SynthesisAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2024
Assessing clinical progression measures in Alzheimer's disease trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating amyloid-beta as a surrogate endpoint in trials of anti-amyloid-beta drugs in Alzheimer's disease: a Bayesian meta-analysis.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Pooled it
- Assessing clinical progression measures in Alzheimer's disease trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Pooled it
- Plant-mediated green nanoparticles: combining nanometal and biometabolite potential for Alzheimer's treatment.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
- Heterogeneity in the Analysis of the ALSFRS-R in ALS Clinical Trials and its Effect on the Validity and Precision of Trial Conclusions.Neurology · 2026Article
- Genetic drivers of progression in Alzheimer's disease are distinct from disease risk.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Article
- Sensitivity comparison of longitudinal cognitive function indicators of Alzheimer's disease after mild cognitive impairment: a prospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Predicting rates of cognitive and functional decline in Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- A causal deep learning approach to identifying metabolic signatures of cognitive and functional decline in alzheimer's disease.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Global trends in Alzheimer's disease randomized controlled trials: a bibliometric analysis.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2026Review
- Application of Photostimulation Therapy in Cognitive Function of Alzheimer's Disease Patients: A Scoping Review.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
- Multidomain therapy for Alzheimer's disease: a scoping review of cognitive decline trials.Molecular neurodegeneration · 2025Article
- Genetic drivers of progression in Alzheimer's disease are distinct from disease risk.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAssessing treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) relies on reliable tools for measuring AD progression. In this analysis, we evaluate the sensitivity of clinical progression measures in AD within randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with confirmed positive amyloid (Aβ+) status prior to trial enrollment.
methodsExcluding trials targeting non-cognitive symptoms, we conducted meta-analyses on progression measures from 25 selected RCTs using R version 4.2.0, along with the metafor and emmeans libraries.
resultsThe Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) demonstrated the greatest sensitivity over 12 weeks. Other cognitive measures demonstrated lower sensitivity. The integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) and Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) seemed more effective than their individual cognitive components. Neuropsychiatric measures were the least sensitive in measuring progression. DISCUSSION: Functional measures generally outperformed other measure categories. Purely cognitive domain-based measures were suboptimal for tracking early AD progression. Ideally, future measures should incorporate both cognitive and functional components to enhance sensitivity. HIGHLIGHTS: Concerns remain regarding the limitations of current outcome measures used in AD clinical trials, particularly their sensitivity in the early and preclinical stages of the disease, which hampers their reliability as indicators of AD progression. The Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) demonstrated the most substantial weighted mean change over 12 weeks, followed by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Functional measures outperformed other measure categories. Composite scores of integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale and Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes are more sensitive to change than their individual cognitive components, possibly driven by the functional components of the score. Neuropsychiatric measures analyzed in this study appeared to be the least sensitive in measuring progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.