ARIA risks. Hemorrhagic complications with longer-term lecanemab use need to be better understood. Administration of lecanemab will place unprecedented pressures on dementia care personnel and infrastructure, both of which need to grow exponentially to meet the challenge.

Personal meaningfulness of potential FDA-approved treatments: Perspectives of individuals living with Alzheimer's disease

With the emergence of new clinical trial data on disease-modifying therapies in several. Alzheimer's disease (AD) studies, the Alzheimer's Association convened individuals living with AD to gain their perspective on meaningfulness and new treatments. A total of 30 Alzheimer's Association National Early Stage Advisory Group members participated in a focus group or an online survey to gain insights on what is wanted from a first-in-class treatment that could stop the progression of their disease at the earliest stage. Participants felt that researchers and regulators need to consider personal meaningfulness alongside clinical meaningfulness. At the same time, individuals living with AD felt that access, education, choice, and affordability were all important considerations moving forward.

Passive Alzheimer's immunotherapy: A promising or uncertain option?

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s recent accelerated approval of two anti-amyloid antibodies for treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD), aducanumab and lecanemab, has caused substantial debate. To inform this debate, we reviewed the literature on randomized clinical trials conducted with eight such antibodies focusing on clinical efficacy, cerebral amyloid removal, amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIAs) and cerebral volumes to the extent such measurements have been reported. Two antibodies, donanemab and lecanemab, have demonstrated clinical efficacy, but these results remain uncertain. We further argue that the decreased amyloid PET signal in these trials is unlikely to be a one-to-one reflection of amyloid removal, but rather a reflection of increased therapy-related brain damage, as supported by the increased incidence of ARIAs and reported loss of brain volume. Due to these uncertainties of benefit and risk, we recommend that the FDA pauses existing approvals and approval of new antibodies until results of phase 4 studies with these drugs are available to inform on these risk-benefit uncertainties. We recommend that the FDA prioritize FDG PET and detection of ARIAs and accelerated brain volume loss with MRI in all trial patients, and neuropathological examination of all patients who die in these phase 4 trials.

Predicting the Societal Value of Lecanemab in Early Alzheimer's Disease in Japan: A Patient-Level Simulation

INTRODUCTION

Alzheimer's disease (AD), a neurodegenerative disorder that progresses from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia, is responsible for significant burden on caregivers and healthcare systems. In this study, data from the large phase III CLARITY AD trial were used to estimate the societal value of lecanemab plus standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone against a range of willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds from a healthcare and societal perspective in Japan.

METHODS

A disease simulation model was used to evaluate the impact of lecanemab on disease progression in early AD based on data from the phase III CLARITY AD trial and published literature. The model used a series of predictive risk equations based on clinical and biomarker data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative and Assessment of Health Economics in Alzheimer's Disease II study. The model predicted key patient outcomes, including life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and total healthcare and informal costs of patients and caregivers.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime horizon, patients treated with lecanemab plus SoC gained an additional 0.73 LYs compared with SoC alone (8.50 years vs. 7.77 years). Lecanemab, with an average treatment duration of 3.68 years, was found to be associated with a 0.91 increase in patient QALYs and a total increase of 0.96 when accounting for caregiver utility. The estimated value of lecanemab varied according to the WTP thresholds (JPY 5-15 million per QALY gained) and the perspective employed. From the narrow healthcare payer's perspective, it ranged from JPY 1,331,305 to JPY 3,939,399. From the broader healthcare payer's perspective, it ranged from JPY 1,636,827 to JPY 4,249,702, while from the societal perspective, it ranged from JPY 1,938,740 to JPY 4,675,818.

CONCLUSION

The use of lecanemab plus SoC would improve health and humanistic outcomes with reduced economic burden for patients and caregivers with early AD in Japan.

Meaningful benefit and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in Alzheimer's disease: Open peer commentary

Introduction

Approval of the anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies has stimulated an important discussion of the value to be placed on the magnitude of slowing achieved by treatment compared to placebo.

Methods

The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was reviewed in the context of other measures and analyses that provide perspective on the meaningfulness of treatment responses.

Results

TheMCID is a clinician-anchored approach to making this determination. The MCID applies best to symptomatic therapies for which the drug-placebo difference remains constant. Disease-modifying therapies produce a progressive divergence of drug and placebo trajectories; early in the course the MCID would not be achieved, later the MCID will be achieved, and with continuing therapy the MCID will be exceeded. Clinicians are not the only stakeholders involved in determining the value proposition of slowing disease progression. Patient-reported outcomes and caregiver-related measures offer important complementary insights. Analytic approaches also widen the perspective on the observed drug-placebo differences. Risk ratios, numbers needed to treat versus number needed to harm, time-to-event analyses, and predictive benefits based on biomarkers all add depth to the discussion.

