Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35129210›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2022

Public opinion regarding U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of aducanumab and potential policy responses: A nationally representative survey.

Michael J DiStefano, G Caleb Alexander, Daniel Polsky, Gerard F Anderson

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy of anti-amyloid-ß monoclonal antibody therapy in early Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael J DiStefanoDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5021-5347
G Caleb AlexanderCenter for Drug Safety and Effectiveness, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Daniel PolskyDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Gerard F AndersonDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Remote Data Enclave Core (RDEC)P30AG066587 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DANIEL E POLSKY, Jennifer L. Wolff · 2020 to 2026
$6.7M
Arnold VenturesNIA NIH HHS P30 AG066587
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite controversy among experts regarding aducanumab's approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, little is known about public opinion on this matter.

methodsWe conducted a representative survey of U.S. adults ages 35 and older to (1) determine opinions regarding aducanumab's approval, (2) identify any evidence of reputational injury to the Food and Drug Administration, and (3) explore opinions regarding policy responses available to policymakers, such as those relating to a national coverage determination by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The survey was administered online and in English and Spanish using a probability-based sample derived from the National Opinion Research Center's AmeriSpeak® panel. Selection probabilities in the panel and survey design account for differences in population distribution and expected response rates by demographic. The survey was analyzed using survey weights to adjust for selection probabilities and non-response.

resultsA total of 1025 respondents completed the survey. While approximately three-quarters of respondents were initially unfamiliar with aducanumab, respondents were less supportive of the drug's approval once given information about the drug's potential clinical and economic impact. Sixty-three percent of respondents support restricting aducanumab access to patients most likely to benefit. Seventy-one percent indicated a willingness to enroll a family member with mild Alzheimer's disease in a "waitlist"-style trial to further study aducanumab; sixty percent indicated a willingness to enroll a family member in a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Eighty-one percent agree aducanumab should be withdrawn from the market if confirmatory trials fail. The median respondent was willing to pay $1-5 in higher Part B premiums to cover aducanumab.

conclusionThese findings demonstrate support for a range of proposed policies in response to aducanumab's approval. The opinions of an informed public ought to be considered when developing policies in response to aducanumab's approval.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseasePublic OpinionAgedAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedDrug ApprovalHumansMedicarePolicySurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationaducanumabAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAlzheimer'scoverage with evidence developmentdementialong-term careMedicare

Identifiers

PMID35129210
PMCPMC9177789
OpenAlexW4210651095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.