ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2026
Beyond Amyloid: Systemic and Brain Frailty as Determinants of Response to Anti-Amyloid Therapy in Alzheimer's Disease-A Conceptual Review.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anti-amyloid therapy (AAT) with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) modestly slow cognitive and functional decline in early Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, both the magnitude of clinical benefit and the risk of treatment-related complications vary substantially even among patients with similar biomarker profiles. Frailty, both brain and systemic, is highly prevalent in older adults with AD and affects a large proportion of those considered for AAT. Despite this, it has been largely absent from current decision frameworks. Brain frailty, defined by structural and microvascular damage (e.g., small-vessel disease, microbleeds, and atrophy), limits the clinical benefit of amyloid clearance and increases susceptibility to amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. In contrast, systemic frailty, reflecting reduced physiological reserve, mainly affects treatment tolerance and recovery from adverse events. In this narrative, conceptual review, we synthesize evidence that both forms of frailty act as biologically grounded modifiers of AAT efficacy and safety and may limit the clinical benefit while increasing susceptibility to complications and decompensation. Importantly, the precise empirical thresholds at which frailty begins to exert harmful effects remain unknown. We further outline how MRI-based markers of brain frailty, combined with brief systemic frailty measures, could support risk stratification, patient selection, monitoring intensity, and shared decision-making, including deferring treatment when the benefit-risk balance is unfavorable, while avoiding exclusion of patients who may still benefit. Taken together, we propose that future studies should incorporate frailty measures and perform precise assessments of both brain and systemic frailty, as this may improve patient stratification and better characterize the effects of AAT.
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.