ArticleNeurology2025
A Machine Learning Approach to Predict Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer Disease Clinical Trials.
Article in Neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Foods and Micro- and Nanoplastics: Advances in Precision Nutritional Medicine for Oral-Gut-Brain Axis Health.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Clinical impact of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative: A review of studies using ADNI data (2023 to June 2025).Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Review
- Predicting future cognitive impairment in preclinical Alzheimer's disease using multimodal imaging: a multisite machine learning study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Classification of Cognitive Status in Community-Dwelling Sarcopenic Women: A SHAP-Based Analysis of Physical Activity and Anthropometric Factors.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Incremental value of plasma biomarkers in predicting clinical decline among cognitively unimpaired older adults: Results from the A4 trial.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesAmong the participants of Alzheimer disease (AD) treatment trials, 40% do not show cognitive decline over 80 weeks of follow-up. Identifying and excluding these individuals can increase power to detect treatment effects. We aimed to develop machine learning-based predictive models to identify persons unlikely to show decline on placebo treatment over 80 weeks.
methodsWe used the data from the placebo arm of EXPEDITION3 AD clinical trial and a subpopulation from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Participants in the EXPEDITION3 trial were patients with mild dementia and biomarker evidence of amyloid burden. For this study, participants were identified as those who demonstrated clinically meaningful cognitive decline (CMCD) or cognitively stable (CS) at final visit of the trial (week 80). Machine learning-based classifiers were trained to classify participants into CMCD vs CS groups using combinations of demographics, APOE genotype, neuropsychological tests, and biomarkers (volumetric MRI). The results were developed in 70% of the EXPEDITION3 placebo sample using 5-fold cross-validation. Trained models were then used to classify the participants in an internal validation sample and an external matched sample ADNI
resultsEight hundred ninety-four of the 1,072 participants in the placebo arm of the EXPEDITION3 trial had necessary follow-up data, who were on average aged 72.7 (±7.7) years and 59% female. 55.8% of those participants showed CMCD (∼2 years younger than those without) at the final visit. In the independent validation sample within the EXPEDITION3 data, all the models showed high sensitivity and modest specificity. Positive predictive values (PPVs) of models were at least 11% higher than base prevalence of CMCD observed at the end of the trial. The subset of matched ADNI participants (ADNI DISCUSSION: Our results indicate that predictive models have the potential to improve the design of AD trials through selective inclusion and exclusion criteria based on expected cognitive decline. Such predictive models need further validation across data from different AD clinical trials.
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.