Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer Disease: Lecanemab and Donanemab.

IF 3.3 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Ülkü Figen Demir, Fatmanur Karakuş Dilbaz
{"title":"Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer Disease: Lecanemab and Donanemab.","authors":"Ülkü Figen Demir, Fatmanur Karakuş Dilbaz","doi":"10.3390/neurolint18090171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>Alzheimer disease (AD) causes progressive cognitive and functional loss and substantial caregiver and healthcare burden. Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies represent a shift toward biology-directed treatment in biomarker-confirmed early symptomatic AD, but modest clinical effects must be balanced against amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), intensive monitoring, and implementation burden. Heterogeneity in trial populations, endpoints, dosing, stopping rules, and follow-up complicates interpretation. This narrative review critically integrates efficacy, safety, durability, biomarker, and implementation evidence for lecanemab and donanemab while preserving study-family relationships and avoiding unsupported cross-trial superiority claims.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this revised narrative review, a targeted PubMed/MEDLINE search covering the period from database inception was initially conducted before manuscript submission and was subsequently updated through 21 August 2026, supplemented by reference-list and citation tracking. Search terms combined Alzheimer disease with lecanemab, donanemab, anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody, ARIA, APOE, amyloid PET, open-label extension, real-world, clinical meaningfulness, implementation, and access. Sixty-two sources were purposively selected for a comprehensive narrative synthesis; no meta-analysis or formal certainty grading was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pivotal trials demonstrated statistically significant but modest average slowing of decline: Clarity AD showed a 0.45-point between-group difference in CDR-SB worsening at 18 months, and TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 showed a 3.25-point iADRS difference in the low/medium-tau population at 76 weeks. ARIA-E occurred in 12.6% of lecanemab-treated and 24.0% of donanemab-treated participants in the pivotal trials, with higher risk in APOE ε4 carriers. Extensions and biomarker analyses suggest persistent biological effects but are less secure for causal inference, and real-world evidence is currently more mature for lecanemab.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both antibodies substantially reduce amyloid and modestly slow average clinical decline in selected patients, but neither restores lost function, greater amyloid clearance does not establish greater individual benefit, and cross-trial superiority cannot be inferred. Treatment requires biomarker-guided selection, APOE-informed risk counseling, serial MRI, infusion and ARIA-management capacity, and shared decision-making that incorporates cost, access, and patient/caregiver burden.</p>","PeriodicalId":19130,"journal":{"name":"Neurology International","volume":"18 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13610423/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint18090171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objectives: Alzheimer disease (AD) causes progressive cognitive and functional loss and substantial caregiver and healthcare burden. Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies represent a shift toward biology-directed treatment in biomarker-confirmed early symptomatic AD, but modest clinical effects must be balanced against amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), intensive monitoring, and implementation burden. Heterogeneity in trial populations, endpoints, dosing, stopping rules, and follow-up complicates interpretation. This narrative review critically integrates efficacy, safety, durability, biomarker, and implementation evidence for lecanemab and donanemab while preserving study-family relationships and avoiding unsupported cross-trial superiority claims.

Methods: For this revised narrative review, a targeted PubMed/MEDLINE search covering the period from database inception was initially conducted before manuscript submission and was subsequently updated through 21 August 2026, supplemented by reference-list and citation tracking. Search terms combined Alzheimer disease with lecanemab, donanemab, anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody, ARIA, APOE, amyloid PET, open-label extension, real-world, clinical meaningfulness, implementation, and access. Sixty-two sources were purposively selected for a comprehensive narrative synthesis; no meta-analysis or formal certainty grading was performed.

Results: Pivotal trials demonstrated statistically significant but modest average slowing of decline: Clarity AD showed a 0.45-point between-group difference in CDR-SB worsening at 18 months, and TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 showed a 3.25-point iADRS difference in the low/medium-tau population at 76 weeks. ARIA-E occurred in 12.6% of lecanemab-treated and 24.0% of donanemab-treated participants in the pivotal trials, with higher risk in APOE ε4 carriers. Extensions and biomarker analyses suggest persistent biological effects but are less secure for causal inference, and real-world evidence is currently more mature for lecanemab.

Conclusions: Both antibodies substantially reduce amyloid and modestly slow average clinical decline in selected patients, but neither restores lost function, greater amyloid clearance does not establish greater individual benefit, and cross-trial superiority cannot be inferred. Treatment requires biomarker-guided selection, APOE-informed risk counseling, serial MRI, infusion and ARIA-management capacity, and shared decision-making that incorporates cost, access, and patient/caregiver burden.

早期阿尔茨海默病的抗淀粉样蛋白单克隆抗体:Lecanemab和Donanemab。
背景/目的:阿尔茨海默病(AD)导致进行性认知和功能丧失以及大量的护理和医疗负担。抗淀粉样蛋白单克隆抗体代表了生物标志物证实的早期症状性阿尔茨海默病的生物学导向治疗的转变,但适度的临床效果必须与淀粉样蛋白相关成像异常(ARIA)、强化监测和实施负担相平衡。试验人群、终点、给药、停药规则和随访的异质性使解释复杂化。这篇叙述性综述批判性地整合了利卡耐单抗和多纳耐单抗的疗效、安全性、耐久性、生物标志物和实施证据,同时保留了研究-家族关系,避免了无证据支持的交叉试验优势主张。方法:在这篇修订后的叙述性综述中,我们在稿件提交前对PubMed/MEDLINE进行了有针对性的检索,检索时间从数据库建立开始,随后更新至2026年8月21日,并补充了参考文献列表和引文跟踪。搜索词将阿尔茨海默病与lecanemab、donanemab、抗淀粉样蛋白单克隆抗体、ARIA、APOE、淀粉样蛋白PET、开放标签扩展、现实世界、临床意义、实施和获取相结合。有目的地选择了62个来源进行全面的叙事综合;没有进行meta分析或正式的确定性分级。结果:关键试验显示具有统计学意义但平均下降缓慢:Clarity AD在18个月时CDR-SB恶化的组间差异为0.45点,而TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2在76周时中低tau人群中显示3.25点的iADRS差异。在关键试验中,12.6%的lecanemab治疗组和24.0%的donanemab治疗组患者发生ARIA-E, APOE ε4携带者的风险更高。扩展和生物标志物分析表明,持续的生物效应,但不太安全的因果推理,和现实世界的证据目前更成熟的lecanemab。结论:在选定的患者中,这两种抗体均可显著降低淀粉样蛋白并适度减缓平均临床衰退,但均不能恢复失去的功能,更大的淀粉样蛋白清除并不能建立更大的个体获益,并且不能推断交叉试验优势。治疗需要生物标志物引导的选择、apoe知情的风险咨询、连续MRI、输注和aria管理能力,以及包括成本、获取和患者/护理人员负担在内的共同决策。
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
Neurology International
Neurology International CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
69
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书