RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Characterizing Treatment Non-responders vs. Responders in Completed Alzheimer’s Disease Clinical Trials
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.10.27.23297685
DO 10.1101/2023.10.27.23297685
A1 Wang, Dulin
A1 Ling, Yaobin
A1 Harris, Kristofer
A1 Schulz, Paul E.
A1 Jiang, Xiaoqian
A1 Kim, Yejin
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/10/30/2023.10.27.23297685.abstract
AB Alzheimer’s disease (AD) patients have varying responses to AD drugs and there may be no single treatment for all AD patients. Trial after trial shows that identifying non-responsive and responsive subgroups and their corresponding moderators will provide better insights into subject selection and interpretation in future clinical trials. We aim to extensively investigate pre-treatment features that moderate treatment effect of Galantamine, Bapineuzumab, and Semagacestat from completed trial data. We obtained individual-level patient data from ten randomized clinical trials. Six Galantamine trials and two Bapineuzumab trials were from Yale University Open Data Access Project and two Semagacestat trials were from the Center for Global Clinical Research Data. We included a total of 10,948 subjects. The trials were conducted worldwide from 2001 to 2012. We estimated treatment effect using causal forest modeling on each trial. Finally, we identified important pre-treatment features that determine treatment efficacy and identified responsive or nonresponsive subgroups. As a result, patient’s pre-treatment conditions that determined the treatment efficacy of Galantamine differed by dementia stages, but we consistently observed that non-responders in Galantamine trials had lower BMI (25 vs 28, P < .001) and increased ages (74 vs 68, P < .001). Responders in Bapineuzumab and Semagacestat trials had lower Aβ42levels (6.41 vs 6.53 pg/ml, P < .001) and smaller whole brain volumes (983.13 vs 1052.78 ml, P < .001). 6 ‘positive’ treatment trials had subsets of patients who had, in fact, not responded. 4 “negative” treatment trials had subsets of patients who had, in fact, responded. This study suggests that analyzing heterogeneity in treatment effects in “positive” or “negative” trials may be a very powerful tool for identifying distinct subgroups that are responsive to treatments, which may significantly benefit future clinical trial design and interpretation.Competing Interest StatementXJ is CPRIT Scholar in Cancer Research (RR180012), and he was supported in part by Christopher Sarofim Family Professorship, UT Stars award, UTHealth startup, the National Institute of Health (NIH) under award number R01AG066749, R01AG066749-03S1, R01LM013712, R01LM014520, R01AG082721, R01AG066749, U01AG079847, U01TR002062, U01CA274576 and the National Science Foundation (NSF) #2124789. YK is supported in part by UTHealth startup and the National Institute of Health (NIH) under award number R01AG082721 and R01AG066749. PS is funded by the McCord Family Professorship in Neurology, the Umphrey Family Professorship in Neurodegenerative Disorders, multiple NIH grants, several foundation grants, and contracts with multiple pharmaceutical companies related to the performance of clinical trials. He serves as a consultant and speaker for Eli Lilly, Biogen, and Acadia Pharmaceuticals. No other authors have declarations to disclose.Funding StatementThis study was funded by US NIH (R01AG066749 and U01TR002062); NSF (#2124789), Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (RR180012).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors