Donanemab treatment resulted in earlier and greater AP clearance compared to aducanumab. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 148 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
ARIA is an adverse event associated with donanemab treatment that requires safety monitoring. 4 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 3,030 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In TRAILBLAZER-ALZ, 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.2 [5.5] years; 145 [53.3%] female) were randomized. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,955 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No significant difference was seen in cognitive and functional decline between early and delayed treatment groups. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 85 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Reduction of amyloid via amyloid-targeting therapies may result in clinical benefit. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,582 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The primary study randomized 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.2 [5.5] years; 145 female participants [53.3%]). 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 272 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
74/100
This is the pivotal Phase 3 trial for donanemab in 1,736 people with early symptomatic Alzheimer's. Donanemab slowed decline on a combined cognitive/functional scale (iADRS) by about 22-35% relative to placebo over 76 weeks, depending on tau levels at baseline. 3 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 1,736 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
74/100
Among 1736 randomized participants (mean age, 73.0 years; 996 [57.4%] women; 1182 [68.1%] with low/medium tau pathology and 552 [31.8%] with high tau pathology), 1320 (76%) completed the trial. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 860 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on integrated review of laboratory, electrocardiogram, adverse events, and MRI, AAB-003 was safe and well tolerated up to 8 mg/kg for up to 91 weeks (FIH and extension trials) in patients with mild to moderate AD. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 52 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There was a statistically significant increase in the global estimate of cortical tau burden as measured by standardized uptake value ratio (SUVr) from baseline to 18 months in amyloid-β+ but not amyloid-β- subjects (least squared mean change in flortaucipir SUVr : 0.0524 ± 0.0085, P < 0.0001 and 0.0007 ± 0.0024 P = 0.7850, respectively), and a significant association between magnitude of SUVr increase and baseline tau burden. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 202 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study's findings suggest that PET imaging with [18F]flortaucipir could be used to identify the density and distribution of AD-type tau pathology and the presence of high levels of AD neuropathological change, supporting a neuropathological diagnosis of AD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Donanemab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the insoluble form of β-amyloid found in plaques, significantly slows cognitive and functional decline of AD in participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild AD-related dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Bapineuzumab SC once-monthly did not demonstrate significant treatment difference over placebo on cerebral amyloid signal at one year but was well-tolerated. 3 key findings →
Participants: 146 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
For amyloid positron emission tomography positive (Aβ+) subjects, flortaucipir neocortical standard uptake value ratio was significantly higher with more advanced clinical stage (Alzheimer's disease > mild cognitive impairment > older cognitively normal) and was significantly elevated for Aβ+ mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease subjects relative to the respective Aβ- subjects. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 217 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
59/100
CSF and amyloid PET measurements of Aβ were consistent in the majority of subjects in the cross-sectional and longitudinal populations. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 374 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PERSI showed superior test-retest reproducibility (1.84%) and group separation ability (cross-sectional Cohen d = 9.45; longitudinal Cohen d = 2.34) compared with other reference regions. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 215 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite reductions in plasma p-tau217 with donanemab treatment, this biomarker cannot currently be used to accurately detect TRAC by PET (< 24.1 CL) in individuals with early symptomatic AD. 1 key finding →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 830 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older persons with hip fractures remain at increased risk of subsequent hip fractures. 4 key findings →
Participants: 481 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Primary biomarker efficacy endpoints were not statistically significant in either dose group. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Test-retest analyses demonstrated low variability in flortaucipir F 18 SUVR. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Through analytical validation, this assay demonstrated robust performance across multiple lots, operators, and instruments and could be used as a tool for diagnosing AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,091 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PET amyloid imaging is increasingly used in research trials related to Alzheimer disease and has potential as a quantitative biomarker. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
DYRK1A (dual specificity tyrosine phosphorylation-regulated kinase 1A) has been shown to be involved in learning and memory impairments in Alzheimer disease and Down syndrome. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Where “Free full text” comes from
Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled. Show only studies that are free to read
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor, and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself, so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science, Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the tier-3 journals apart.
Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.
We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.
The score is computed from the published data alone and is reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.
See the whole rubric drawn out → — four charts covering all 27,380 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here, that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.
1,032 records (3.8% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 of those are preprints posted before any journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a peer-reviewed article.
See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →