Cargando…

Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of heterogeneity in disease progression for detecting treatment effects in Alzheimer disease (AD) trials, using a simulation study. METHODS: Individuals with an abnormal amyloid PET scan, diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or dementia, baseline Mini-Mental...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jutten, Roos J., Sikkes, Sietske A.M., Van der Flier, Wiesje M., Scheltens, Philip, Visser, Pieter Jelle, Tijms, Betty M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205463/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34550903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012022
_version_ 1783708512650526720
author Jutten, Roos J.
Sikkes, Sietske A.M.
Van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Scheltens, Philip
Visser, Pieter Jelle
Tijms, Betty M.
author_facet Jutten, Roos J.
Sikkes, Sietske A.M.
Van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Scheltens, Philip
Visser, Pieter Jelle
Tijms, Betty M.
author_sort Jutten, Roos J.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of heterogeneity in disease progression for detecting treatment effects in Alzheimer disease (AD) trials, using a simulation study. METHODS: Individuals with an abnormal amyloid PET scan, diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or dementia, baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≥24, global Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) score of 0.5, and ≥1 follow-up cognitive assessment were selected from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database (n = 302, age 73 ± 6.7; 44% female; 16.1 ± 2.7 years of education; 69% APOE ε4 carrier). We simulated a clinical trial by randomly assigning individuals to a “placebo” and “treatment” group and subsequently computed group differences on the CDR–sum of boxes (CDR-SB), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale–cognitive subscale–13 and MMSE after 18 months follow-up. We repeated this simulation 10,000 times to determine the 95% range of effect sizes. We further studied the influence of known AD risk factors (age, sex, education, APOE ε4 status, CSF total tau levels) on the variability in effect sizes. RESULTS: Individual trajectories on all cognitive outcomes were highly variable, and the 95% ranges of possible effect sizes at 18 months were broad (e.g., ranging from 0.35 improvement to 0.35 decline on the CDR-SB). Results of recent anti-amyloid trials mostly fell within these 95% ranges of effect sizes. APOE ε4 carriers and individuals with abnormal baseline tau levels showed faster decline at group level, but also greater within-group variability, as illustrated by broader 95% effect size ranges (e.g., ±0.70 points for the CDR-SB). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with early AD show heterogeneity in disease progression, which increases when stratifying on risk factors associated with progression. We provide guidance for a priori effect sizes on cognitive outcomes for detecting true change, which is crucial for future AD trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8205463
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82054632021-06-16 Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity Jutten, Roos J. Sikkes, Sietske A.M. Van der Flier, Wiesje M. Scheltens, Philip Visser, Pieter Jelle Tijms, Betty M. Neurology Article OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of heterogeneity in disease progression for detecting treatment effects in Alzheimer disease (AD) trials, using a simulation study. METHODS: Individuals with an abnormal amyloid PET scan, diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or dementia, baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≥24, global Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) score of 0.5, and ≥1 follow-up cognitive assessment were selected from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database (n = 302, age 73 ± 6.7; 44% female; 16.1 ± 2.7 years of education; 69% APOE ε4 carrier). We simulated a clinical trial by randomly assigning individuals to a “placebo” and “treatment” group and subsequently computed group differences on the CDR–sum of boxes (CDR-SB), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale–cognitive subscale–13 and MMSE after 18 months follow-up. We repeated this simulation 10,000 times to determine the 95% range of effect sizes. We further studied the influence of known AD risk factors (age, sex, education, APOE ε4 status, CSF total tau levels) on the variability in effect sizes. RESULTS: Individual trajectories on all cognitive outcomes were highly variable, and the 95% ranges of possible effect sizes at 18 months were broad (e.g., ranging from 0.35 improvement to 0.35 decline on the CDR-SB). Results of recent anti-amyloid trials mostly fell within these 95% ranges of effect sizes. APOE ε4 carriers and individuals with abnormal baseline tau levels showed faster decline at group level, but also greater within-group variability, as illustrated by broader 95% effect size ranges (e.g., ±0.70 points for the CDR-SB). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with early AD show heterogeneity in disease progression, which increases when stratifying on risk factors associated with progression. We provide guidance for a priori effect sizes on cognitive outcomes for detecting true change, which is crucial for future AD trials. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8205463/ /pubmed/34550903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012022 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Article
Jutten, Roos J.
Sikkes, Sietske A.M.
Van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Scheltens, Philip
Visser, Pieter Jelle
Tijms, Betty M.
Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity
title Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity
title_full Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity
title_fullStr Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity
title_full_unstemmed Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity
title_short Finding Treatment Effects in Alzheimer Trials in the Face of Disease Progression Heterogeneity
title_sort finding treatment effects in alzheimer trials in the face of disease progression heterogeneity
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205463/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34550903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012022
work_keys_str_mv AT juttenroosj findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity
AT sikkessietskeam findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity
AT vanderflierwiesjem findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity
AT scheltensphilip findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity
AT visserpieterjelle findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity
AT tijmsbettym findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity
AT findingtreatmenteffectsinalzheimertrialsinthefaceofdiseaseprogressionheterogeneity