Disease modification in multiple sclerosis: Issues with relevance to clinical trial designs in Alzheimer's disease

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 143-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Rudick
Author(s):  
J. Cummings ◽  
N. Fox ◽  
B. Vellas ◽  
P. Aisen ◽  
G. Shan

BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying therapies are urgently needed for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The European Union/United States (EU/US) Task Force represents a broad range of stakeholders including biopharma industry personnel, academicians, and regulatory authorities. OBJECTIVES: The EU/US Task Force represents a community of knowledgeable individuals who can inform views of evidence supporting disease modification and the development of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). We queried their attitudes toward clinical trial design and biomarkers in support of DMTs. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIANTS: A survey of members of the EU/US Alzheimer’s Disease Task Force was conducted. Ninety-three members (87%) responded. The details were analyzed to understand what clinical trial design and biomarker data support disease modification. MEASUREMENTS/RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Task Force members favored the parallel group design compared to delayed start or staggered withdrawal clinical trial designs to support disease modification. Amyloid biomarkers were regarded as providing mild support for disease modification while tau biomarkers were regarded as providing moderate support. Combinations of biomarkers, particularly combinations of tau and neurodegeneration, were regarded as providing moderate to marked support for disease modification and combinations of all three classes of biomarkers were regarded by a majority as providing marked support for disease modification. Task Force members considered that evidence derived from clinical trials and biomarkers supports clinical meaningfulness of an intervention, and when combined with a single clinical trial outcome, nearly all regarded the clinical trial design or biomarker evidence as supportive of disease modification. A minority considered biomarker evidence by itself as indicative of disease modification in prevention trials. Levels of evidence (A,B,C) were constructed based on these observations. CONCLUSION: The survey indicates the view of knowledgeable stakeholders regarding evidence derived from clinical trial design and biomarkers in support of disease modification. Results of this survey can assist in designing clinical trials of DMTs.


2006 ◽  
Vol 14 (7S_Part_12) ◽  
pp. P677-P677
Author(s):  
Michael J. Castle ◽  
Fernando Calvo Baltanas ◽  
Imre Kovacs ◽  
Alan H. Nagahara ◽  
Krystof S. Bankiewicz ◽  
...  

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (S1) ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Jeffrey L. Cummings

AbstractWe appear to be on the brink of a new epoch of treatment for Alzheimer's disease. Compelling evidence suggests that Aβ42 secretion is the triggering event in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease, and that tau aggregation may be an important secondary event linked to neurodegeneration. Prophylactic administration of anti-amyloid agents designed to prevent Aβ accumulation in persons with subclinical disease is likely to be more effective than therapeutic interventions in established Alzheimer's disease. Drug development programs in Alzheimer's disease focus primarily on agents with anti-amyloid disease-modifying properties, and many different pharmacologic approaches to reducing amyloid pathology and tauopathy are being studied. Classes of therapeutic modalities currently in advanced-stage clinical trial testing include forms of immunotherapy (active β -amyloid immunoconjugate and human intravenous immunoglobulin), a γ-secretase inhibitor, the selective Aβ42-lowering agent R-flurbiprofen, and the anti-aggregation agent tramiprosate. Non-traditional dementia therapies such as the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), valproate, and lithium are now being assessed for clinical benefit as anti-amyloid disease-modifying treatments. Positive findings of efficacy and safety from clinical studies are necessary but not sufficient to demonstrate that a drug has disease-modifying properties. Definitive proof of disease-modification requires evidence from validated animal models of Alzheimer's disease; rigorously controlled clinical trials showing a significantly improved, stabilized, or slowed rate of decline in cognitive and global function compared to placebo; and prospectively obtained evidence from surrogate biomarkers that the treatment resulted in measurable biological changes associated with the underlying disease process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document