Assessing the clinical meaningfulness of slowing CDR-SB progression with disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease.
- Authors
- Hartz, Sarah M; Schindler, Suzanne E; Streitz, Marissa L; Moulder, Krista L; Mozersky, Jessica; Wang, Guoqiao; Xiong, Chengjie; Morris, John C
- Year
- 2025
- Journal
- Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)
- PMID
- 39949872
- DOI
- 10.1002/trc2.70033
- PMCID
- PMC11822626
INTRODUCTION: For many patients and caregivers, a major goal of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia is to extend independence in instrumental and basic activities of daily living (IADLs and BADLs). The goal of this study was to estimate the effect of treatments on the time remaining independent in IADLs and BADLs. METHODS: Participants at the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC) who met eligibility criteria for recent DMT trials were studied: age ≥60 years at baseline, clinical diagnosis of very mild or mild AD dementia (global Clinical Dementia Rating [CDR] score 0.5 or 1), biomarker confirmation of amyloid pathology, and at least one follow-up CDR assessment within 5 years. For IADLs, a subset of the Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ) was examined that rated the degree of independence in the following: paying bills, driving, remembering medications and appointments, and preparing meals. For BADLs, the Personal Care domain of the CDR was used. Mixed-effects logistic and ordinal regression models were used to examine the relationship between CDR Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) and the individual functional outcomes and their components. The change in CDR-SB over time was estimated with linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 282 participants were followed for an average of 2.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 1.3 years). For 50% of individuals, loss of independence in IADLs occurred at CDR-SB >4.5 and in BADLs at CDR-SB >11.5. For individuals with a baseline CDR-SB = 2, treatment with lecanemab would extend independence in IADLs for 10 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4-18 months) and treatment with donanemab in the low/medium tau group would extend independence in IADLs by 13 months (95% CI 6-24 months). DISCUSSION: Independence in ADLs can be related to CDR-SB and used to demonstrate the effect of AD treatments in extending the time of independent function, a meaningful outcome for patients and their families. HIGHLIGHTS: We estimated time to loss of independence for people with AD dementiaEstimating time to loss of independence can help with clinical decision-makingDisease-modifying treatments for AD dementia can extend independence.
Relationship between CDR‐SB and functional outcomes. (A) shows the decline in components of ADLs: IADLs (personal finances, driving, remembering appointments/medications and meal preparation, with non‐independence defined as “needing assistance” or “dependent” on at least three of these), and BADLs (including dressing and personal hygiene). (B) Shows the probability of independence in IADLs and BADLs relative to CDR‐SB. Dashed lines represent boundaries for 95% confidence intervals. The CDR‐SB score is noted where an estimated 50% of participants are no longer independent in ADLs. ADLs, activities of daily living; BADLs, basic ADLs; CDR‐SB, Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes; IADLs, instrumental ADLs.
Translation of CDR‐SB progression to estimated time remaining with independence in ADLs. (A) Illustrates the computation of expected months of independence in IADLs (CDR‐SB = 4.5) for baseline CDR‐SB = 2, using the estimated annual change in CDR‐SB shown in Table 1. (B) Expands this calculation to baseline CDR‐SB 0.5–11, showing the estimated months remaining of independence in IADLs (time to CDR‐SB = 4.5) for global CDR 0.5 (baseline CDR‐SB 0.5–4), and independence in BADLs (time to CDR‐SB = 11.5) for global CDR 1 (baseline CDR‐SB 4.5–11). ADLs, activities of daily living; BADLs, basic ADLs; CDR‐SB, Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes; IADLs, instrumental ADLs.
Example computation of estimated months of independence in ADLs saved by DMTs using published results. (A) Shows results of the lecanemab trial. (B–D) Show results of the donanemab trial: the full sample results are in B, and then the results are partitioned into (C) low/medium tau and (D) high tau. ADLs, activities of daily living; DMTs, disease‐modifying treatments.
No entities extracted from this document yet.
