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 66 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Genetics and APOE

APOE -ε4 allele[s] is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA) in anti-amyloid beta therapy, and is also associated with cerebrovascular risk factors such as hyperlipidemia or atherosclerosis. During AD clinical trials, APOE -ε4 carriers may experience neuropsychiatric adverse events (AEs) related to these risks, complicating the differentiation of ARIA from cerebrovascular events based on symptoms. This study aimed to examine the hypothetical impact of considering the APOE -ε4 allele's risk for non-ARIA AEs during AD clinical trials. We used data from the Critical Path for Alzheimer's Disease (CPAD) from the placebo arm of randomized controlled trials (RCT) for AD treatment. We determined whether AEs were reported more frequently in APOE -ε4 carriers, quantifying with reporting odds ratio (ROR) using a mixed effect model. We also evaluated the association between ROR levels and the prior probability that an AE is symptomatic ARIA. We analyzed 6,313 patients with AD or mild cognitive impairment in 28 trials. Of the prespecified 35 neuropsychiatric or related AEs, several had a significantly high ROR: "delusion" (ROR = 4.133), "confusional state" (ROR = 1.419), "muscle spasms" (ROR = 9.849), "irritability" (ROR = 12.62), "sleep disorder" (ROR = 2.944), or "convulsion" (ROR = 13.00). However, none remained significant after adjusting for Mini-Mental State Examination scores. There is no strong evidence to suggest that specific neuropsychiatric AEs occur more frequently without drug treatment association among APOE -ε4 carriers. The influence of APOE -ε4 allele[s] on the clinicians' assessment of the likelihood of ARIA during safety monitoring in anti-amyloid beta monoclonal antibody treatment might be unchanged, thus maintaining the current level of awareness of clinicians of AEs.

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

APA 7th

Sato, K., Niimi, Y., Ihara, R., Suzuki, K., Iwata, A., & Iwatsubo, T. (2023). APOE -ε4 allele[s]-associated adverse events reported from placebo arm in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease: implications for anti-amyloid beta therapy. Frontiers in dementia. https://doi.org/10.3389/frdem.2023.1320329

Vancouver

Sato K, Niimi Y, Ihara R, Suzuki K, Iwata A, Iwatsubo T. APOE -ε4 allele[s]-associated adverse events reported from placebo arm in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease: implications for anti-amyloid beta therapy. Frontiers in dementia. 2023. doi:10.3389/frdem.2023.1320329. PMID: 39081988.

BibTeX

@article{sato2023-39081988,
  author  = {Sato, K. and Niimi, Y. and Ihara, R. and Suzuki, K. and Iwata, A. and Iwatsubo, T.},
  title   = {{APOE -ε4 allele[s]-associated adverse events reported from placebo arm in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease: implications for anti-amyloid beta therapy}},
  journal = {Frontiers in dementia},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.3389/frdem.2023.1320329},
  pmid    = {39081988},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3389/frdem.2023.1320329}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 66/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 38 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 66 of 100. Total 66 of 100.38 of the 58 points we could judge = 66 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 66 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in dementia)
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 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 3 / 5 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 6,313 participants
Effect reported 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization 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
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39081988)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 38 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 66 out of 100.
Total 66 / 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.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Treatments

Also tagged “monoclonal”

332 studies in the library carry the topic tag “monoclonal”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 332 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →