Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Find studies

Showing 101–125 of 873 studies in Drug development (page 5 of 35) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “Drug development” covers

Drug development — Candidate treatments on their way through the pipeline, from the laboratory to early human trials.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Refractory Status Epilepticus in a Patient With Aducanumab-Induced Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neurology 2024-08-09

The patient was participating in an extended open-label trial of aducanumab when she was admitted to hospital for focal seizures and ARIA in 2 noncontiguous regions of the left frontal and occipital lobes. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Antidiabetic medications and risk of cognitive disorders in type 2 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. PLoS ONE 2026-08-24

Among 1,528,885 adults with type 2 diabetes (mean age, 58 years; 49.2% women), GLP-1 receptor agonists plus metformin were associated with lower incidence of vascular dementia (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.57), mild cognitive disorder (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.95), and Alzheimer disease (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.31-0.70). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 1,528,885 Evidence: moderate

Alzheimer's disease drug development pipeline: 2024

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 2024-04-24

Compared to the 2023 pipeline, there are fewer trials (164 vs. 187), fewer drugs (127 vs. 141), fewer new chemical entities (88 vs. 101), and a similar number of repurposed agents (39 vs. 40). 3 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 56 Evidence: low

Clinicopathologic Evaluation of Amyloid Clearance in Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. JAMA 2026-07-12

The long-term efficacy of amyloid-targeting therapies hinges on their ability to slow downstream neuropathologic change, but little is known about the influence of amyloid clearance on tau pathology and neurodegeneration. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high

Serum concentrations of semorinemab were consistent across studies and showed a dose-proportional increase across the evaluated dose range. 5 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 8,430 Evidence: low

We identified GLP-1 receptor agonist initiation compared to DPP-4 inhibitors initiation was associated with a reduced risk of AD (hazard ratio [HR] ≤ 0.69 and P value < 0.001) and SGLT-2 inhibitor initiation compared to DPP-4 inhibitor initiation was associated with a reduced risk of AD (HR ≤ 0.67 and P value < 0.001). 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

ARIA monitoring is important to inform treatment dosing decisions and might be improved through assistive software. 4 key findings →

Participants: 16 Evidence: low

Alzheimer disease (AD) may develop after the onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and the risk of AD may depend on the antidiabetic drug administered. 2 key findings →

Participants: 85 Evidence: low

Use of antihypertensives and the risk of Parkinson disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Neurology 2008-02-06

Current long-term use of calcium channel blockers was associated with a significantly reduced risk of a Parkinson disease diagnosis, while the risk was not materially altered for users of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or beta-blockers and, with less statistical precision, for users of angiotensin II antagonists. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate

Evaluation of liraglutide in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

Preclinical evidence in transgenic models of Alzheimer’s disease suggests that liraglutide exerts neuroprotective effects by reducing amyloid oligomers, normalising synaptic plasticity and cerebral glucose uptake, and increasing the proliferation of neuronal progenitor cells. 4 key findings →

Participants: 204 Evidence: high

Occurrence and Progression of Dementia in a Community Population Aged 75 Years and Older

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Archives of Neurology 1999-08-01

Subjects taking antihypertensive medication (n = 651, 83.9% of whom took diuretics) had a lower prevalence of dementia than those not taking antihypertensive medication (P<.001). 5 key findings →

Participants: 651 Evidence: moderate

Alzheimer's disease: Recent treatment strategies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. European journal of pharmacology 2020-09-15

Alzheimer Disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by two neuropathological hallmarks: extracellular deposition of amyloid plaques and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease drug development pipeline: 2021

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 2021-05-25

This pipeline analysis shows that target biological processes are more diversified, biomarkers are more regularly used, and repurposed agents are being explored to determine their utility for the treatment of AD. 1 key finding →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed