ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease reports
Uptake and safety profile of anti-amyloid immunotherapies in routine clinical practice.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports. 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Anti-amyloid immunotherapies are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease; however, the adoption and safety profile of these medications in routine clinical practice have not been described. Objective: To describe the adoption and safety profile of anti-amyloid immunotherapies in routine clinical practice. Methods: This was a retrospective observational cohort study using target trial emulation methods. The data source was nationwide electronic health record data from Epic Cosmos. The primary exposure was the first prescription of anti-amyloid immunotherapy versus the active comparator of oral dementia therapy (acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (AChEI) or memantine, selected to minimize bias by baseline health status and disease severity). The primary end point was time to first nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Propensity score overlap weighting was used to balance baseline demographic and clinical characteristics across treatment groups. Results: Between July 1, 2023 and January 1, 2025, 2616 patients (median age 74.8 years [IQR 69.8-78.8]; 53.9% female) were prescribed anti-amyloid immunotherapy (with or without AChEI/memantine), and 1,065,192 patients (median age 79.98 [IQR 73.6-85.6], 57.9% female) were prescribed AChEI/memantine alone. In total, 401 patients prescribed anti-amyloid immunotherapy and 274,470 patients prescribed AChEI/memantine were assessed for safety endpoints. Compared with AChEI/memantine, the analysis did not detect a statistically significant association between prescription of anti-amyloid immunotherapy and ICH (owHR 0.73 [95% CI 0.10-5.12]). Conclusions: The study did not detect a statistically significant association between prescription of anti-amyloid immunotherapy and ICH. The small treated cohort and low event count yielded imprecise estimates; these findings do not confirm safety and cannot exclude a clinically important increase in risk.
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.