The higher benefit of lecanemab in males compared to females in CLARITY AD is probably due to a real sex effect

Daniel Andrews, Simon Ducharme, Howard Chertkow, Maria Pia Sormani, D. Louis Collins, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
{"title":"The higher benefit of lecanemab in males compared to females in CLARITY AD is probably due to a real sex effect","authors":"Daniel Andrews, Simon Ducharme, Howard Chertkow, Maria Pia Sormani, D. Louis Collins, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative","doi":"10.1101/2024.07.11.24310278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: The Phase 3 trial CLARITY AD found that lecanemab slowed cognitive decline by a statistically significant 27% vs. placebo. However, the subgroup analysis indicated a significant sex difference in the effect, and recent work has implied that lecanemab has either no or limited effectiveness in females. To resolve this ambiguity, we used simulations constrained by the trial design to determine whether the difference could be explained by known sex differences in Alzheimer's progression, or as an isolated random event.\nMETHODS: Simulations were generated using linear mixed models of cognitive decline fit to data from ADNI participants who satisfied CLARITY AD inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The statistically nonsignificant 7.9% sex difference in cognitive decline rate observed in our selected ADNI participants does not explain the trial's 31% sex difference in lecanemab's effect. A 31% difference occurred randomly in only 12 of our 10,000 simulations, signifying a probability of 0.0012. DISCUSSION: Our results are consistent with those from CLARITY AD. Lecanemab likely affects females and males differently, but we cannot conclude that the drug is ineffective in females.","PeriodicalId":501025,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Geriatric Medicine","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Geriatric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.11.24310278","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The Phase 3 trial CLARITY AD found that lecanemab slowed cognitive decline by a statistically significant 27% vs. placebo. However, the subgroup analysis indicated a significant sex difference in the effect, and recent work has implied that lecanemab has either no or limited effectiveness in females. To resolve this ambiguity, we used simulations constrained by the trial design to determine whether the difference could be explained by known sex differences in Alzheimer's progression, or as an isolated random event. METHODS: Simulations were generated using linear mixed models of cognitive decline fit to data from ADNI participants who satisfied CLARITY AD inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The statistically nonsignificant 7.9% sex difference in cognitive decline rate observed in our selected ADNI participants does not explain the trial's 31% sex difference in lecanemab's effect. A 31% difference occurred randomly in only 12 of our 10,000 simulations, signifying a probability of 0.0012. DISCUSSION: Our results are consistent with those from CLARITY AD. Lecanemab likely affects females and males differently, but we cannot conclude that the drug is ineffective in females.
在CLARITY AD研究中,莱卡奈单抗对男性的益处高于女性,这可能是由于真正的性别效应所致
简介:CLARITY AD 3 期临床试验发现,与安慰剂相比,利卡尼单抗在统计学上显著减缓了 27% 的认知功能衰退。然而,亚组分析表明该效果存在明显的性别差异,而最近的研究表明,莱卡奈单抗对女性没有疗效或疗效有限。为了解决这一含糊不清的问题,我们在试验设计的限制下进行了模拟,以确定这一差异是否可以用阿尔茨海默氏症进展中的已知性别差异来解释,或者作为一个孤立的随机事件来解释。方法:使用认知能力下降的线性混合模型模拟符合CLARITY AD纳入标准的ADNI参与者的数据。结果:在我们选定的 ADNI 参与者中观察到的认知能力下降率 7.9% 的性别差异在统计学上并不显著,这并不能解释试验中 Lecanemab 31% 的效果性别差异。在 10,000 次模拟中,只有 12 次随机出现了 31% 的差异,概率为 0.0012。讨论:我们的结果与CLARITY AD的结果一致。来卡尼单抗对女性和男性的影响可能不同,但我们不能得出该药物对女性无效的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信