Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29201996›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)2017

A randomized, exploratory molecular imaging study targeting amyloid β with a novel 8-OH quinoline in Alzheimer's disease: The PBT2-204 IMAGINE study.

Victor L Villemagne, Christopher C Rowe, Kevin J Barnham, Robert Cherny, Michael Woodward, Svetlana Bozinosvski, Olivier Salvado, Pierrick Bourgeat, Keyla Perez, Christopher Fowler and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Copper homeostasis and cuproptosis in Alzheimer's disease (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Novel Therapeutic Approaches for Alzheimer's Disease: An Updated Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Victor L VillemagneDepartment of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (Research), Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Christopher C RoweDepartment of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (Research), Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Kevin J BarnhamThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Robert ChernyThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Michael WoodwardMedical and Cognitive Research Unit, Aged Care and Residential Services, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Svetlana BozinosvskiDepartment of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (Research), Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Olivier SalvadoHealth and Biosecurity, CSIRO, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Pierrick BourgeatHealth and Biosecurity, CSIRO, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Keyla PerezThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Christopher FowlerThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Alan RembachThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Paul MaruffThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Craig RitchiePsychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Rudy TanziGenetics and Aging Research Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Colin L MastersThe Florey Institute, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe are developing a second generation 8-OH quinoline (2-(dimethylamino) methyl-5, 7-dichloro-8-hydroxyquinoline [PBT2, Prana Biotechnology]) for targeting amyloid β (Aβ) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). In an earlier phase IIa, 3 month trial, PBT2 lowered cerebrospinal fluid Aβ by 13% and improved cognition (executive function) in a dose-related fashion in early AD. We, therefore, sought to learn whether PBT2 could alter the Aβ-PET signal in subjects with prodromal or mild AD, in an exploratory randomized study over a 12-month phase in a double-blind and a 12-month open label extension phase trial design.

methodsFor inclusion, the usual clinical criteria for prodromal or probable AD, Mini-Mental State Examination ≥20, and global Pittsburgh compound B (PiB)-PET standardized uptake volume ratio (SUVR) >1.7 were used. As this was an exploratory study, we included contemporaneous matched control data from the Australian Imaging Biomarker and Lifestyle Study (AIBL). Other measures included fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging volumetrics, blood Aβ biomarkers, and cognition and function.

resultsForty subjects completed the first 12-month double-blind phase (placebo = 15, PBT2 = 25), and 27 subjects completed the 12-month open label extension phase (placebo = 11, PBT2 = 16). Overall, PTB2 250 mg/day was safe and well tolerated. The mean PiB-PET SUVR at baseline was 2.51 ± 0.59. After adjusting for baseline SUVR, in the double-blind phase, the placebo group showed a nonsignificant decline in PiB-PET SUVR, whereas the PBT2 group declined significantly ( DISCUSSION: There was no significant difference between PBT2 and controls at 12 months, likely due to the large individual variances over a relatively small number of subjects. PBT2 was associated with a significant 3% PiB-PET SUVR decline in the double-blind phase and a stabilization of SUVR in the open-label phase. From this exploratory study, we have learned that the entry criterion of SUVR should have been set at ≥ 1.5 and <2.0, where we know from the AIBL study that subjects in this band are accumulating Aβ in a linear fashion and that subjects who withdrew from this type of study have much higher SUVRs, which if not taken into account, could distort the final results. Because of large individual variations in SUVR, future studies of PBT2 will require larger numbers of subjects (n > 90 per arm) over a longer period (18 months or more). Further evaluation of higher doses of PBT2 in earlier stages of AD is warranted.

trial registrationACTRN 12611001008910 and ACTRN 12613000777796.

Indexed as

Alzheimer's diseaseAβ-amyloid PET molecular imagingBiomarkers for Alzheimer's diseaseClinical trial designNovel 8-OH quinolineRandomised control trial

Identifiers

PMID29201996
PMCPMC5702880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.