Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39945003›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2024

Comparative the efficacy and safety of Gosuranemab, Semorinemab, Tilavonemab, and Zagotenemab in patients with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Wenting Cai, Hui Zhang, Yan Wu, Yao Yao, Jinping Zhang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Promoter mutagenesis and a massively parallel reporter screen of thebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

5 authors.

Wenting CaiDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, School of Basic Medicine and Clinical Pharmacy, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Hui ZhangDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Yan WuDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, School of Basic Medicine and Clinical Pharmacy, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Yao YaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Jinping ZhangDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of anti-tau protein monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Tau protein aggregation, a key pathological feature of AD, is closely associated with neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. Targeting tau protein has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy. By investigating the effects of monoclonal antibodies on cognitive function, disease progression, and overall quality of life in patients with AD, which can provide valuable insights into their potential as a therapeutic option for this devastating neurodegenerative disorder. Methods: The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of Gosuranemab, Semorinemab, Tilavonemab, and Zagotenemab in Alzheimer's disease (AD) were systematically searched across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, up to May 2024. The control group included placebo. The efficacy indicators were change in the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (ADAS-Cog), Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADCS-ADL) from baseline until the time of efficacy observation. Statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 14 and RevMan 5.4. The purpose of data processing, including generating network evidence plots, surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking, league plots, and funnel plots, is to visually summarize and evaluate the relative effectiveness and safety and potential publication bias of multiple interventions. Mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) as effect sizes to analyze continuous variables. Results: This study encompassed six RCTs involving 2,193 patients. Semorinemab were more effective than placebo in MMSE and ADAS-Cog scores (MDs ranging between 0.52 and 3.21; MDs ranging between 0.17 and 3.30). Placebo showed relatively good efficacy according to SUCRA ranking on change in CDR-SB and ADCS-ADL scores (75.7 and 79.5%). Tilavonemab and Semorinemab exhibited efficacy similar to that of a placebo in the analysis of the two indicators. Tilavonemab showed a lower incidence of AE, SAE, fall, and urinary tract infections than placebo, and the differences were statistically significant. Most safety analysis results showed no statistical difference. Conclusion: The results indicated that anti-tau protein monoclonal antibodies, such as Semorinemab and Tilavonemab, showed promise in terms of efficacy and safety for managing AD. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings, assess long-term effects, and refine treatment protocols. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#myprospero, CRD42024583388.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseaseanti-tau protein monoclonal antibodiesefficacynetwork meta-analysisrandomized controlled trialssafety

Identifiers

PMID39945003
PMCPMC11814219

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.