Comparative efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of donanemab, lecanemab, aducanumab and lithium on cognitive function in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease : A systematic review and network meta-analysis
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved..
BACKGROUND: The comparative clinical utility of the disease-modifying treatments for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease that are approved or under review by the Food and Drug Administration (i.e., donanemab, lecanemab and aducanumab), and lithium, which is a potential disease-modifying agent for this condition, remains elusive.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the efficacy on cognitive decline, tolerability and acceptability of these drugs in this condition.
METHODS: We systematically searched in MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINHAL and ClinicalTrials,gov for randomized controlled trials from their inception to 7 November 2023, and then performed a random-effect network meta-analysis.
RESULTS: The analysis included 8 randomized placebo-controlled trials with 6547 participants. On the Mini-Mental State Examination, lithium significantly outperformed donanemab, aducanumab and placebo. On the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale, the efficacy of all active drugs was significantly higher than placebo. In addition, in the Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes, the efficacy of donanemab and lecanemab was significantly higher than placebo. Compared to placebo, donanemab and lecanemab were significantly less acceptable and tolerable. Aducanumab was also less well tolerated compared to placebo. There were no significant differences in the other comparisons.
CONCLUSION: Although it is yet to be determined which is more effective between lithium or lecanemab or donanemab, lithium may be more effective than aducanumab. Aducanumab, lecanemab and donanemab do not appear to differ in their effectiveness on cognitive function. Low-dose lithium may be safer than aducanumab, lecanemab and donanemab.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:94 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Ageing research reviews - 94(2024) vom: 20. Feb., Seite 102203 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Terao, Itsuki [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
105J35OE21 |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 14.02.2024 Date Revised 14.02.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.arr.2024.102203 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM367436752 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM367436752 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240214233137.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240123s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.arr.2024.102203 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1293.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM367436752 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38253184 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1568-1637(24)00021-7 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Terao, Itsuki |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparative efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of donanemab, lecanemab, aducanumab and lithium on cognitive function in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease |b A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 14.02.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 14.02.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: The comparative clinical utility of the disease-modifying treatments for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease that are approved or under review by the Food and Drug Administration (i.e., donanemab, lecanemab and aducanumab), and lithium, which is a potential disease-modifying agent for this condition, remains elusive | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the efficacy on cognitive decline, tolerability and acceptability of these drugs in this condition | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: We systematically searched in MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINHAL and ClinicalTrials,gov for randomized controlled trials from their inception to 7 November 2023, and then performed a random-effect network meta-analysis | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: The analysis included 8 randomized placebo-controlled trials with 6547 participants. On the Mini-Mental State Examination, lithium significantly outperformed donanemab, aducanumab and placebo. On the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale, the efficacy of all active drugs was significantly higher than placebo. In addition, in the Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes, the efficacy of donanemab and lecanemab was significantly higher than placebo. Compared to placebo, donanemab and lecanemab were significantly less acceptable and tolerable. Aducanumab was also less well tolerated compared to placebo. There were no significant differences in the other comparisons | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Although it is yet to be determined which is more effective between lithium or lecanemab or donanemab, lithium may be more effective than aducanumab. Aducanumab, lecanemab and donanemab do not appear to differ in their effectiveness on cognitive function. Low-dose lithium may be safer than aducanumab, lecanemab and donanemab | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Aducanumab | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Alzheimer’s disease | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Donanemab | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Lecanemab | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Lithium | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-analysis | |
| 650 | 7 | |a donanemab |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a lecanemab |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 12PYH0FTU9 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a aducanumab |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 105J35OE21 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Lithium |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 9FN79X2M3F |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kodama, Wakako |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Ageing research reviews |d 2002 |g 94(2024) vom: 20. Feb., Seite 102203 |w (DE-627)NLM119138735 |x 1872-9649 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:94 |g year:2024 |g day:20 |g month:02 |g pages:102203 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2024.102203 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 94 |j 2024 |b 20 |c 02 |h 102203 | ||