Changes in Neuropsychiatric Inventory Associated with Semagacestat Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease

An Update on Apathy in Alzheimer's Disease

Apathy is a complex multi-dimensional syndrome that affects up to 70% of individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Whilst many frameworks to define apathy in AD exist, most include loss of motivation or goal-directed behaviour as the central feature. Apathy is associated with significant impact on persons living with AD and their caregivers and is also associated with accelerated cognitive decline across the AD spectrum. Neuroimaging studies have highlighted a key role of fronto-striatial circuitry including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), orbito-frontal cortex (OFC) and associated subcortical structures. Importantly, the presence and severity of apathy strongly correlates with AD stage and neuropathological biomarkers of amyloid and tau pathology. Following from neurochemistry studies demonstrating a central role of biogenic amine neurotransmission in apathy syndrome in AD, recent clinical trial data suggest that apathy symptoms may improve following treatment with agents such as methylphenidate-which may have an important role alongside emerging non-pharmacological treatment strategies. Here, we review the diagnostic criteria, rating scales, prevalence, and risk factors for apathy in AD. The underlying neurobiology, neuropsychology and associated neuroimaging findings are reviewed in detail. Finally, we discuss current treatment approaches and strategies aimed at targeting apathy syndrome in AD, highlighting areas for future research and clinical trials in patient cohorts.

Role of monomeric amyloid-β in cognitive performance in Alzheimer's disease: Insights from clinical trials with secretase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies

According to the β-amyloid (Aβ) hypothesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), brain Aβ accumulation is the primary cascade event leading to cognitive deficit and dementia. Numerous anti-Aβ drugs either inhibiting production or aggregation of Aβ or stimulating its clearance have failed to show clinical benefit in large scale AD trials, with β- and γ-secretase inhibitors consistently worsening cognitive and clinical decline. In June 2021, the FDA approved aducanumab, an anti-Aβ monoclonal antibody for early AD based on its ability to reduce brain amyloid plaques, while two other amyloid-clearing antibodies (lecanemab and donanemab) have recently produced encouraging cognitive and clinical results. We reviewed AD trials using PubMed, meeting abstracts and ClinicalTrials.gov and evaluated the effects of such drugs on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ levels, correlating them with cognitive effects. We found that β-secretase and γ-secretase inhibitors produce detrimental cognitive effects by significantly reducing CSF Aβ levels. We speculate that monoclonal antibodies targeting Aβ protofibrils, fibrils or plaques may improve cognitive performance in early AD by increasing soluble Aβ levels through Aβ aggregate disassembly and/or stabilization of existing Aβ monomers.These findings suggest that the real culprit in AD may be decreased levels of soluble monomeric Aβ due to sequestration into brain Aβ aggregates and plaques.

Enhanced Association of Tau Pathology and Cognitive Impairment in Mild Cognitive Impairment Subjects with Behavior Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) individuals with neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are more likely to develop dementia.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand the relationship between neuroimaging markers such as tau pathology and cognitive symptoms both with and without the presence of NPS during the prodromal period of Alzheimer's disease.

METHODS

A total of 151 MCI subjects with tau positron emission tomographic (PET) scanning with 18F AV-1451, amyloid-β (Aβ) PET scanning with florbetapir or florbetaben, magnetic resonance imaging, and cognitive and behavioral evaluations were selected from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. A 4-group division approach was proposed using amyloid (A-/A+) and behavior (B-/B+) status: A-B-, A-B+, A+B-, and A+B+. Pearson's correlation test was conducted for each group to examine the association between tau deposition and cognitive performance.

RESULTS

No statistically significant association between tau deposition and cognitive impairment was found for subjects without behavior symptoms in either the A-B-or A+B-groups after correction for false discovery rate. In contrast, tau deposition was found to be significantly associated with cognitive impairment in entorhinal cortex and temporal pole for the A-B+ group and nearly the whole cerebrum for the A+B+ group.

CONCLUSION

Enhanced associations between tauopathy and cognitive impairment are present in MCI subjects with behavior symptoms, which is more prominent in the presence of elevated amyloid pathology. MCI individuals with NPS may thus be at greater risk for further cognitive decline with the increase of tau deposition in comparison to those without NPS.