No uploaded files.
| Citation | PMID | DOI | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures. Alzheimers Dement. 2023;19(4):1598‐1695. doi:10.1002/alz.13016 36918389 | — | — | — |
| A placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, parallel‐group, 18‐month study with an open‐label extension phase to confirm safety and efficacy of BAN2401 in subjects with early Alzheimer's disease. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03887455 | — | — | — |
| Andrews JS , Desai U , Kirson NY , Zichlin ML , Ball DE , Matthews BR . Disease severity and minimal clinically important differences in clinical outcome assessments for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials. Alzheimers Dement. 2019;5:354‐363. doi:10.1016/j.trci.2019.06.005 PMC669041531417957 | — | — | — |
| Barthelemy NR , Saef B , Li Y , et al. CSF tau phosphorylation occupancies at T217 and T205 represent improved biomarkers of amyloid and tau pathology in Alzheimer's disease. Nat Aging. 2023;3(4):391‐401. doi:10.1038/s43587-023-00380-7 37117788 PMC10154225 | — | — | — |
| Bates D , Mächler M , Bolker B , Walker S . Fitting linear mixed‐effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67(1):1‐48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 | — | — | — |
| Burke JF , Kerber KA , Langa KM , Albin RL , Kotagal V. Lecanemab : Looking before we leap. Neurology. 2023;101(15):661‐665. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000207505 37479527 PMC10585683 | — | — | — |
| DiBenedetti DB , Slota C , Wronski SL , et al. Assessing what matters most to patients with or at risk for Alzheimer's and care partners: a qualitative study evaluating symptoms, impacts, and outcomes. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2020;12(1):90. doi:10.1186/s13195-020-00659-6 32731886 PMC7393916 | — | — | — |
| Dickson SP , Wessels AM , Dowsett SA , et al. ‘Time Saved’ as a demonstration of clinical meaningfulness and illustrated using the donanemab TRAILBLAZER‐ALZ study findings. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2023;10(3):595‐599. doi:10.14283/jpad.2023.50 37357301 | — | — | — |
| Dubbelman MA , Verrijp M , Terwee CB , et al. Determining the minimal important change of everyday functioning in dementia: pursuing clinical meaningfulness. Neurology. 2022;99(9):e954‐e964. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000200781 35641309 PMC9502738 | — | — | — |
| Ebell MH , Barry HC , Baduni K , Grasso G . Clinically important benefits and harms of monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid for the treatment of Alzheimer disease: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Ann Fam Med. 2024;22(1):50‐62. doi:10.1370/afm.3050 38253509 PMC11233076 | — | — | — |
| GLMMadaptive . Generalized Linear Mixed Models using Adaptive Gaussian Quadrature. GLMMadaptive; 2023. https://drizopoulos.github.io/GLMMadaptive/ | — | — | — |
| Hauber B , Paulsen R , Krasa HB , et al. Assessing what matters to people affected by Alzheimer's disease: a quantitative analysis. Neurol Ther. 2023;12(2):505‐527. doi:10.1007/s40120-023-00445-0 36763306 PMC10043143 | — | — | — |
| Insel PS , Weiner M , Mackin RS , et al. Determining clinically meaningful decline in preclinical Alzheimer disease. Neurology. 2019;93(4):e322‐e333. 10.1212/wnl.0000000000007831 31289148 PMC6669933 | — | — | — |
| Lanctôt KL , Boada M , Tariot PN , et al. Association between clinical dementia rating and clinical outcomes in Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2024;16(1):e12522. doi:10.1002/dad2.12522 PMC1079485738239329 | — | — | — |
| Liu KY , Schneider LS , Howard R . The need to show minimum clinically important differences in Alzheimer's disease trials. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8(11):1013‐1016. doi:10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00197-8 34087114 | — | — | — |
| Morris JC , Ernesto C , Schafer K , et al. Clinical dementia rating training and reliability in multicenter studies: the Alzheimer's disease cooperative study experience. Neurology. 1997;48(6):1508‐10. doi:10.1212/wnl.48.6.1508 9191756 | — | — | — |
| Morris JC , Weintraub S , Chui HC , et al. The uniform data set (UDS): clinical and cognitive variables and descriptive data from Alzheimer disease centers. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2006;20(4):210‐6. doi:10.1097/01.wad.0000213865.09806.92 17132964 | — | — | — |
| Morris JC . The clinical dementia rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology. 1993;43(11):2412‐4. doi:10.1212/wnl.43.11.2412-a 8232972 | — | — | — |
| National Library of Medicine (US) . Assessment of Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Donanemab in Early Symptomatic Alzheimer's Disease. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04437511 | — | — | — |
