Change in Digital Cognitive Test Performance between Solanezumab and Placebo Groups in Preclinical Alzheimer's Disease: Secondary Analyses from the A4 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary results from the Anti-Amyloid in Asymptomatic Alzheimer's disease Study (A4) suggested no benefit of solanezumab on its primary cognitive outcome, a composite of paper and pencil tests (the Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite; PACC). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether change in cognitive performance, assessed using the Computerized Cognitive Composite (C3) summary score and C3 individual tests, differed between treatment groups over 240 weeks, differed based on baseline Aβ burden, and tracked with PACC decline. DESIGN: Longitudinal analysis of cognitive change over 240 weeks on the C3 Summary Score and C3 individual tests between participants randomly assigned to solanezumab at a dose of up to 1600 mg intravenously every 4 weeks versus placebo. SETTING: The A4 study took place at 67 sites in Australia, Canada, Japan and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Cognitively unimpaired older adults (n=1117, Mean Age=71.9, 60.7% female) with elevated brain amyloid levels on 18F-florbetapir positron-emission tomography (PET) at baseline (n=549 in the solanezumab group; n=568 in the placebo group). MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed the C3 battery and PACC every 6 months. The C3 Summary Score combines the Cogstate Brief Battery (CBB)-One Card Learning, the Behavioral Pattern Separation (BPS) Test- Object- Lure Discrimination Index, and the Face Name Associative Memory Exam (FNAME)- Face-Name Matching. RESULTS: Change on the C3 Summary Score was moderately correlated with change on the PACC (Spearman's corr=0.53, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.57; p<0.001). At 240 weeks, mean change in the C3 Summary Score did not differ between groups; +0.24 in the solanezumab group and +0.27 in the placebo group (mean difference= -0.02; 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.08; p = 0.650). Lack of a treatment effect was similarly observed across most individual C3 tests. Performance on the C3 tests were influenced by level of amyloid burden, where higher levels were associated with worse performance. CONCLUSION: This study provides corroborating evidence that solanezumab does not slow cognitive decline in preclinical AD as exhibited with a computerized cognitive assessment with some evidence that solanezumab may exacerbate cognition on select digital outcomes. This study also provides important information that amyloid related cognitive change manifests differently on individual C3 tests.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".