MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4414680807 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.27.25336656

Oral Blarcamesine Phase IIb/III Trial Confirms Identified Precision Medicine Patient Population – Significant Broad Clinical and Quality of Life Improvements for Early Alzheimer’s Disease Patients

2025· preprint· en· W4414680807 sur OpenAlexaff
Stephen Macfarlane, Timo Grimmer, Ken Teo, Terence J. O’Brien, Mark Woodward, Jennifer Grunfeld, Alastair Mander, Bruce J. Brew, Philip Morris, C Short, Susan Kurrle, Rosalyn Lai, Sneha Bharadwaj, Peter Drysdale, Jonathan Sturm, Simon J.G. Lewis, Chris Kalafatis, Nicholas Mannering, Josephine Emer MacSweeney, Stephen Pearson, Craig Evans, Neel S. Bhatt, Jennifer Lynch, P. L. J. Dautzenberg, Niels D. Prins, Lutz Froelich, Paweł Tacik, Oliver Peters, Alexandre Henri‐Bhargava, Stephen Pasternak, Andrew Frank, Howard Chertkow, Ging‐Yuek Robin Hsiung, Maria Carmela Tartaglia, Sharon Cohen, Olivier Courrèges, Luca M. Villa, Elizabeth Gordón, Nicolas Guizard, Jeffrey B. Edwards, Terrie Kellmeyer, Juan Carlos López-Talavera, David Gould, Wolfgang Liedtke, Kun Jin, William R Chezem, Christopher U. Missling, Audrey Gabelle, Marwan N. Sabbagh

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Établissements canadiensDynacast (Canada)Toronto Western HospitalUniversity of British Columbia HospitalBruyèreBaycrest HospitalParkwood InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaIsland Health
Organismes subventionnairesGrifolsNovo NordiskEisaiBiogenTauRx PharmaceuticalsAlnylam PharmaceuticalsEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
Mots-clésPrecision medicineDiseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Clinical trialPlaceboNeurologyPopulationRandomized controlled trialBiomarker

