Home › Research › Treatments
Amyloid-Beta Immunotherapies for Alzheimer's Disease: Current Progress
Bazzari FH, Bazzari AH.. Current Alzheimer research, 2026-03-30
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a major global challenge and the most common cause of dementia worldwide. Accumulation of Amyloid-Beta (Aβ) is considered a key factor in AD pathophysiology and progression, and is linked to disruptions of neuronal integrity and the initiation of several downstream neurodegenerative cascades. Immunotherapeutic agents targeting Aβ have emerged as potential disease-modifying drug candidates, and extensive efforts have been dedicated to both active and passive modalities. Early Aβ vaccines demonstrated proof of concept; however, they were later discontinued due to several safety concerns, which, in turn, guided the refinement of epitope design and immune response modulation in the second-generation ones. On the other hand, early monoclonal antibodies have also faced challenges, such as variable efficacy and adverse events, particularly Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA), which ultimately led to their discontinuation. Nonetheless, recent regulatory advances have led to the approvals of Aduhelm® (Aducanumab), Leqembi® (Lecanemab), and Kisunla® (Donanemab), each of which has demonstrated the ability to reduce Aβ burden and slow cognitive decline. Despite these advancements, challenges persist regarding patient selection, biomarker-guided monitoring, ARIA risk reduction, long-term outcomes, and global accessibility. Notably, the clinical benefits observed to date remain modest, and it remains uncertain whether the currently approved Aβ-targeted immunotherapies achieve meaningful long-term disease modification. Collectively, the evolution of Aβ-targeted immunotherapies has provided further insights into the complexity of AD pathology and the challenges associated with future progress toward achieving effective disease modification. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of all Aβ-directed immunotherapies, both active and passive agents, that have advanced into clinical trials, including those currently approved, discontinued, or undergoing late-stage evaluation.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Bazzari, F. H., & Bazzari, A. H. (2026). Amyloid-Beta Immunotherapies for Alzheimer's Disease: Current Progress. Current Alzheimer research. https://doi.org/10.2174/0115672050468315260226041235
Vancouver
Bazzari FH, Bazzari AH. Amyloid-Beta Immunotherapies for Alzheimer's Disease: Current Progress. Current Alzheimer research. 2026. doi:10.2174/0115672050468315260226041235. PMID: 41918206.
BibTeX
@article{bazzari2026-41918206,
author = {Bazzari, F. H. and Bazzari, A. H.},
title = {{Amyloid-Beta Immunotherapies for Alzheimer's Disease: Current Progress}},
journal = {Current Alzheimer research},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.2174/0115672050468315260226041235},
pmid = {41918206},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2174/0115672050468315260226041235}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Early Aβ vaccines demonstrated proof of concept; however, they were later discontinued due to several safety concerns, which, in turn, guided the refinement of epitope design and immune response modulation in the second-generation ones.
- Nonetheless, recent regulatory advances have led to the approvals of Aduhelm® (Aducanumab), Leqembi® (Lecanemab), and Kisunla® (Donanemab), each of which has demonstrated the ability to reduce Aβ burden and slow cognitive decline.
- Collectively, the evolution of Aβ-targeted immunotherapies has provided further insights into the complexity of AD pathology and the challenges associated with future progress toward achieving effective disease modification.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current Alzheimer research) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41918206) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.