Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Clinical progression on CDR‐SB©: Progression‐free time at each 0.5 unit level in dominantly inherited and sporadic Alzheimer's disease populations
Guoqiao Wang, Yan Li, Eric McDade, Chengjie Xiong, Sarah M. Hartz, Randall John Bateman, John C. Morris, Lon S. S. Schneider et al.. Alzheimer s & Dementia, 2025-09-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
PFT is longer at CDR-SB ≤ 2.0 (1-2 years) and shorter at CDR-SB ≥ 5 (≤ 0.33) in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. The DIAD cohort showed similar but shorter times. Using PFT, continuous lecanemab treatment for 3 years is estimated to delay disease progression by 0.62 years in the sporadic population. PFT provides a benchmark for expressing clinical progression and treatment effects and can be applied particularly during open-label extensions and single-arm trials without placebo comparisons. HIGHLIGHTS: We estimated the progression-free time at each 0.5 unit Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes increment in dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease (AD) and sporadic AD populations. We proposed using progression-free time to estimate treatment effects in open-label extension or single-arm studies. If further validated, progression-free time could serve as a benchmark for assessing clinical progression and treatment effects.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Wang, G., Li, Y., McDade, E., Xiong, C., Hartz, S. M., Bateman, R. J., et al. (2025). Clinical progression on CDR‐SB©: Progression‐free time at each 0.5 unit level in dominantly inherited and sporadic Alzheimer's disease populations. Alzheimer s & Dementia. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70643
Vancouver
Wang G, Li Y, McDade E, Xiong C, Hartz SM, Bateman RJ, et al. Clinical progression on CDR‐SB©: Progression‐free time at each 0.5 unit level in dominantly inherited and sporadic Alzheimer's disease populations. Alzheimer s & Dementia. 2025. doi:10.1002/alz.70643. PMID: 40911712.
BibTeX
@article{wang2025-40911712,
author = {Wang, Guoqiao and Li, Yan and McDade, Eric and Xiong, Chengjie and Hartz, Sarah M. and Bateman, Randall John and Morris, John C. and Schneider, Lon S. S. and others},
title = {{Clinical progression on CDR‐SB©: Progression‐free time at each 0.5 unit level in dominantly inherited and sporadic Alzheimer's disease populations}},
journal = {Alzheimer s \& Dementia},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1002/alz.70643},
pmid = {40911712},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70643}
}
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.
Key findings
- PFT is longer at CDR-SB ≤ 2.0 (1-2 years) and shorter at CDR-SB ≥ 5 (≤ 0.33) in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort.
- The DIAD cohort showed similar but shorter times.
- Using PFT, continuous lecanemab treatment for 3 years is estimated to delay disease progression by 0.62 years in the sporadic population.
- PFT provides a benchmark for expressing clinical progression and treatment effects and can be applied particularly during open-label extensions and single-arm trials without placebo comparisons.
- HIGHLIGHTS: We estimated the progression-free time at each 0.5 unit Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes increment in dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease (AD) and sporadic AD populations.
Why it matters
This study estimated progression-free time at each 0.5-unit step of the CDR-SB in inherited and sporadic Alzheimer's disease and used it to estimate that three years of continuous lecanemab treatment delays progression by 0.62 years in the sporadic population. The authors say the measure needs further validation before it can serve as a benchmark for clinical progression and treatment effects.
Study details
- Study designopen-label trial
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 36/100
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 senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 35 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer s & Dementia) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Alzheimer s & Dementia: journal h-index 228 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | Design recorded as “open-label trial”, which our rubric does not rank (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 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 | 1 / 7 | Cited 1 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 1 / 6 | Cited 0.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 1 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 | Washington University in St. Louis: institution h-index 1,962 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40911712) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 35 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 35 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also in Cognitive tests and assessment
88 studies in the library are filed under Cognitive tests and assessment with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Cognitive tests and assessment hub.