ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2024
Progression analysis versus traditional methods to quantify slowing of disease progression in Alzheimer's disease.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Meaningfulness of Donanemab in Early Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease: Data From the Randomized Phase 3 TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Trial.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2026Trial
- Estimating the Future Health and Social Care Costs of Alzheimer's Disease Dementia in the UK: Impact of Disease Modifying Therapy Efficacy, Uptake, and Care Model - A Scenario Modelling Study.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2026Article
- Characterizing heterogeneity in Alzheimer's disease progression: a semiparametric model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Simulation of long-term lecanemab treatment effect on Alzheimer's disease progression.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
- Measuring time saved in Alzheimer's disease: What is a meaningful slowing of progression?Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
- Comparison between treatment-placebo difference and saved time measures to assess treatment effect in Alzheimer's disease.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.