MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112722171 · doi:10.1159/000511506

Lessons Learnt from the Second Generation of Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies Clinical Trials

2020· review· en· W3112722171 on OpenAlexaff
Angela T.H. Kwan, Saman Arfaie, Joseph Therriault, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Serge Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialMedicineMonoclonal antibodyAmyloid (mycology)AsymptomaticAntibodyInternal medicineImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disorder with complex pathophysiology that affects over 50 million people worldwide. Most drug therapies, to date, have focused on targeting the amyloid-beta (Aβ) pathway, but clinical outcomes of anti-Aβ antibodies have been unsuccessful and unable to meet their primary endpoints. Similar trends have also been observed in treatments that target the tau pathway. SUMMARY: This paper reviews recent anti-Aβ passive monotherapies, since Bapineuzumab, that have progressed to phase 3 clinical trials. Specifically, we discuss the 4 clinical trial programs of Solanezumab (targets Aβ monomers), Aducanumab (targets Aβ oligomers and plaques), Crenezumab (targets Aβ oligomers), and Gantenerumab (targets Aβ fibrils) which are all exogenous monoclonal antibodies. We conclude with potential reasons for why they have not met their primary endpoints and discuss lessons learnt from these trials. Key Message: Future disease-modifying trials (DMTs) for AD should be conducted in asymptomatic, Aβ-positive individuals. Moreover, potential additive and/or synergistic benefits focusing on anti-Aβ and anti-tau drug combinations merit further investigation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.195
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive DisordersSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207