Pharmacological Management of Apathy in Dementia

Apathy is a highly prevalent symptom of dementia. Despite its association with faster cognitive and functional decline, decreased quality of life and increased mortality, no therapies are currently approved to treat apathy. The objective of this review was to summarize the drugs that have been studied for apathy treatment in patients with dementia (specifically Alzheimer's disease [AD], Huntington's disease [HD] and Parkinson's disease [PD] dementia; dementia with Lewy bodies [DLB]; vascular dementia [VaD]; and frontotemporal dementia [FTD]) based on their putative mechanisms of action. A search for relevant studies was performed using ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that were available in English and included at least one drug intervention and an apathy measure scale. A total of 52 studies that included patients with AD (n = 33 studies), PD (n = 5), HD (n = 1), DLB (n = 1), FTD (n = 3), VaD (n = 1), VaD and AD (n = 4), VaD and mixed dementia (n = 1), and AD, VaD and mixed dementia (n = 3) were eligible for inclusion. These studies showed that methylphenidate, olanzapine, cholinesterase inhibitors, choline alphoscerate, citalopram, memantine, and mibampator are the only beneficial drugs in AD-related apathy. For PD-related apathy, only methylphenidate, rotigotine and rivastigmine showed benefits. Regarding FTD- and DLB-related apathy, initial studies with agomelatine and rivastigmine showed benefits, respectively. As for HD- and only-VaD-related apathy, no drugs demonstrated benefits. With regards to mixed populations, memantine, galantamine and gingko biloba showed effects on apathy in the AD plus VaD populations and nimodipine in the VaD plus mixed dementia populations. Of the drugs with positive results, some are already prescribed to patients with dementia to target other symptoms, some have characteristics-such as medical contraindications (e.g., cardiovascular) and adverse effects (e.g., gastrointestinal disturbances)-that limit their clinical use and some require further study. Future studies should investigate apathy as a primary outcome, making use of appropriate sample sizes and study durations to ensure durability of results. There should also be a consensus on using scales with high test/retest and interrater reliabilities to limit the inconsistencies between clinical trials. In conclusion, there are currently no US FDA-approved drugs that target apathy in dementia, so there is an ongoing need for the development of such drugs.

What have we learned from past failures of investigational drugs for Alzheimer's disease?

INTRODUCTION

In the last 15 years, huge efforts against Alzheimer's disease (AD) with drugs targeting β-amyloid (Aβ) and tau have produced poor clinical results. Aducanumab, a recently FDA-approved anti-Aβ monoclonal antibody has been greeted with distrust by most experts, hospitals and insurance companies for its level of efficacy and poor tolerability.

AREA COVERED

We reviewed literature on Alzheimer trials using PubMed, meeting abstracts and ClnicalTrials.gov and discuss what we can learn from past failures of investigational drugs for Alzheimer's disease, especially anti-Aβ and anti-tau drugs.

EXPERT OPINION

It is our opinion that previous failures of anti-AD drugs suggest that soluble Aβ and tau are not appropriate drug targets. In addition, pivotal clinical trials of future clinical candidates should avoid major protocol amendments and futility analyses. Study protocols should adopt better measures to protect study blinding and minimize the potential introduction of major biases in the evaluation of clinical results. Finally, alternative biological targets should be pursued as well as more multimodal approaches to addressing neurodegeneration in AD.

Alzheimer Disease Clinical Trials Targeting Amyloid: Lessons Learned From Success in Mice and Failure in Humans

BACKGROUND

The goal of slowing or halting the development of Alzheimer disease (AD) has resulted in the huge allocation of resources by academic institutions and pharmaceutical companies to the development of new treatments. The etiology of AD is elusive, but the aggregation of amyloid-β and tau peptide and oxidative processes are considered critical pathologic mechanisms. The failure of drugs with multiple mechanisms to meet efficacy outcomes has caused several companies to decide not to pursue further AD studies and has left the field essentially where it has been for the past 15 years. Efforts are underway to develop biomarkers for detection and monitoring of AD using genetic, imaging, and biochemical technology, but this is of minimal use if no intervention can be offered.

REVIEW SUMMARY

In this review, we consider the natural progression of AD and how it continues despite present attempts to modify the amyloid-related machinery to alter the disease trajectory. We describe the mechanisms and approaches to AD treatment targeting amyloid, including both passive and active immunotherapy as well as inhibitors of enzymes in the amyloidogenic pathway.

CONCLUSION

Lessons learned from clinical trials of amyloid reduction strategies may prove crucial for the leap forward toward novel therapeutic targets to treat AD.

