The Efficacy of Anti-amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer's Dementia: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Alyaa Mostafa, Stephanie Tiu, Farooq Khan, Nusrath A Baig
{"title":"The Efficacy of Anti-amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer's Dementia: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Alyaa Mostafa, Stephanie Tiu, Farooq Khan, Nusrath A Baig","doi":"10.4103/aian.aian_547_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Much research has been conducted into the role and safety of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies on the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Despite the historical approval of three drugs by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of early AD, there remains other potential treatment, which is yet to be approved or further developed. This systematic review explores the efficacy of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of early AD from reported clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Authors conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase. Screening was carried out by two authors and cross-checked thereafter. Clinical changes in cognition and objective measures such as cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and imaging constituted primary and secondary outcomes, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our search yielded 14 randomized controlled trials; the primary focus of the included trials is amyloid-β. The monoclonal antibodies reported in this review are: lecanemab, aducanumab, crenezumab, solanezumab, donanemab, bapineuzumab, and gantenerumab. The most common finding among the trials is the lack of statistically significant results in measures of clinical outcomes, (e.g., Clinical Dementia Rating Scale-Sum of Boxes, AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale). However, specific trials investigating lecanemab, aducanumab, and donanemab demonstrated promising improvements in clinical cognition. Results related to secondary outcomes were also mixed, but showed more positive findings across the included trials. Overall, primary outcomes were inconsistent with secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings highlight the need to consider the complex pathophysiology of AD in treatment development. Focusing solely on the amyloid-beta hypothesis may be inadequate; further research is necessary to understand the underlying mechanisms and develop treatments for the multifactorial nature of the disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":8036,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aian.aian_547_24","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Much research has been conducted into the role and safety of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies on the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Despite the historical approval of three drugs by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of early AD, there remains other potential treatment, which is yet to be approved or further developed. This systematic review explores the efficacy of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of early AD from reported clinical trials.

Methods: Authors conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase. Screening was carried out by two authors and cross-checked thereafter. Clinical changes in cognition and objective measures such as cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and imaging constituted primary and secondary outcomes, respectively.

Results: Our search yielded 14 randomized controlled trials; the primary focus of the included trials is amyloid-β. The monoclonal antibodies reported in this review are: lecanemab, aducanumab, crenezumab, solanezumab, donanemab, bapineuzumab, and gantenerumab. The most common finding among the trials is the lack of statistically significant results in measures of clinical outcomes, (e.g., Clinical Dementia Rating Scale-Sum of Boxes, AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale). However, specific trials investigating lecanemab, aducanumab, and donanemab demonstrated promising improvements in clinical cognition. Results related to secondary outcomes were also mixed, but showed more positive findings across the included trials. Overall, primary outcomes were inconsistent with secondary outcomes.

Conclusion: Our findings highlight the need to consider the complex pathophysiology of AD in treatment development. Focusing solely on the amyloid-beta hypothesis may be inadequate; further research is necessary to understand the underlying mechanisms and develop treatments for the multifactorial nature of the disease.

抗淀粉样蛋白单克隆抗体在早期阿尔茨海默氏痴呆中的疗效:系统综述。
关于抗淀粉样蛋白单克隆抗体在阿尔茨海默病(AD)进展中的作用和安全性进行了大量研究。尽管美国食品和药物管理局历史上批准了三种药物用于治疗早期AD,但仍有其他潜在的治疗方法尚未获得批准或进一步开发。本系统综述从已报道的临床试验中探讨抗淀粉样蛋白单克隆抗体治疗早期AD的疗效。方法:对MEDLINE和Embase进行系统检索。筛选由两位作者进行,并在此之后进行交叉检查。认知的临床变化和客观测量如脑脊液生物标志物和影像学分别构成主要和次要结局。结果:我们检索了14个随机对照试验;纳入试验的主要焦点是淀粉样蛋白-β。本综述中报道的单克隆抗体有:lecanemab、aducanumab、crenezumab、solanezumab、donanemab、bapineuzumab和gantenerumab。这些试验中最常见的发现是在临床结果的测量中缺乏统计上显著的结果(例如,临床痴呆评定量表-方框和,AD评估量表-认知子量表)。然而,研究lecanemab, aducanumab和donanemab的特定试验显示有希望改善临床认知。与次要结果相关的结果也好坏参半,但在纳入的试验中显示出更多积极的结果。总体而言,主要结局与次要结局不一致。结论:我们的研究结果强调了在治疗开发中考虑AD复杂病理生理的必要性。仅仅关注淀粉样蛋白假说可能是不够的;进一步的研究是必要的,以了解潜在的机制和开发治疗疾病的多因素性质。
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
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology Nervous System Diseases-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
293
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal has a clinical foundation and has been utilized most by clinical neurologists for improving the practice of neurology. While the focus is on neurology in India, the journal publishes manuscripts of high value from all parts of the world. Journal publishes reviews of various types, original articles, short communications, interesting images and case reports. The journal respects the scientific submission of its authors and believes in following an expeditious double-blind peer review process and endeavors to complete the review process within scheduled time frame. A significant effort from the author and the journal perhaps enables to strike an equilibrium to meet the professional expectations of the peers in the world of scientific publication. AIAN believes in safeguarding the privacy rights of human subjects. In order to comply with it, the journal instructs all authors when uploading the manuscript to also add the ethical clearance (human/animals)/ informed consent of subject in the manuscript. This applies to the study/case report that involves animal/human subjects/human specimens e.g. extracted tooth part/soft tissue for biopsy/in vitro analysis.
×
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