Home › Research › Drug development
Drug development for Alzheimer's disease: where are we now and where are we headed?
Sabbagh MN.. The American journal of geriatric pharmacotherapy, 2009-06-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Plain-language summary
Objective The aim of this article was to provide a survey of the clinical development of pharmacotherapy for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Methods A search of PubMed to identify pertinent English-language literature was conducted using the terms Alzheimer's disease AND clinical trials (2003-2008), dementia AND prevention AND clinical trials (2003-2008), and the chemical names of all compounds mentioned in articles on new drugs for AD published since 2005. www.ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for relevant trials. Abstracts of the 2008 International Conference on Alzheimer's Disease (ICAD) were reviewed for relevance, as were pharmaceutical company and AD advocacy Web sites. Articles selected for review were primary reports of data from preclinical studies and clinical trials. Results A large number of drugs with differing targets and mechanisms of action are under development for the treatment of AD. Phase III trials of Ginkgo biloba, NSAIDs, phenserine, statins, tarenflurbil, tramiprosate, and xaliproden have been completed, none of them demonstrating adequate efficacy. Encouraging results from completed Phase II trials of dimebon, huperzine A, intravenous immunoglobulin, and methylthioninium chloride were reported at ICAD 2008. Nineteen compounds are currently in Phase II trials, and 3 compounds (AN1792, lecozotan SR, and SGS742) failed at this stage of development. Conclusions Despite disappointing results from recently completed Phase III trials of several novel compounds, the extent and breadth of activity at all phases of clinical development suggest that new pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of AD will become available within the next decade.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Sabbagh, M. N. (2009). Drug development for Alzheimer's disease: where are we now and where are we headed? The American journal of geriatric pharmacotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjopharm.2009.06.003
Vancouver
Sabbagh MN. Drug development for Alzheimer's disease: where are we now and where are we headed? The American journal of geriatric pharmacotherapy. 2009. doi:10.1016/j.amjopharm.2009.06.003. PMID: 19616185.
BibTeX
@article{sabbagh2009-19616185,
author = {Sabbagh, M. N.},
title = {{Drug development for Alzheimer's disease: where are we now and where are we headed?}},
journal = {The American journal of geriatric pharmacotherapy},
year = {2009},
doi = {10.1016/j.amjopharm.2009.06.003},
pmid = {19616185},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjopharm.2009.06.003}
}
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
- Results A large number of drugs with differing targets and mechanisms of action are under development for the treatment of AD.
- Encouraging results from completed Phase II trials of dimebon, huperzine A, intravenous immunoglobulin, and methylthioninium chloride were reported at ICAD 2008.
- Conclusions Despite disappointing results from recently completed Phase III trials of several novel compounds, the extent and breadth of activity at all phases of clinical development suggest that new pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of AD will become available within the next decade.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
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 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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The American journal of geriatric pharmacotherapy) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2009 — within 20 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) |
| 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 19616185) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 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
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.
Related studies in Drug development from nearby years
Also in Drug development
126 studies in the library are filed under Drug development with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Drug development hub.