4.7 Article

Effect of APOE genotype status on targeted clinical trials outcomes and efficiency in dementia and mild cognitive impairment resulting from Alzheimer's disease

Journal

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
Volume 10, Issue 3, Pages 349-359

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2013.03.003

Keywords

Alzheimer disease; Mild cognitive impairment; Apolipoprotein E epsilon 4; Clinical trials; Clinical trial simulations; Biomarkers; Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative; Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study; Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R 01 AG037561]
  2. NIH [P50 AG05142]
  3. Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC)
  4. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) [NIA U01 AG024904]
  5. Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study [NIH AG10483]
  6. Alzheimer's Association
  7. Baxter
  8. Eli Lilly
  9. Genentech
  10. Novartis
  11. Pfizer
  12. Accera
  13. AC Immune
  14. Allon
  15. AstraZeneca
  16. Biogen Idec
  17. Chiesi
  18. Elan
  19. En Vivo
  20. GlaxoSmithKline
  21. Ipsen
  22. Johnson Johnson
  23. Lundbeck
  24. Merck
  25. Roche
  26. Takeda
  27. Toyama
  28. Zinfandel
  29. National Institute on Aging (NIA)
  30. National Institute of Neurological Communicative Diseases and Stroke (NINDS)
  31. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
  32. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
  33. Department of Education
  34. Apotek
  35. Biogen-Idec
  36. Cleveland Clinic
  37. Gilead Pharmaceuticals
  38. Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceuticals
  39. Merck/Ono Pharmaceuticals
  40. Modigenetech/Prolor
  41. Neuren
  42. Revalesio
  43. Sanofi-Aventis
  44. Teva
  45. Vivus
  46. NHLBI (Bone Marrow Transplant Protocol Review Committee)
  47. NINDS
  48. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (NMSS)
  49. National Institute on Child and Human Development (NICHD) (Obstetric-Fetal Pharmacology Research Unit [OPRU] oversight committee)
  50. Alexion
  51. Allozyne
  52. Bayer
  53. Celgene
  54. Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers
  55. Coronado Biosciences
  56. Diogenix
  57. Klein-Buendel Incorporated
  58. Medimmune
  59. Nuron Biotech
  60. Receptos
  61. Spiniflex Pharmaceuticals
  62. Teva pharmaceuticals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The apolipoprotein E (APOE) 64 genotype has been recommended as a potential inclusion or exclusion criterion in targeted clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) resulting from AD, and has been implemented in trials of immunotherapeutic agents. Methods: We tested this recommendation with clinical trial simulations using participants from a meta-database of 19 studies to create trial samples with APOE 64 proportions ranging from 0% (all noncarriers) to 100% (all carriers). For each percentage of APOE 64 carriers, we resampled the database randomly for 1000 trials for each trial scenario, planning for 18- or 24-month trials with samples from 50 to 400 patients per treatment or placebo group, up to 40% dropouts, and outcomes on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) with effect sizes from 0.15 to 0.75, and calculated statistical power. Results: Enrichment of clinical trial participants based on APOE 64 carrier status resulted in minimal increases in power compared with enrolling participants with the APOE 63 genotype only or enrolling patients without regard to APOE genotype. Increased screening requirements to enhance the sample would offset gains in power. Conclusions: Although samples enriched for APOE 64 carriers in AD or MCI clinical trials showed slightly more cognitive impairment and greater decline using the number APOE 64 alleles as an inclusion criterion most likely would not result in more efficient trials, and trials would take longer because fewer patients would be available. The APOE epsilon 4/epsilon X (where X = 2, 3 or 4) genotype could be useful, however, as an explanatory variable or covariate if warranted by a drug's action. (C) 2014 The Alzheimer's Association. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available