Alzheimer's Disease and Its Potential Alternative Therapeutics

Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease that affects over 5 million individuals in the United States alone. Currently, there are only two kinds of pharmacological interventions available for symptomatic relief of AD; Acetyl Cholinesterase Inhibitors (AChEI) and N-methyl-D-aspartic Acid (NMDA) receptor antagonists and these drugs do not slow down or stop the progression of the disease. Several molecular targets have been implicated in the pathophysiology of AD, such as the tau (τ) protein, Amyloid-beta (Aβ), the Amyloid Precursor Protein (APP) and more and several responses have also been observed in the advancement of the disease, such as reduced neurogenesis, neuroinflammation, oxidative stress and iron overload. In this review, we discuss general features of AD and several small molecules across different experimental AD drug classes that have been studied for their effects in the context of the molecular targets and responses associated with the AD progression. These drugs include: Paroxetine, Desferrioxamine (DFO), N-acetylcysteine (NAC), Posiphen/-(−)Phenserine, JTR-009, Carvedilol, LY450139, Intravenous immunoglobulin G 10%, Indomethacin and Lithium Carbonate (Li₂CO₃).

Pharmacological interventions for apathy in Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

Despite the high prevalence of apathy in Alzheimer's disease (AD), and its harmful effects, there are currently no therapies proven to treat this symptom. Recently, a number of pharmacological therapies have been investigated as potential treatments for apathy in AD.

OBJECTIVES

Objective 1: To assess the safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of apathy in Alzheimer's disease (AD).Objective 2: To assess the effect on apathy of pharmacotherapies investigated for other primary outcomes in the treatment of AD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (ALOIS), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) portal, ICTRP on 17 May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) investigating apathy as a primary or secondary outcome in people with AD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors extracted data. We assessed the risks of bias of included studies using Cochrane methods, and the overall quality of evidence for each outcome using GRADE methods. We calculated mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals on an intention-to-treat basis for all relevant outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 studies involving a total of 6384 participants in the quantitative analyses. Risk of bias is very low to moderate. All studies reported appropriate methods of randomization and blinding. Most studies reported appropriate methods of allocation concealment. Four studies, three with methylphenidate and one with modafinil, had a primary aim of improving apathy. In these studies, all participants had clinically significant apathy at baseline. Methylphenidate may improve apathy compared to placebo. This finding was present when apathy was assessed using the apathy evaluation scale (AES), which was used by all three studies investigating methylphenidate: MD -4.99, 95% CI -9.55 to -0.43, n = 145, 3 studies, low quality of evidence, but not when assessed with the neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI)-apathy subscale, which was used by two of the three studies investigating methylphenidate: MD -0.08, 95% CI -3.85 to 3.69, n = 85, 2 studies, low quality of evidence. As well as having potential benefits for apathy, methylphenidate probably also slightly improves cognition (MD 1.98, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.91, n = 145, 3 studies, moderate quality of evidence), and probably improves instrumental activities of daily living (MD 2.30, 95% CI 0.74 to 3.86, P = 0.004, n = 60, 1 study, moderate quality of evidence), compared to placebo. There may be no difference between methylphenidate and placebo in the risk of developing an adverse event: RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.42, n = 145, 3 studies, low quality of evidence. There was insufficient evidence from one very small study of modafinil to determine the effect of modafinil on apathy assessed with the FrSBe-apathy subscale: MD 0.27, 95% CI -3.51 to 4.05, n = 22, 1 study, low quality of evidence. In all other included studies, apathy was a secondary outcome and participants were not selected on the basis of clinically significant apathy at baseline. We considered the evidence on apathy from these studies to be indirect and associated with publication bias. There was low or very low quality of evidence on cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) (six studies), ChEI discontinuation (one study), antipsychotics (two studies), antipsychotic discontinuation (one study), antidepressants (two studies), mibampator (one study), valproate (three studies) and semagacestat (one study).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Methylphenidate may demonstrate a benefit for apathy and may have slight benefits for cognition and functional performance in people with AD, but this finding is associated with low-quality evidence. Our meta-analysis is limited by the small number of studies within each drug class, risk of bias, publication bias, imprecision and inconsistency between studies. Additional studies should be encouraged targeting people with AD with clinically significant apathy which investigate apathy as a primary outcome measure, and which have a longer duration and a larger sample size. This could increase the quality of evidence for methylphenidate, and may confirm whether or not it is an effective pharmacotherapy for apathy in AD.