Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Monoclonal Antibodies for Cognitive Decline in Patients with Alzheimer's Disease : A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG..
BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials of anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in the treatment of early Alzheimer's disease (AD) have produced encouraging cognitive and clinical results. The purpose of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare and rank mAb drugs according to their efficacy and safety.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials testing various mAbs for the treatment of cognitive decline in patients with AD, up to March 31, 2023. R software (version 4.2.3) along with JAGS and STATA software (version 15.0) were used for statistical analysis. Odds ratio (OR) for binary variables, mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were utilized to estimate treatment effects and rank probabilities for each mAb in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes. We calculated the surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) to evaluate each mAb, with higher SUCRA values indicating better efficacy or lower likelihood of adverse events.
RESULTS: Thirty-three randomized controlled trials with a total of 21,087 patients were included in the current NMA, involving eight different mAbs. SUCRA values showed that aducanumab (87.01% and 99.37%, respectively) was the most likely to achieve the best therapeutic effect based on the changes of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) scores. Donanemab (88.50% and 99.00%, respectively) performed better than other therapies for Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and Positron Emission Tomography-Standardized Uptake Value ratio (PET-SUVr). Lecanemab (87.24%) may be the most promising way to slow down the decrease of Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) score. In the analysis of the incidence of adverse events (subjects with any treatment-emergent adverse event), gantenerumab (89.12%) had the least potential for adverse events, while lecanemab (0.79%) may cause more adverse events. Solanezumab (95.75% and 80.38%, respectively) had the lowest incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities characterized by edema and effusion (ARIA-E) and by cerebral microhemorrhages (ARIA-H) of the included immunotherapies. While SUCRA values provided a comprehensive measure of treatment efficacy, the inherent statistical uncertainty required careful analysis in clinical application.
CONCLUSION: Despite immunotherapies significantly increasing the risks of adverse events and ARIA, the data suggest that mAbs can effectively improve the cognitive function of patients with mild and moderate AD. According to the NMA, aducanumab was the most likely to achieve significant improvements in different cognitive and clinical assessments (statistically improved MMSE and CDR-SB), followed by donanemab (statistically improved ADAS-Cog, and PET-SUVr) and lecanemab (statistically improved ADCS-ADL).
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:38 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
CNS drugs - 38(2024), 3 vom: 18. März, Seite 169-192 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Qiao, Yue [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Antibodies, Monoclonal |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 08.03.2024 Date Revised 19.04.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1007/s40263-024-01067-2 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM369194934 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM369194934 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240419232358.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240302s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s40263-024-01067-2 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1380.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM369194934 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38429615 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Qiao, Yue |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Monoclonal Antibodies for Cognitive Decline in Patients with 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 08.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 19.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials of anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in the treatment of early Alzheimer's disease (AD) have produced encouraging cognitive and clinical results. The purpose of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare and rank mAb drugs according to their efficacy and safety | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials testing various mAbs for the treatment of cognitive decline in patients with AD, up to March 31, 2023. R software (version 4.2.3) along with JAGS and STATA software (version 15.0) were used for statistical analysis. Odds ratio (OR) for binary variables, mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were utilized to estimate treatment effects and rank probabilities for each mAb in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes. We calculated the surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) to evaluate each mAb, with higher SUCRA values indicating better efficacy or lower likelihood of adverse events | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Thirty-three randomized controlled trials with a total of 21,087 patients were included in the current NMA, involving eight different mAbs. SUCRA values showed that aducanumab (87.01% and 99.37%, respectively) was the most likely to achieve the best therapeutic effect based on the changes of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) scores. Donanemab (88.50% and 99.00%, respectively) performed better than other therapies for Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and Positron Emission Tomography-Standardized Uptake Value ratio (PET-SUVr). Lecanemab (87.24%) may be the most promising way to slow down the decrease of Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) score. In the analysis of the incidence of adverse events (subjects with any treatment-emergent adverse event), gantenerumab (89.12%) had the least potential for adverse events, while lecanemab (0.79%) may cause more adverse events. Solanezumab (95.75% and 80.38%, respectively) had the lowest incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities characterized by edema and effusion (ARIA-E) and by cerebral microhemorrhages (ARIA-H) of the included immunotherapies. While SUCRA values provided a comprehensive measure of treatment efficacy, the inherent statistical uncertainty required careful analysis in clinical application | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Despite immunotherapies significantly increasing the risks of adverse events and ARIA, the data suggest that mAbs can effectively improve the cognitive function of patients with mild and moderate AD. According to the NMA, aducanumab was the most likely to achieve significant improvements in different cognitive and clinical assessments (statistically improved MMSE and CDR-SB), followed by donanemab (statistically improved ADAS-Cog, and PET-SUVr) and lecanemab (statistically improved ADCS-ADL) | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 7 | |a donanemab |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Antibodies, Monoclonal |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gu, Jian |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yu, Miao |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chi, Yuewei |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ma, Ying |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t CNS drugs |d 1994 |g 38(2024), 3 vom: 18. März, Seite 169-192 |w (DE-627)NLM09374627X |x 1179-1934 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:38 |g year:2024 |g number:3 |g day:18 |g month:03 |g pages:169-192 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40263-024-01067-2 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 38 |j 2024 |e 3 |b 18 |c 03 |h 169-192 | ||