Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41872889›Full record

ArticleTrials2026

Elucidating the phase 1 trial experience among study participants following completion of the INTERCEPT-AD study of sabirnetug (ACU193) for early Alzheimer's disease: a qualitative interview study.

Elizabeth Merikle, Carrie Presnall, Todd Feaster, Robyn Moxon, Eric Siemers, Diana Kerwin, Stephanie Cline

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase I
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Elizabeth MerikleClinical Outcomes Assessment Consultant, Parksville, BC, Canada.
Carrie PresnallIndependent Researcher, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Todd FeasterAcumen Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Newton, MA, USA.
Robyn MoxonAcumen Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Newton, MA, USA.
Eric SiemersAcumen Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Newton, MA, USA.
Diana KerwinKerwin Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Stephanie ClineAcumen Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Newton, MA, USA. scline@acumenpharm.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecruitment and retention remain persistent challenges in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials, particularly as studies increasingly focus on earlier disease stages and require longer participation and more invasive procedures. Understanding how trial enrollment and participation are experienced is critical to improving acceptability and sustaining engagement. Qualitative interviews conducted alongside clinical trials offer an opportunity to capture participant and study partner perspectives on the trial experience. In INTERCEPT-AD, a phase 1 trial evaluating safety and tolerability of the Aβ oligomer-selective monoclonal antibody sabirnetug (ACU193) among participants with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD), semi-structured qualitative interviews concerning trial experience were conducted with a subset of participants and their study partners.

methodsParticipant/study partner dyads completed qualitative interviews following the final study visit. A semi-structured interview guide elicited descriptions regarding motivations for participating, enrollment decision-making, and positive and negative aspects of participation. Principles of applied qualitative thematic analysis guided the qualitative analyses. Exploratory analyses examined how factors differ by participant gender.

resultsTwenty-eight participants (64.2% female) and their study partners were interviewed, representing 43% of the trial population (n = 65; 53.8% female). Participants and study partner dyads described varied pathways to trial awareness and enrollment decision-making, including both independent and family-involved decisions. Motivations for participation reflected anticipated personal benefit as well as altruistic goals. While interactions with study staff were viewed positively, dyads reported meaningful burdens related to travel, time commitment, and study procedures, with cognitive testing more frequently described as challenging than invasive procedures. A recurring theme was the desire for clearer communication and greater access to study-related information, including test results and treatment assignment. Exploratory analyses suggested that perceived burden and enrollment decision-making may differ by participant gender.

conclusionsStudy findings suggest opportunities to enhance the AD trial experience by addressing trial-related burdens and logistical aspects of participation. Exploratory gender analyses yielded additional insight into the patient trial experience but should be further examined along with race/ethnicity and study partner characteristics to enhance clinical study design and execution.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionPatient SelectionResearch SubjectsAgedAged, 80 and overCognitionFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMotivationQualitative ResearchSex FactorsTreatment OutcomeACU193Alzheimer’s diseaseClinical trial participationGenderPatient perspectivePhase 1 clinical trialQualitative interviewSabirnetug

Identifiers

PMID41872889
PMCPMC13130801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.