| Pemberton HG , Collij LE , Heeman F , et al. Quantification of amyloid PET for future clinical use: a state‐of‐the‐art review. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49(10):3508‐3528. doi:10.1007/s00259-022-05784-y 35389071 PMC9308604 | — | — | — |
| Pfeffer RI , Kurosaki TT , Harrah CH , Jr., Chance JM , Filos S . Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol. 1982;37(3):323‐9. doi:10.1093/geronj/37.3.323 7069156 | — | — | — |
| Proust‐Lima C , Philipps V , Liquet B . Estimation of extended mixed models using latent classes and latent processes: the R package lcmm. J Stat Softw. 2017;78(2):1‐56. doi:10.18637/jss.v078.i02 | — | — | — |
| R Core Team. R Foundation for Statistical Computing . R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Version 4.0.0. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2024. https://www.R‐project.org/ | — | — | — |
| Raket LL . Statistical disease progression modeling in Alzheimer disease. Front Big Data. 2020;3. doi:10.3389/fdata.2020.00024 PMC793195233693397 | — | — | — |
| Rentz DM , Wessels AM , Annapragada AV , et al. Building clinically relevant outcomes across the Alzheimer's disease spectrum. Alzheimers Dement. 2021;7(1):e12181. doi:10.1002/trc2.12181 PMC823469634195350 | — | — | — |
| SAS Institute Inc. SAS 9.4. (c). 2016. | — | — | — |
| Siemers E , Holdridge KC , Sundell KL , Liu‐Seifert H . Function and clinical meaningfulness of treatments for mild Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2016;2(1):105‐112. doi:10.1016/j.dadm.2016.02.006 PMC487964527239541 | — | — | — |
| Sims JR , Zimmer JA , Evans CD , et al. Donanemab in early symptomatic Alzheimer disease: the TRAILBLAZER‐ALZ 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023;330(6):512‐527. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.13239 37459141 PMC10352931 | — | — | — |
| Tochel C , Smith M , Baldwin H , et al. What outcomes are important to patients with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease, their caregivers, and health‐care professionals? A systematic review. Alzheimers Dement. 2019;11:231‐247. doi:10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.003 PMC641150730906845 | — | — | — |
| van Dyck CH , Swanson CJ , Aisen P , et al. Lecanemab in early Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(1):9‐21. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2212948 36449413 | — | — | — |
| Vermunt L , Sikkes SAM , van den Hout A , et al. Duration of preclinical, prodromal, and dementia stages of Alzheimer's disease in relation to age, sex, and APOE genotype. Alzheimers Dement. 2019;15(7):888‐898. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2019.04.001 31164314 PMC6646097 | — | — | — |
| Wang G , Cutter G , Oxtoby NP , et al. Statistical considerations when estimating time‐saving treatment effects in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials. Alzheimers Dement. 2024;20(8):5421‐5433. doi:10.1002/alz.14035 39030751 PMC11350030 | — | — | — |
| Watson J , Saunders S , Muniz Terrera G , et al. What matters to people with memory problems, healthy volunteers and health and social care professionals in the context of developing treatment to prevent Alzheimer's dementia? A qualitative study. Health Expect. 2019;22(3):504‐517.30809895 10.1111/hex.12876PMC6543163 | — | — | — |
| Wessels AM , Dennehy EB , Dowsett SA , Dickson SP , Hendrix SB . Meaningful clinical changes in Alzheimer disease measured with the iADRS and illustrated using the donanemab TRAILBLAZER‐ALZ study findings. Neurol Clin Pract. 2023;13(2):e200127. doi:10.1212/cpj.0000000000200127 36891463 PMC9987204 | — | — | — |
No papers in this knowledge base cite this source.
External
| Title | Authors | Journal | Year | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical meaningfulness of anti-amyloid therapies in early Alzheimer's disease: Perspectives from the East and Southeast Asia region. | Chen C et al. | — | 2026 | → |
| Cognitive Outcomes After Hip Fracture Surgery: The Association of Postoperative Delirium on Previously Cognitively Normal Older Adults. | Umoh ME et al. | — | 2026 | → |
| 2'-Fucosyllactose mitigates cognitive deficits in Alzheimer models: targeting amyloid pathology, oxidative stress, and synaptic plasticity. | Munni YA et al. | — | 2025 | → |
| Anti-amyloid treatments: Why we think they are worth it. | Schindler SE et al. | — | 2025 | → |
| Clinical progression on CDR-SB©: Progression-free time at each 0.5 unit level in dominantly inherited and sporadic Alzheimer's disease populations. | Wang G et al. | — | 2025 | → |
| Maximizing the benefit and managing the risk of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody therapy for Alzheimer's disease: Strategies and research directions. | Cummings JL | — | 2025 | → |
| Plasma tau biomarkers for biological staging of Alzheimer's disease. | Montoliu-Gaya L et al. | — | 2025 | → |
| Updates on Disease-Modifying Therapy for Alzheimer's Dementia: Options for Delawareans. | Huege S | — | 2025 | → |