ReviewNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2026
Amyloid-beta-targeting monoclonal antibodies in early Alzheimer's disease: a cochrane review summary and appraisal for the neurological community.
Review in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeven amyloid-beta-targeting monoclonal antibodies have been trialled in early Alzheimer's disease. They differ in epitope and in how much plaque they clear; only two have traditional approval. A 2026 Cochrane Review pooled all seven as one class. We ask what that average tells us about any one drug.
methodsWe summarise the review in mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease and report its estimates and certainty ratings unchanged. Our appraisal sits in a separate section and draws on the pivotal trials and regulatory assessments.
resultsSeventeen trials (20,342 participants) were included. At 18 months the pooled standardised mean difference was -0.11 (95 % confidence interval -0.16 to -0.06) for cognition and -0.12 (-0.24 to 0.00) for dementia severity; three functional scales favoured treatment (0.09 to 0.23). Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with oedema affected 119 versus 12 per 1,000 (risk ratio 10.02, 7.49 to 13.41). Four of the seven antibodies cleared no plaque or cleared it incompletely, so the pooled result cannot test whether clearance produces benefit. In the two approved agents dementia severity differed by 0.45 and 0.67 points, larger than the class average but below thresholds of clinical importance.
conclusionsThe class average is not an estimate for any single agent. These antibodies clear amyloid and produce small differences on trial scales at 18 months, against a tenfold rise in amyloid-related oedema. Counselling should rest on agent-specific figures and a biomarker-confirmed diagnosis, and should weigh APOE ε4 genotype and antithrombotic use before the first infusion.
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.