The search for clarity regarding “clinically meaningful outcomes” in Alzheimer disease clinical trials: CLARITY-AD and Beyond

Abstract

Abstract CLARITY-AD is an 18-month, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial which examined the safety and efficacy of the anti-amyloid agent, lecanemab, in mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia due to Alzheimer disease (AD). Lecanemab effectively reduced mean brain amyloid burden and was associated with statistically significant favorable effects, reflected by moderately less decline in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes, at 18 months compared to placebo. However, there is controversy within the AD community regarding the clinical significance of these results and whether they translate into clinically meaningful and tangible benefits on cognition or daily functions. We here review the primary and secondary clinical outcomes of CLARITY-AD and present our interpretation of the potential clinical meaningfulness of the group-level differences in study outcomes in the context of the 18-month study duration. We propose that the validation of stage-appropriate group-level thresholds for clinical meaningfulness of AD trial outcomes in biologically confirmed cohorts will allow objective interpretation of trial results and guide clinical decision-making. Further, in accordance with FDA guidance which emphasizes patient-focused drug development, the contextualization of AD clinical trial outcomes can be facilitated by supplementary individual-level data analyses which measure the risk of disease progression or summarize intraindividual change, using prespecified thresholds of clinically meaningful change, in each of the study groups over the trial period. The concepts of “time-saved” and “time-based” slowing in disease progression can be used to communicate clinical outcomes associated with emerging disease-modifying AD therapies to various stakeholders. We also describe several factors that need to be considered when evaluating outcomes of emerging AD therapies, including disease stage, the neuropathologic complexity of AD, time-based effects of disease-modifying therapies, and the possible influence of individual factors on treatment response and/or risk for adverse events. The consideration of these factors in the design and reporting of future trials of emerging AD therapies will guide clinicians regarding their appropriateness for use in various patient populations. Finally, we emphasize that data from clinical cohorts with longer durations of treatment and follow-up, including extension studies and patient registries, is needed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of lecanemab in early symptomatic AD.

Keywords

• Lecanemab
• Alzheimer disease
• Clinical outcomes
• Clinically meaningful change
• Minimal clinically important difference