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

28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 26–50 of 60 studies with an author at Eisai (United States) (US) (page 2 of 3) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 60 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

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; 13,658 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.

Eligibility Rates among Racially and Ethnically Diverse US Participants in Phase 2 and Phase 3 Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Randomized Trials of Lecanemab and Elenbecestat in Early Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2023-10-25

Differential eligibility may contribute to underrepresentation of some minoritized racial and ethnic groups in early AD trials. 2 key findings →

Participants: 156 Evidence: high

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

Reference proteins to improve Core 1 and Core 2 Alzheimer’s disease CSF and plasma biomarkers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Brain 2025-10-03

Using the Swedish BioFINDER-2 cohort [n = 1702, 50.7% male, mean (standard deviation) age 68.4 (12.2) years], we compared the associations between tau/Aβ-PET load and fluid biomarkers alone versus biomarkers in a ratio with a reference protein (Aβ40 or np-tau) in univariate linear regression models. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,702 Evidence: moderate

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

Acceptable performance of blood biomarker tests of amyloid pathology - recommendations from the Global CEO Initiative on Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Nature Reviews Neurology 2024-06-12

Anti-amyloid treatments for early symptomatic Alzheimer disease have recently become clinically available in some countries, which has greatly increased the need for biomarker confirmation of amyloid pathology. 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

The effects of donepezil in Alzheimer's disease - results from a multinational trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders 1999-05-01

Donepezil has been shown to be well tolerated and to improve cognition and global function in patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Biomarker-based prognosis for people with mild cognitive impairment (ABIDE): a modelling study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. The Lancet. Neurology 2019-09-13

The models could aid clinicians in the interpretation of CSF biomarker and hippocampal volume results in individuals with MCI, and help research and clinical settings to prepare for a future of precision medicine in Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

Participants: 883 Evidence: moderate

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

Clarity AD: Asian regional analysis of a phase III trial of lecanemab in early Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease 2025-04-06

Of the total of 1795 subjects randomized in Clarity AD, 294 subjects were in the Asian region (Japan:152; Korea:129; Singapore:13). 5 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 294 Evidence: high

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

Large multi-ethnic genetic analyses of amyloid imaging identify new genes for Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica communications 2023-04-26

Amyloid PET imaging has been crucial for detecting the accumulation of amyloid beta (Aβ) deposits in the brain and to study Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 13,409 Evidence: low

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

Neuropsychiatric signs and symptoms of Alzheimer's disease: New treatment paradigms

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 2017-08-05

Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPSs) are hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), causing substantial distress for both people with dementia and their caregivers, and contributing to early institutionalization. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Trajectories of plasma and CSF MTBR-tau243 and phosphorylated-tau species across the Alzheimer’s disease continuum

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Nature Communications 2026-04-09

To efficiently implement plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for staging and prognosis of Alzheimer disease (AD), we must understand their dynamics across disease progression. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA): radiological, biological and clinical characteristics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2023-11-01

This review provides a comprehensive state-of-the-art conceptual review of radiological features, clinical detection and classification challenges, pathophysiology, underlying biological mechanism(s) and risk factors/predictors associated with ARIA. 2 key findings →

Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Tau-PET and CSF MTBR-tau243 comparisons validate increased tau aggregation in females

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2026-05-27

In both cohorts, CSF MTBR-tau243 was associated with tau-PET temporal meta-ROI burden (BioFINDER-2: β = 1.1, p = < 0.0001 and Knight-ADRC: β = 0.7, p = < 0.0001), and this association did not differ by sex (BioFINDER-2 β = 0.04, p = 0.6 and Knight-ADRC: β = 0.009, p = 0.9). 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 446 Evidence: low

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

Biomarker-guided clustering of Alzheimer's disease clinical syndromes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neurobiology of Aging 2019-09-10

Alzheimer's disease (AD) neuropathology is extremely heterogeneous, and the evolution from preclinical to mild cognitive impairment until dementia is driven by interacting genetic/biological mechanisms not fully captured by current clinical/research criteria. 2 key findings →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

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

Bridging the gap: A conversion framework for CDR-SB and MoCA scores in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease 2025-06-07

CDR-SB and MoCA scores showed strong inverse correlation (Spearman's ρ = -0.68; p < 0.001). 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 23,717 Evidence: moderate

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

Trajectories of CSF and plasma MTBR‐tau 243 and phosphorylated‐tau species across the Alzheimer's disease continuum

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

The CSF and plasma cohorts were on average 71.4(±8.5) and 72.2 (±9.3) years of age, 49.1%/50.8% was female, and 263/453 (0.59%/51.8%) were cognitively impaired, respectively. 4 key findings →

Participants: 97 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% 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