Discussion

Multiple stakeholder perspectives are needed to determine the importance to be attributed to the therapeutic changes observed with monoclonal antibody therapies and other emerging treatments.

Advances in amyloid-targeting monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer's disease: clinical and public health issues

INTRODUCTION

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major global public health challenge. To date, no treatments have been shown to stop the underlying pathological processes. The cerebral accumulation of amyloid-beta (Ab) is still considered as the primum movens of AD and disease-modifying treatments targeting Ab are reaching - or have already reached - clinical practice.

AREAS COVERED

The authors explore the main advancements from Aβ-targeting monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for the treatment of AD. From a public health perspective, they address ethically relevant issues such as the benevolence and non-maleficence principles. They report on the potential biological and clinical benefits of these drugs, discussing minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and other relevant outcomes. They examine the short- and long-term effects of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and explore the differences between eligibility criteria in clinical trials, appropriate use recommendations, and prescribing information content. In doing so, they contextualize the discussion on the disagreements among different regulatory authorities.

EXPERT OPINION

Although anti-β-amyloid monoclonal antibodies may be effective in selected scenarios, non-negligible knowledge gaps and implementation limits persist. Overcoming these gaps can no longer be postponed if we are to ensure the principles of Quality of Care for patients with cognitive impairment who would be eligible for this class of drugs.

Key questions for the evaluation of anti-amyloid immunotherapies for Alzheimer's disease

The clinical benefit associated with anti-amyloid immunotherapies, a new class of drugs for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease, is predicated on their ability to modify disease course by lowering brain amyloid levels. At the time of writing, two amyloid-lowering antibodies, aducanumab and lecanemab, have obtained United States Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval, with further agents of this class in the Alzheimer's disease treatment pipeline. Based on limited published clinical trial data to date, regulators, payors and physicians will need to assess their efficacy, clinical effectiveness and safety, as well as cost and accessibility. We propose that attention to three important questions related to treatment efficacy, clinical effectiveness and safety should guide evidence-based consideration of this important class of drugs. These are: (1) Were trial statistical analyses appropriate and did they convincingly support claims of efficacy? (2) Do reported treatment effects outweigh safety concerns and are they generalizable to a representative clinical population of people with Alzheimer's disease? and (3) Do the data convincingly demonstrate disease course modification, suggesting that increasing clinical benefits beyond the duration of the trials are likely? We suggest specific approaches to interpreting trial results for these drugs and highlight important areas of uncertainty where additional data and a cautious interpretation of existing results is warranted. Safe, effective and accessible treatments for Alzheimer's disease are eagerly awaited by millions of patients and their caregivers worldwide. While amyloid-targeting immunotherapies may be promising disease-modifying Alzheimer's disease treatments, rigorous and unbiased assessment of clinical trial data is critical to regulatory decision-making and subsequently determining their provision and utility in routine clinical practice. Our recommendations provide a framework for evidence-based appraisal of these drugs by regulators, payors, physicians and patients.

Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies are Transformative Treatments that Redefine Alzheimer's Disease Therapeutics

Two anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies (MABs)-lecanemab (Leqembi®) and aducanumab (Aduhelm®)-have been approved in the USA for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies are the first disease-modifying therapies for AD that achieve slowing of clinical decline by intervening in the basic biological processes of the disease. These are breakthrough agents that can slow the inevitable progression of AD into more severe cognitive impairment. The results of trials of anti-amyloid MABs support the amyloid hypothesis and amyloid as a target for AD drug development. The success of MABs reflects a relentless application of neuroscience knowledge to solving major challenges facing humankind. The success of these transformative agents will foster the development of more anti-amyloid MABs, other types of anti-amyloid therapies, treatments of other targets of AD biology, and new approaches to therapies for an array of neurodegenerative disorders. Monoclonal antibodies have side effects and, during the period of treatment initiation, patients must be closely monitored for the occurrence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) and infusion reactions. A successful first step in the development of disease-modifying therapy for AD defines desirable features for the next phase of therapeutic development including less frequent ARIA, more convenient administration, and greater efficacy. Unprecedented agents make new demands on patients and care partners, clinicians, payers, and health care systems. Collaboration among stakeholders is essential to take advantage of the therapeutic benefits offered by these agents and to make them widely available. Monoclonal antibodies usher in a new era in AD therapy and define a new landscape of what is possible for therapeutic development for neurodegenerative disorders.