Key considerations for combination therapy in Alzheimer's clinical trials: Perspectives from an expert advisory board convened by the Alzheimer's drug discovery foundation.

There is growing consensus in the Alzheimer's community that combination therapy will be needed to maximize therapeutic benefits through the course of the disease. However, combination therapy raises complex questions and decisions for study sponsors, from preclinical research through clinical trial design to regulatory, statistical, and operational considerations. In January 2024, the Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation convened an expert advisory board to discuss the key considerations in each of these areas.

Glutamine sensing licenses cholesterol synthesis.

The mevalonate pathway produces essential lipid metabolites such as cholesterol. Although this pathway is negatively regulated by metabolic intermediates, little is known of the metabolites that positively regulate its activity. We found that the amino acid glutamine is required to activate the mevalonate pathway.

A Statistical Framework for Assessing the Relationship between Biomarkers and Clinical Endpoints in Alzheimer's Disease.

Changes in biomarker levels of Alzheimer's disease (AD) reflect underlying pathophysiological changes in the brain and can provide evidence of direct and downstream treatment effects linked to disease modification. Recent results from clinical trials of anti-amyloid β (Aβ) treatments have raised the question of how to best characterize the relationship between AD biomarkers and clinical endpoints. Consensus methodology for assessing such relationships is lacking, leading to inconsistent evaluation and reporting.

Clinical Meaningfulness in Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials. A Report from the EU-US CTAD Task Force.

Recent positive results of three phase III anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody trials are transforming the landscape of disease-modifying therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease, following several decades of failures. Indeed, all three trials have met their primary endpoints. However, the absolute size of the benefit measured in these trials has generated a debate on whether the change scores observed on clinical outcome assessments represent a clinically meaningful benefit to patients.