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract IMPORTANCE There are no approved oral disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) with the ability to prolong time in a stable disease state and with clinically meaningful outcomes clear to patients and caregivers. DESIGN The Phase IIb/III ANAVEX2-73-AD-004 study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 48-week trial with prespecified gene or GWAS identified genetic variant populations related to the mechanism of the pharmacological intervention. OBJECTIVE Providing evidence of improved Precision Medicine neurology clinical treatment responses with optimal blarcamesine dose for up to ∼70% of AD patients within prespecified SIGMAR1 (ABCLEAR1) and GWAS identified COL24A1 (ABCLEAR2) and SIGMAR1/COL24A1 (ABCLEAR3) non-missense gene populations. Describing once-daily, oral therapeutic intervention of blarcamesine in early AD, with a differentiated upstream and constitutional mechanism of action by enhancing autophagy through SIGMAR1 activation and restoration of cellular homeostasis. SETTING Multicenter - 52 medical research centers/hospitals in 5 countries. INTERVENTION 508 participants with Early AD (Stage 3) were randomized to receive blarcamesine (n = 338) oral capsules once daily either in medium dose group (30 mg) or in high dose group (50 mg) or placebo (n = 170) for 48 weeks. An open-label-extension study ATTENTION-AD, continued for up to 192 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES Further improved clinical and biomarker outcomes of the ABCLEAR2 and ABCLEAR3 populations were accretive to the previously reported intent-to-treat (ITT) and prespecified ABCLEAR1 populations. The co-primary cognitive and functional outcomes were assessed as changes in ADAS-Cog13 and ADCS-ADL from baseline to 48 weeks. The outcomes include the secondary outcome CDR-SB as well as patient assessed clinical outcomes CGI-I, NPI-Q and QoL-AD (Quality of Life AD Patient) as well as biomarkers global brain volume changes measured by MRI. All clinical endpoints were analyzed using mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), and volumetric MRI scans were analyzed by general linear model. RESULTS The ITT population (mean age, 73.7 years; 225 [48.7%] women), consisted of 462 randomized participants, with ABCLEAR1 population comprising of 300 participants, ABCLEAR2 population of 336 participants and ABCLEAR3 of 222 participants. In both the ABCLEAR2 and ABCLEAR3 populations, the co-primary outcomes as well as all other clinical outcomes were statistically significant. ABCLEAR3 blarcamesine group vs. placebo at Week 48 (ADAS-Cog13 difference of −4.179 [95% CI −6.512, −1.845]; P=0.0005; ADCS-ADL difference of +3.131 [95%CI 0.720, 5.542]; P=0.0111; CDR-SB difference of −1.076 [95% CI −1.645, −0.508]; P=0.0002; QoL-AD Patient improvement from baseline of 0.334 [95% CI −1.164, 1.833] and difference of 1.848 [95% CI 0.455, 3.241]; P=0.0095). The clinical outcomes were strongest in the blarcamesine 30 mg cohort (ADAS-Cog13 difference of −4.739 [95% CI −7.370, −2.108]; P=0.0004; ADCS-ADL difference of +4.245 [95%CI 1.518, 6.972]; P=0.0024; CDR-SB difference of −1.414 [95% CI −2.054, −0.775]; P<0.0001; QoL-AD Patient improvement from baseline of 0.182 [95% CI −1.472, 1.835]; and difference of 1.651 [95% CI 0.455, 3.241]; P=0.0392). Whole brain volume loss in blarcamesine group vs. placebo was significantly further decreased from ITT population (37.6%, P=0.0019) to ABCLEAR3 population (44.5%, P=0.0019). Participants in the 30 mg group ABCLEAR3 full safety population with ≥1 serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 10 participants (12.7%) in the blarcamesine and 6 (9.1%) in the placebo group. Common TEAEs included dizziness, which was transient and mostly mild to moderate in severity. There were no deaths in the blarcamesine group and 1 in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Blarcamesine group demonstrated a balanced safety profile with no associated neuroimaging adverse events. The respective once-daily oral 30 mg blarcamesine cohort in the respective ABCLEAR1, ABCLEAR2, and ABCLEAR3 populations demonstrates further improvement of the already adequate safety profile of the ITT population and hence representing the dose with the most balanced benefit-to-risk ratio. In both ABCLEAR2 and ABCLEAR3 populations significant slowing in decline and even stabilization of clinical worsening was demonstrated. Blarcamesine group vs. placebo was 75.9% reduction in decline at 48 weeks in the total blarcamesine group and was 84.7% in the 30 mg dose group, respectively on the prespecified co-primary cognitive endpoint ADAS-Cog13 in the ABCLEAR3 population. Blarcamesine demonstrated consistently significantly improved clinical effect for all clinical endpoints, which was in accordance with significant and further reduced brain atrophy. Furthermore, a significant absolute improvement in Quality of Life (QoL-AD) scores indicating a reversal of negative trajectory for Alzheimer’s disease patients from baseline to end of trial was observed. The Phase IIb/III ANAVEX2-73-AD-004 clinical study confirmed blarcamesine’s consistent efficacy leading to improved cognitive stabilization with continued benefit in the open-label-extension study ATTENTION-AD up to 192 weeks. Evidenced by the Precision Medicine paradigm, including in a prespecified ABCLEAR1 population, a consistent significant improvement for all clinical endpoints in the ABCLEAR2 and ABCLEAR3 populations, respectively, was demonstrated. Coupled with a convenient once daily, oral pill administration, blarcamesine could represent a novel treatment option for up to ∼70% of early AD patients benefiting from further improved outcomes using directed Precision Medicine to alleviate significant medical and economic burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03790709 ; Open-label extension NCT04314934 FUNDING This work was funded by Anavex Life Sciences. Key Message Within a heterogeneous Alzheimer’s disease (AD) population, clinical utility of disease-modifying drug candidates could be enhanced via a Precision Medicine approach of treating those with target-relevant genetic profiles, excluding missense gene populations. This effective targeting could alleviate significant medical and economic burden.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,027

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,501
Tête enseignante GPT0,519
Écart entre enseignants0,018 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxiv→Même sujetHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→Travaux en français237 207→