Unleashing the Power of Bayesian Re-Analysis: Enhancing Insights into Lecanemab (Clarity AD) Phase III Trial Through Informed t-Test

Evaluating the robustness of DTI-ALPS in clinical context: a meta-analytic parallel on Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases

In recent years, the glymphatic system has received increasing attention due to its possible implications in biological mechanisms associated with neurodegeneration. In the field of human brain mapping, this led to the development of diffusion tensor image analysis along the perivascular space (DTI-ALPS) index. While this index has been repeatedly used to investigate possible differences between neurodegenerative disorders and healthy controls, a comprehensive evaluation of its stability across multiple measurements and different disorders is still missing. In this study, we perform a Bayesian meta-analysis aiming to assess the consistency of the DTI-ALPS results previously reported for 12 studies on Parkinson's disease and 11 studies on Alzheimer's disease. We also evaluated if the measured value of the DTI-ALPS index can quantitatively inform the diagnostic process, allowing disambiguation between these two disorders. Our results, expressed in terms of Bayes' Factor values, confirmed that the DTI-ALPS index is consistent in measuring the different functioning of the glymphatic system between healthy subjects and patients for both Parkinson's disease (Log10(BF10) = 30) and Alzheimer's disease (Log10(BF10) = 10). Moreover, we showed that the DTI-ALPS can be used to compare these two disorders directly, therefore providing a first proof of concept supporting the reliability of taking into consideration this neuroimaging measurement in the diagnostic process. Our study underscores the potential of the DTI-ALPS index in advancing our understanding of neurodegenerative pathologies and enhancing clinical diagnostics.

Once upon a time, the Amyloid Cascade Hypothesis

Recent trials with monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid-β (Aβ) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) have sparked a renewed interest in disease-modifying therapies. Despite their promise, these trials leave the issue open and posit some doubts about the validity of the Amyloid Cascade Hypothesis (ACH). While some scores of neurocognitive tests improved upon treatment, real-world clinical benefits were minimal. This Viewpoint discusses additional, often overlooked findings from these trials. We also emphasize the multifactorial nature of AD and the need for a broader research perspective beyond the simplistic disease model provided by the ACH.