alzhub.org
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.

Research

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–25 of 33 studies with an author at Genentech (page 1 of 2) · 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.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Other institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

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.

Rare coding variants in PLCG2, ABI3, and TREM2 implicate microglial-mediated innate immunity in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100. Nature genetics 2017-07-17

We identified rare coding variants associated with Alzheimer's disease in a three-stage case-control study of 85,133 subjects. 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 85,133 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Crenezumab vs Placebo in Adults With Early Alzheimer Disease: Two Phase 3 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2022-11-01

There were 813 participants in CREAD (mean [SD] age, 70.7 [8.2] years; 483 female and 330 male) and 806 in CREAD2 (mean [SD] age, 70.9 [7.7] years; 456 female and 350 male). 2 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 3,664 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Two Phase 3 Trials of Gantenerumab in Early Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100. The New England journal of medicine 2023-11-01

Among persons with early Alzheimer's disease, the use of gantenerumab led to a lower amyloid plaque burden than placebo at 116 weeks but was not associated with slower clinical decline. 2 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 980 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Safety and Efficacy of Semorinemab in Individuals With Prodromal to Mild Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2022-08-01

In participants with prodromal to mild AD in this randomized clinical trial, semorinemab did not slow clinical AD progression compared with placebo throughout the 73-week study period but did demonstrate an acceptable and well-tolerated safety profile. 3 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 422 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

A phase III randomized trial of gantenerumab in prodromal Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2017-12-08

The study was stopped early for futility, but dose-dependent effects observed in exploratory analyses on select clinical and biomarker endpoints suggest that higher dosing with gantenerumab may be necessary to achieve clinical efficacy. 2 key findings →

Participants: 3,089 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA) in Clinical Trials of Gantenerumab in Early Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2025-01-01

These results show that in addition to APOE ε4 allele count, severity of Aβ neuropathology and comorbid cerebrovascular pathology may be relevant for clinicians prescribing anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies for early AD and developing individualized safety monitoring plans. 2 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 985 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

ABBY: A phase 2 randomized trial of crenezumab in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100. Neurology 2018-04-25

Although prespecified criteria for testing treatment effects were not met, these data suggest a potential treatment effect in patients with mild AD treated with high-dose crenezumab. 4 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 184 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Preclinical and first-in-human evaluation of AL002, a novel TREM2 agonistic antibody for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2024-10-23

Variants of the gene triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-2 (TREM2) increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative disorders. 4 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Amyloid positron emission tomography and cerebrospinal fluid results from a crenezumab anti-amyloid-beta antibody double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II study in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (BLAZE)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2018-09-19

We investigated the effect of crenezumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta (Aβ) immunoglobulin (Ig)G4 monoclonal antibody, on biomarkers of amyloid pathology, neurodegeneration, and disease progression in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 26 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Blood-Based Biomarkers and Risk of Onset of Mild Cognitive Impairment Over the Short and Long Term

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. Neurology 2024-12-26

This study examined whether levels of blood biomarkers of amyloid (Aβ 42 /Aβ 40 ratio), tau (p-tau 181 ), neurodegeneration (NfL), and glial activation and neuroinflammation (glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], YKL40, soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 [sTREM2]) collected when participants were cognitively normal are associated with the time to onset of MCI. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 271 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

A mutation in APP protects against Alzheimer's disease and age-related cognitive decline

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Nature 2012-08-01

The prevalence of dementia in the Western world in people over the age of 60 has been estimated to be greater than 5%, about two-thirds of which are due to Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

The Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Autosomal-Dominant Alzheimer's Disease Trial: A study of crenezumab versus placebo in preclinical PSEN1 E280A mutation carriers to evaluate efficacy and safety in the treatment of autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease, including a placebo-treated noncarrier cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 2018-03-08

We describe the first large-scale, potentially label-enabling clinical trial of a preclinical treatment for ADAD. 4 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 300 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Practical recommendations for timely, accurate diagnosis of symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (MCI and dementia) in primary care: a review and synthesis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Journal of internal medicine 2021-03-31

The critical role of primary care clinicians (PCCs) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention, diagnosis and management must evolve as new treatment paradigms and disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) emerge. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Detection Rates of Mild Cognitive Impairment in Primary Care for the United States Medicare Population

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease 2023-10-26

The average detection rates for mild cognitive impairment is 0.08 (interquartile range=0.00-0.02) for both clinicians and practices, suggesting that only about 8% of expected cases were diagnosed on average. 3 key findings →

Participants: 25 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Expected and diagnosed rates of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in the U.S. Medicare population: observational analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2023-07-22

These results highlight the need to increase the overall detection rates of MCI and of dementia particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ 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