Application of a Novel Endpoint Staging Framework: Proof of Concept in the AMBAR Study.

Background: A theoretical endpoint staging framework was previously developed and published, aligning outcomes (i.e., memory) to the stage of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in which a given outcome is most relevant (i.e., has the greatest risk of degradation). The framework guides the selection of endpoints measuring outcomes relevant within a target AD population. Here, a proof of concept is presented via post-hoc analyses of the Alzheimer Management by Albumin Replacement (AMBAR) Phase 2b clinical trial in patients with AD (NCT01561053, 2012). Objective: To evaluate whether aligning endpoints measuring cognition, function, and quality of life to hypothesized 'target' stages of AD yields magnitudes of treatment efficacy greater than those reported in the AMBAR full analysis set (FAS). Methods: Three endpoints were tested: ADAS-Cog 12, ADCS-ADL, and QoL-AD. The magnitude of treatment efficacy was hypothesized to be maximized in the target stages of mild, mild-to-moderate, and very mild AD, respectively, compared to the full analysis set (FAS) and non-target stages. Results: For ADAS-Cog 12, the magnitude of treatment efficacy was largest in the non-target stage (-4.0, p = 0.0760) compared to target stage and FAS. For ADCS-ADL and QoL-AD, the magnitude of treatment efficacy was largest in the target stage (14.2, p = 0.0003; 2.4, p < 0.0001, respectively) compared to non-target stage and FAS. Conclusions: Findings indicated that evaluating endpoints in the most relevant AD stage can increase the magnitude of the observed treatment efficacy. Evidence provides preliminary proof of concept for the endpoint staging framework.

Toward the optimized assessment of clinical outcomes in studies of novel treatments for Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by a progressive decline in cognition and daily function, leading to a greater need for caregiver support. Clinical disease is segmented into a preclinical stage, mild cognitive impairment, and mild, moderate, and severe stages of Alzheimer's dementia. Although AD trials enroll participants at various stages of illness, treatment efficacy is often assessed using endpoints based on measures of outcomes that are held fixed across disease stages. We hypothesize that matching the primary outcomes measured in the endpoint hierarchy to the stage of disease targeted by the trial will increase the likelihood of detecting true treatment benefits. AREAS COVERED: We discuss current approaches to assessing clinical outcomes in AD trials, followed by a consideration of how effect detection can be improved by linking the stage of AD to the endpoints that most likely reflect stage-specific disease progression. EXPERT OPINION: Failing to account for stage-specific relevance and sensitivity of clinical outcomes may be one factor that contributes to trial failures in AD. Given the history of failure, experts have begun to scrutinize the relevance and sensitivity of outcomes as a potentially modifiable barrier to successful trials. To this end, we present a framework for refining trial endpoint selection and evaluation.