ReviewBJPsych open2026
Efficacy, safety and policy implications of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer's disease: protocol for a living systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in BJPsych open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDementia affects approximately 6-13% of adults aged 65 years and older, with Alzheimer's disease accounting for most cases. Established symptomatic therapies, including acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine, provide limited benefit and do not modify disease progression. Multiple monoclonal antibodies (mABs) targeting different amyloid-β species have been developed as potential disease-modifying therapies; because some agents have entered clinical use whereas others remain investigational, a continuously updated synthesis of their efficacy and safety is needed.
aimsTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of all anti-amyloid mABs for adults with Alzheimer's disease, using a living systematic review and meta-analysis.
methodWe will conduct a living systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and the PRISMA extension for living systematic reviews. Randomised controlled trials comparing any approved or investigational anti-amyloid mAB with placebo, standard care or active comparators will be included. Searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform will be updated every 6 months. Meta-analyses will be conducted separately for each antibody molecule using random-effects models. Critical outcomes include global clinical change and disease severity, cognitive abilities, functional ability and dependency, and safety (serious adverse events, treatment discontinuation and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities). Important outcomes include neuropsychiatric symptoms, quality of life and health system outcomes. Certainty of evidence will be assessed using the methodology Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
resultsThis article describes a protocol; therefore, no review findings are available at this stage.
conclusionsThis living systematic review will provide an up-to-date synthesis of the benefits and harms of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies to inform clinical decision-making and health-system planning in Alzheimer's disease.
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.