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.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Objective This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging phase 2 study explored safety, efficacy, and biomarker effects of ELND005 (an oral amyloid anti-aggregation agent) in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease (AD). Methods A total of 353 patients were randomized to ELND005 (250, 1,000, or 2,000 mg) or placebo twice daily for 78 weeks. Coprimary endpoints were the Neuropsychological Test Battery (NTB) and Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale. The primary analysis compared 250 mg (n =84) to placebo (n =82) after an imbalance of infections and deaths led to early discontinuation of the 2 higher dose groups. Results The 250 mg dose demonstrated acceptable safety. The primary efficacy analysis at 78 weeks revealed no significant differences between the treatment groups on the NTB or ADCS-ADL. Brain ventricular volume showed a small but significant increase in the overall 250 mg group (p =0.049). At the 250 mg dose, scyllo-inositol concentrations increased in CSF and brain and CSF Aβx-42 was decreased significantly compared to placebo (p =0.009). Conclusions Primary clinical efficacy outcomes were not significant. The safety and CSF biomarker results will guide selection of the optimal dose for future studies, which will target earlier stages of AD. Classification of evidence Due to the small sample sizes, this Class II trial provides insufficient evidence to support or refute a benefit of ELND005.

Key findings

Why it matters

In this phase 2 trial, the 250 mg dose of ELND005 showed no significant differences from placebo on the primary measures of cognition or daily living. The authors state that primary clinical efficacy outcomes were not significant, though safety and biomarker results will guide future studies.

Study details

How this study scored 69/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record 4 of 4; Study design 8 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 2 of 2; Times cited 5 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 66 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 69 of 100. Total 69 of 100.66 of the 96 points we could judge = 69 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a mid-stage phase 2 trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 66 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology)
Journal's citation record 4 / 4 Neurology: journal h-index 525 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 8 / 12 A mid-stage phase 2 trial (from PubMed type “Clinical Trial, Phase II”)
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 84 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 2 / 2 Randomised and blinded or placebo-controlled (as stated in the record)
Times cited 5 / 7 Cited 259 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 15.2 citations a year over 17 year(s) since 2011
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 12.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 10 other studies in this library
Still being cited 2 / 4 Cited 29 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record 2 / 3 Brigham and Women's Hospital: institution h-index 1,995 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 7 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21917766)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 66 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 66 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100.
Total 69 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — PubMed Central lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Salloway, S., Sperling, R., Keren, R., Porsteinsson, A. P., van Dyck, C. H., Tariot, P. N., et al. (2011). A phase 2 randomized trial of ELND005, scyllo-inositol, in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182309fa5

Vancouver

Salloway S, Sperling R, Keren R, Porsteinsson AP, van Dyck CH, Tariot PN, et al. A phase 2 randomized trial of ELND005, scyllo-inositol, in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. Neurology. 2011. doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182309fa5. PMID: 21917766.

BibTeX

@article{salloway2011-21917766,
  author  = {Salloway, S. and Sperling, R. and Keren, R. and Porsteinsson, A. P. and van Dyck, C. H. and Tariot, P. N. and Gilman, S. and Arnold, D. and others},
  title   = {{A phase 2 randomized trial of ELND005, scyllo-inositol, in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182309fa5},
  pmid    = {21917766},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182309fa5}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 18.

Later studies that cite this one

10 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Treatments

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →