ReviewNeurology international2026
Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies in Early Alzheimer Disease: Lecanemab and Donanemab.
Review in Neurology international, 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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAlzheimer disease (AD) causes progressive cognitive and functional loss and substantial caregiver and healthcare burden. Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies represent a shift toward biology-directed treatment in biomarker-confirmed early symptomatic AD, but modest clinical effects must be balanced against amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), intensive monitoring, and implementation burden. Heterogeneity in trial populations, endpoints, dosing, stopping rules, and follow-up complicates interpretation. This narrative review critically integrates efficacy, safety, durability, biomarker, and implementation evidence for lecanemab and donanemab while preserving study-family relationships and avoiding unsupported cross-trial superiority claims.
methodsFor this revised narrative review, a targeted PubMed/MEDLINE search covering the period from database inception was initially conducted before manuscript submission and was subsequently updated through 21 August 2026, supplemented by reference-list and citation tracking. Search terms combined Alzheimer disease with lecanemab, donanemab, anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody, ARIA, APOE, amyloid PET, open-label extension, real-world, clinical meaningfulness, implementation, and access. Sixty-two sources were purposively selected for a comprehensive narrative synthesis; no meta-analysis or formal certainty grading was performed.
resultsPivotal trials demonstrated statistically significant but modest average slowing of decline: Clarity AD showed a 0.45-point between-group difference in CDR-SB worsening at 18 months, and TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 showed a 3.25-point iADRS difference in the low/medium-tau population at 76 weeks. ARIA-E occurred in 12.6% of lecanemab-treated and 24.0% of donanemab-treated participants in the pivotal trials, with higher risk in APOE ε4 carriers. Extensions and biomarker analyses suggest persistent biological effects but are less secure for causal inference, and real-world evidence is currently more mature for lecanemab.
conclusionsBoth antibodies substantially reduce amyloid and modestly slow average clinical decline in selected patients, but neither restores lost function, greater amyloid clearance does not establish greater individual benefit, and cross-trial superiority cannot be inferred. Treatment requires biomarker-guided selection, APOE-informed risk counseling, serial MRI, infusion and ARIA-management capacity, and shared decision-making that incorporates cost, access, and patient/caregiver burden.
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.