Practical Considerations in the Administration of Aducanumab for the Neurologist

2021 ◽  
pp. 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000001144
Author(s):  
Katherine Coerver ◽  
Melissa M Yu ◽  
Anelyssa D'Abreu ◽  
Marc Wasserman ◽  
Kavita Nair

Aducanumab (Aduhelm®), developed by the biotechnology firm Biogen in Cambridge, Massachusetts, was approved using the less common accelerated approval pathway by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) reserved for treatments that fill a significant unmet need.1 Its approval on June 7, 2021 has been met with an outpouring of opinions from prescribers, insurers, advocacy groups and hospital systems regarding its risk benefit profile.2-4 Originally approved for all forms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), the FDA updated aducanumab’s labeling on July 8th, 2021 for “treatment in patients with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia stage of disease, the population in which treatment was initiated in clinical trials.5 With six million people nationally in the United States who suffer from AD and an anticipated one third of those who may now fulfill the criteria under the revised labeling, the implications of aducanumab’s approval continue to generate national interest.6

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175628642110576
Author(s):  
Melissa J. Armstrong

Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is a clinical diagnosis representing a specific presentation of a pathological α-synucleinopathy (Lewy body disease). DLB is one entity under the broader term Lewy body dementia, which also includes Parkinson’s disease dementia. Recent advances in DLB include publication of updated diagnostic criteria and recognition of prodromal DLB states, including mild cognitive impairment, delirium-onset, and psychiatric-onset forms. Research criteria for the mild cognitive impairment form of DLB were published in 2020. Increasing research shows that concomitant Alzheimer’s disease pathology in individuals with DLB is common in addition to the α-synucleinopathy pathology. This has implications for biomarker use and expected progression. Identifying biomarkers for DLB is an area of active research. Cerebrospinal fluid and skin biopsy tests are now commercially available in the United States, but their role in routine clinical care is not yet established. Additional research and biomarkers are needed. Research suggests that median survival after DLB diagnosis is 3–4 years, but there are rapidly and slowly progressive forms. Most individuals with DLB die of complications of the disease. Clinical trials for individuals with DLB have increased over the last 5 years, targeting both symptoms and underlying pathology. Effective therapies remain an unmet need, however. This review focuses on recent advances with an emphasis on literature that informs clinical care.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Eisenberg ◽  
◽  
Petra Kaufmann ◽  
Ellen Sigal ◽  
Janet Woodcock ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 224 (2) ◽  
pp. S433
Author(s):  
Cynthia Coots ◽  
Stephen Wagner ◽  
Matthew J. Bicocca ◽  
Megha Gupta ◽  
Hector Mendez Figueroa ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii79-ii79
Author(s):  
Kathryn Nevel ◽  
Samuel Capouch ◽  
Lisa Arnold ◽  
Katherine Peters ◽  
Nimish Mohile ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Patients in rural communities have less access to optimal cancer care and clinical trials. For GBM, access to experimental therapies, and consideration of a clinical trial is embedded in national guidelines. Still, the availability of clinical trials to rural communities, representing 20% of the US population, has not been described. METHODS We queried ClinicalTrials.gov for glioblastoma interventional treatment trials opened between 1/2010 and 1/2020 in the United States. We created a Structured Query Language database and leveraged Google application programming interfaces (API) Places to find name and street addresses for the sites, and Google’s Geocode API to determine the county location. Counties were classified by US Department of Agriculture Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC 1–3 = urban and RUCC 4–9 = rural). We used z-ratios for rural-urban statistical comparisons. RESULTS We identified 406 interventional treatment trials for GBM at 1491 unique sites. 8.7% of unique sites were in rural settings. Rural sites opened an average of 1.7 trials/site and urban sites 2.8 trials/site from 1/2010–1/2020. Rural sites offered more phase II trials (63% vs 57%, p= 0.03) and fewer phase I trials (22% vs 28%, p= 0.01) than urban sites. Rural locations were more likely to offer federally-sponsored trials (p< 0.002). There were no investigator-initiated or single-institution trials offered at rural locations, and only 1% of industry trials were offered rurally. DISCUSSION Clinical trials for GBM were rarely open in rural areas, and were more dependent on federal funding. Clinical trials are likely difficult to access for rural patients, and this has important implications for the generalizability of research as well as how we engage the field of neuro-oncology and patient advocacy groups in improving patient access to trials. Increasing the number of clinical trials in rural locations may enable more rural patients to access and enroll in GBM studies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document