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 40 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Disease mechanisms in lab and animal studies

Tau immunotherapies have advanced from proof-of-concept studies to over a dozen clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other tauopathies. Mechanistic studies in animal and culture models have provided valuable insight into how these therapies may work but multiple pathways are likely involved. Different groups have emphasized the importance of intracellular vs extracellular antibody-mediated clearance of the tau protein and there is no consensus on which pool of tau should ideally be targeted. Likewise, various normal and disease-selective epitopes are being targeted, and the antibody isotypes either favor phagocytosis of the tau-antibody complex or are neutral in that aspect. Most of the clinical trials are in early stages, thus their efficacy is not yet known, but all have been without any major adverse effects and some have reported target engagement. A few have been discontinued. One in phase I, presumably because of a poor pharmacokinetic profile, and three in phase II for a lack of efficacy although this trial stage is not well powered for efficacy measures. In these phase II studies, trials with two antibodies in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy or other primary tauopathies were halted but are continuing in patients with AD, and one antibody trial was stopped in early-stage AD but is continuing in moderate AD. These three antibodies have been reported to only work extracellularly and tau is not increased in the cerebrospinal fluid of primary tauopathies, which may explain the failures of two of them. In the discontinued AD trial, there are some concerns about how much of extracellular tau contains the N-terminal epitope that is being targeted. In addition, extracellular tau is only a small part of total tau, compared to intracellular tau. Targeting only the former may not be sufficient for functional benefits. Given these outcomes, decision makers within the pharmaceutical companies who green light these trials should attempt to target tau not only extracellularly but also intracellularly to increase their chances of success. Hopefully, some of the ongoing trials will provide some functional benefits to the large number of patients with tauopathies.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 40/100
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 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / 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; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 23 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 40 of 100. Total 40 of 100.23 of the 58 points we could judge = 40 of 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Drugs)
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 3 / 5 2021 — within 6 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 34101156)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 23 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100.
Total 40 / 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.

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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Ji, C., & Sigurdsson, E. M. (2021). Current Status of Clinical Trials on Tau Immunotherapies. Drugs. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-021-01546-6

Vancouver

Ji C, Sigurdsson EM. Current Status of Clinical Trials on Tau Immunotherapies. Drugs. 2021. doi:10.1007/s40265-021-01546-6. PMID: 34101156.

BibTeX

@article{ji2021-34101156,
  author  = {Ji, C. and Sigurdsson, E. M.},
  title   = {{Current Status of Clinical Trials on Tau Immunotherapies}},
  journal = {Drugs},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.1007/s40265-021-01546-6},
  pmid    = {34101156},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-021-01546-6}
}

Related studies in Drug development

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →