Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38424559›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2024

Progression analysis versus traditional methods to quantify slowing of disease progression in Alzheimer's disease.

Linus Jönsson, Milana Ivkovic, Alireza Atri, Ron Handels, Anders Gustavsson, Julie Hviid Hahn-Pedersen, Teresa León, Mathias Lilja, Jens Gundgaard, Lars Lau Raket

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Linus JönssonDivision of Neurogeriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, 171 64, Sweden. Linus.jonsson@ki.se.
Milana IvkovicNovo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Alireza AtriBanner Sun Health Research Institute and Banner Alzheimer's Institute, Banner Health, Sun City and Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Ron HandelsDivision of Neurogeriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, 171 64, Sweden.
Anders GustavssonDivision of Neurogeriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, 171 64, Sweden.
Julie Hviid Hahn-PedersenNovo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Teresa LeónNovo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Mathias LiljaQuantify Research, Hantverkargatan 8, Stockholm, 112 21, Sweden.
Jens GundgaardNovo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
Lars Lau RaketNovo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

Funding

Research Education ComponentP30AG072980 · NIA · BANNER HEALTH · PI HEATHER Allyson BIMONTE-NELSON · 2021 to 2026
$24.9M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072980
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe clinical meaningfulness of the effects of recently approved disease-modifying treatments (DMT) in Alzheimer's disease is under debate. Available evidence is limited to short-term effects on clinical rating scales which may be difficult to interpret and have limited intrinsic meaning to patients. The main value of DMTs accrues over the long term as they are expected to cause a delay or slowing of disease progression. While awaiting such evidence, the translation of short-term effects to time delays or slowing of progression could offer a powerful and readily interpretable representation of clinical outcomes.

methodsWe simulated disease progression trajectories representing two arms, active and placebo, of a hypothetical clinical trial of a DMT. The placebo arm was simulated based on estimated mean trajectories of clinical dementia rating scale-sum of boxes (CDR-SB) recordings from amyloid-positive subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). The active arm was simulated to show an average slowing of disease progression versus placebo of 20% at each visit. The treatment effects in the simulated trials were estimated with a progression model for repeated measures (PMRM) and a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) for comparison. For PMRM, the treatment effect is expressed in units of time (e.g., days) and for MMRM in units of the outcome (e.g., CDR-SB points). PMRM results were implemented in a health economics Markov model extrapolating disease progression and death over 15 years.

resultsThe PMRM model estimated a 19% delay in disease progression at 18 months and 20% (~ 7 months delay) at 36 months, while the MMRM model estimated a 25% reduction in CDR-SB (~ 0.5 points) at 36 months. The PMRM model had slightly greater power compared to MMRM. The health economic model based on the estimated time delay suggested an increase in life expectancy (10 months) without extending time in severe stages of disease.

conclusionPMRM methods can be used to estimate treatment effects in terms of slowing of progression which translates to time metrics that can be readily interpreted and appreciated as meaningful outcomes for patients, care partners, and health care practitioners.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionClinical Trials as TopicDisease ProgressionHumansMental Status and Dementia TestsModels, TheoreticalResearch DesignAlzheimer’s diseaseDisease progressionStatistical model

Identifiers

PMID38424559
PMCPMC10903002

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.