BACKGROUND:Bapineuzumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta (Abeta) monoclonal antibody for the potential treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD), was evaluated in a multiple ascending dose, safety, and efficacy study in mild to moderate AD. METHODS: The study enrolled 234 patients, randomly assigned to IV bapineuzumab or placebo in 4 dose cohorts (0.15, 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 mg/kg). Patients received 6 infusions, 13 weeks apart, with final assessments at week 78. The prespecified primary efficacy analysis in the modified intent-to-treat population assumed linear decline and compared treatment differences within dose cohorts on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive and Disability Assessment for Dementia. Exploratory analyses combined dose cohorts and did not assume a specific pattern of decline. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the primary efficacy analysis. Exploratory analyses showed potential treatment differences (p < 0.05, unadjusted for multiple comparisons) on cognitive and functional endpoints in study "completers" and APOE epsilon4 noncarriers. Reversible vasogenic edema, detected on brain MRI in 12/124 (9.7%) bapineuzumab-treated patients, was more frequent in higher dose groups and APOE epsilon4 carriers. Six vasogenic edema patients were asymptomatic; 6 experienced transient symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Primary efficacy outcomes in this phase 2 trial were not significant. Potential treatment differences in the exploratory analyses support further investigation of bapineuzumab in phase 3 with special attention to APOE epsilon4 carrier status. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: Due to varying doses and a lack of statistical precision, this Class II ascending dose trial provides insufficient evidence to support or refute a benefit of bapineuzumab.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Bapineuzumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta (Abeta) monoclonal antibody for the potential treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD), was evaluated in a multiple ascending dose, safety, and efficacy study in mild to moderate AD. METHODS: The study enrolled 234 patients, randomly assigned to IV bapineuzumab or placebo in 4 dose cohorts (0.15, 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 mg/kg). Patients received 6 infusions, 13 weeks apart, with final assessments at week 78. The prespecified primary efficacy analysis in the modified intent-to-treat population assumed linear decline and compared treatment differences within dose cohorts on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive and Disability Assessment for Dementia. Exploratory analyses combined dose cohorts and did not assume a specific pattern of decline. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the primary efficacy analysis. Exploratory analyses showed potential treatment differences (p < 0.05, unadjusted for multiple comparisons) on cognitive and functional endpoints in study "completers" and APOE epsilon4 noncarriers. Reversible vasogenic edema, detected on brain MRI in 12/124 (9.7%) bapineuzumab-treated patients, was more frequent in higher dose groups and APOE epsilon4 carriers. Six vasogenic edemapatients were asymptomatic; 6 experienced transient symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Primary efficacy outcomes in this phase 2 trial were not significant. Potential treatment differences in the exploratory analyses support further investigation of bapineuzumab in phase 3 with special attention to APOE epsilon4 carrier status. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: Due to varying doses and a lack of statistical precision, this Class II ascending dose trial provides insufficient evidence to support or refute a benefit of bapineuzumab.
Authors: F Bard; C Cannon; R Barbour; R L Burke; D Games; H Grajeda; T Guido; K Hu; J Huang; K Johnson-Wood; K Khan; D Kholodenko; M Lee; I Lieberburg; R Motter; M Nguyen; F Soriano; N Vasquez; K Weiss; B Welch; P Seubert; D Schenk; T Yednock Journal: Nat Med Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: J-M Orgogozo; S Gilman; J-F Dartigues; B Laurent; M Puel; L C Kirby; P Jouanny; B Dubois; L Eisner; S Flitman; B F Michel; M Boada; A Frank; C Hock Journal: Neurology Date: 2003-07-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: P J Neumann; S S Araki; A Arcelus; A Longo; G Papadopoulos; K S Kosik; K M Kuntz; A Bhattacharjya Journal: Neurology Date: 2001-09-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: E Vanmechelen; H Vanderstichele; P Davidsson; E Van Kerschaver; B Van Der Perre; M Sjögren; N Andreasen; K Blennow Journal: Neurosci Lett Date: 2000-05-05 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: James A R Nicoll; David Wilkinson; Clive Holmes; Phil Steart; Hannah Markham; Roy O Weller Journal: Nat Med Date: 2003-03-17 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: D Boche; E Zotova; R O Weller; S Love; J W Neal; R M Pickering; D Wilkinson; C Holmes; J A R Nicoll Journal: Brain Date: 2008-10-25 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Alena V Savonenko; Tatiana Melnikova; Andrew Hiatt; Tong Li; Paul F Worley; Juan C Troncoso; Phil C Wong; Don L Price Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2011-09-21 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Mark R Trusheim; Breon Burgess; Sean Xinghua Hu; Theresa Long; Steven D Averbuch; Aiden A Flynn; Alfons Lieftucht; Abhijit Mazumder; Judy Milloy; Peter M Shaw; David Swank; Jian Wang; Ernst R Berndt; Federico Goodsaid; Michael C Palmer Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2011-10-31 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Anika M S Hartz; Björn Bauer; Emma L B Soldner; Andrea Wolf; Sandra Boy; Roland Backhaus; Ivan Mihaljevic; Ulrich Bogdahn; Hans H Klünemann; Gerhard Schuierer; Felix Schlachetzki Journal: Stroke Date: 2011-11-23 Impact factor: 7.914