Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31470905›Full record

ReviewAlzheimer's research & therapy2019

The "rights" of precision drug development for Alzheimer's disease.

Jeffrey Cummings, Howard H Feldman, Philip Scheltens

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 127 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
127citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

127 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

67 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Jeffrey CummingsDepartment of Brain Health, School of Integrated Health Sciences, UNLV and Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, 888 West Bonneville Ave, Las Vegas, NV, 89106, USA. cumminj@ccf.org.
Howard H FeldmanDepartment of Neurosciences, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Philip ScheltensAlzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Renewal of Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE) (Phase 2) CNTN - ResubmissionP20GM109025 · NIGMS · CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION · PI JESSICA KIRKLAND CALDWELL · 2015 to 2026
$22.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM109025NIH/NIGMS P20GM109025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a high rate of failure in Alzheimer's disease (AD) drug development with 99% of trials showing no drug-placebo difference. This low rate of success delays new treatments for patients and discourages investment in AD drug development. Studies across drug development programs in multiple disorders have identified important strategies for decreasing the risk and increasing the likelihood of success in drug development programs. These experiences provide guidance for the optimization of AD drug development. The "rights" of AD drug development include the right target, right drug, right biomarker, right participant, and right trial. The right target identifies the appropriate biologic process for an AD therapeutic intervention. The right drug must have well-understood pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic features, ability to penetrate the blood-brain barrier, efficacy demonstrated in animals, maximum tolerated dose established in phase I, and acceptable toxicity. The right biomarkers include participant selection biomarkers, target engagement biomarkers, biomarkers supportive of disease modification, and biomarkers for side effect monitoring. The right participant hinges on the identification of the phase of AD (preclinical, prodromal, dementia). Severity of disease and drug mechanism both have a role in defining the right participant. The right trial is a well-conducted trial with appropriate clinical and biomarker outcomes collected over an appropriate period of time, powered to detect a clinically meaningful drug-placebo difference, and anticipating variability introduced by globalization. We lack understanding of some critical aspects of disease biology and drug action that may affect the success of development programs even when the "rights" are adhered to. Attention to disciplined drug development will increase the likelihood of success, decrease the risks associated with AD drug development, enhance the ability to attract investment, and make it more likely that new therapies will become available to those with or vulnerable to the emergence of AD.

Indexed as

Drug DevelopmentPrecision MedicineAlzheimer DiseaseBiomarkersHumansResearch DesignBiomarkersAlzheimer’s diseaseBiomarkersClinical trialsDrug development

Identifiers

PMID31470905
PMCPMC6717388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.