2/n Many of these questions can be answered with existing RCT data but have not been reported by trial sponsors in peer-reviewed journals. Others may require RCTs with specific design features to test whether these are disease modifying treatments. Both incomplete & selective
3/n reporting of RCT results as well as statistically inappropriate interpretation of existing data undermine the validity of these carefully run & challenging experiments in human patients in trial centers across the world. We specify three key questions in assessing these Rx
4/n Were statistical analyses appropriate and did they support efficacy?
5/n Do reported treatment effects outweigh safety concerns?
6/n Do the data convincingly demonstrate disease course modification, suggesting that increasing clinical benefits beyond the duration of the trials are likely?
7/n The advent of a new class of licensed drugs for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease, particularly with the promise of disease course modification, represents an exciting and long-anticipated milestone for patients, caregivers, and their doctors. However, with the limited
8/n data that has been made available from clinical trials, questions over biases due to unblinding and differential drop out, as well as concerns about safety and clinical and cost-effectiveness remain. These must be addressed by regulators and payors when making approval
9/n decisions and by clinicians & patients when treatments are licensed. Hope & desperation for a treatment are not good reasons to drive such impactful decisions. We propose that attention to these three pertinent questions can guide an informed & evidence-based consideration
10/n of this important class of drugs.
A special thank you to Ms. Batool Rizvi @neurobatool for the graphical abstract in this publication.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/n One of my favorite chapters is 6 ‘An Unlikely Trio’. Dr. Subbarow was one of the original ascetic-scientists, pursuing science as an end in itself rather than as a means to fame, wealth or adulation. I learned about him from my own scientist parents & through 👇
2/n this comic book. The cover illustration shows him being stopped by a cop who has spotted blood from the trunk of his car. He had to procure raw liver from the butcher’s to take back to his lab and extract folic acid which eventually led to the cure for pernicious anemia!
3/n The colorimteric method for estimating phosphorous in tissue that you reference in the book is now called the Fiske-Subbarow method & still used in clinical lab testing of patient samples. Subbarow’s underplaying of his own role in developing this technique is well known & as
1/n Good point, Mike. I can use #solanezumab as a case study in selective reporting of RCT trial results which does not serve patient’s interests. Sola was discontinued despite pooled results from 2 ph-3 trials suggesting that ‘mild’ (but not ‘moderate’) stage #Alzheimer patients
2/n may benefit. But a 3rd ph-3 trial in only ‘mild’ AD was clearly negative. Presumed reason was that the Rx did not lower brain amyloid levels enough. Lilly published the MRI findings from these studies looking at brain volume changes. They considered these results important to
3/n report because they noted that “Rates of whole brain volume & ventricular volume changes are sensitive markers of neurodegeneration & used as biomarker outcome measures in trials of potential disease‐modifying therapies.” tinyurl.com/33a7dkh3 They also reported on the
1/n Thoughts on Neurofilament Light (NfL) as a neurodegeneration biomarker. I expect to hear a lot on it in the upcoming #Tofersen Adcom. @US_FDA refers to it as a promising biomarker of neurodegeneration in several diseases at the Relyvrio #ALS approval👇@ProfRobHoward@pash22
2/n This raises an important question- if decreasing NfL levels are associated with clinical benefit outcomes in #ALS, wouldn’t increasing levels associated with worsening clinical outcomes and/or adverse events in #Alzheimer’s be similarly meaningful? Unfortunately these results
3/n have not been published for #aducanumab or #lecanemab. But they have for #donanemab by @LillyPad in phase-2 where accelerated loss of brain volume seen relative to placebo is associated with Increase in NfL levels. Increase in NFL is also significantly associated with faster
2/n I have long believed that NfL, a marker of neurodegeneration, will track with accelerated brain atrophy in amyloid lowering Rx including #donanemab👇 This indeed appears to be the case. NfL shows significant correlation with change in whole brain volume (R = –0.1710; P =0.03)
3/n Importantly, increase in plasma NfL levels are associated with less slowing in the primary endpoint iADRS scores at week 76 ie worse clinical outcomes (R = –0.182 [95% CI, –0.322 to –0.035];P = 0.02). Caveat; I am always worried if I am interpreting the negative R correctly.
2/ "The FDA approved aducanumab via its Accelerated Approval Pathway. This means a licence can be granted based on a drug’s effect on a biological marker of disease, rather than its proven ability to improve people’s day-to-day lives. This meant the FDA was able to consider
3/ #aducanumab’s effect on amyloid levels in the brain, rather than how it affected people’s memory and thinking. The EMA does not have a similar pathway to approval. Under its pathway, its committee considered whether the trial results showed evidence that the drug