ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)
Recruitment and eligibility in a Phase 1 early Alzheimer's disease trial of Sabirnetug.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recruitment and eligibility in a Phase 1 early Alzheimer's disease trial of Sabirnetug.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHistorically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups may face a higher risk and burden of dementia but continue to be underrepresented in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical research. Recent efforts have been insufficient to identify and address race-related disparities in recruitment and eligibility for AD clinical trials.
methodsINTERCEPT-AD was a Phase 1 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, first-in-human study of sabirnetug (ACU193) in participants with early symptomatic AD (mild cognitive impairment [MCI] or mild dementia due to AD). Participants were referred through seven site-selected recruitment strategies across 17 study sites in the United States (June 2021-January 2023). Numbers of pre-screened (
resultsLocal site databases were used at 13 of 17 sites (76%) and accounted for the most screened ( DISCUSSION: Diverse recruitment tactics, customized to capabilities of study sites and patient populations, may be more successful in recruiting diverse populations than a one-size-fits-all approach. Although a diverse pool of potential participants was screened, a less diverse group was enrolled, largely due to race- and ethnicity-related disparities in screening eligibility rates. Further investigation is needed to assess equitable screening methods for AD clinical trials. Highlights: Site databases recruited the most screened and enrolled participants.Diverse participants were primarily recruited from site databases.The diversity of enrolled participants was lower than screened participants.More ineligible participants were from diverse racial and ethnic groups.No approach was observed to be a one-size-fits-all method to recruit and enroll a diverse pool of participants.
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.