A-MCIまたはVm-AD患者におけるABvac40の反復投与の安全性と免疫原性
ABvac40の反復皮下注射の安全性、忍容性、および免疫反応を調査するための、記憶喪失性軽度認知障害または非常に軽度のアルツハイマー病の患者における多施設、無作為化、二重盲検、プラセボ対照、24か月の研究
アルツハイマー病 (AD) は認知症の最も一般的なタイプであり、世界中で推定 4,700 万人の認知症患者の 50 ~ 75% を占めています。 アルツハイマー病のアミロイドカスケード仮説は、Aβの産生とクリアランスの不均衡によって引き起こされる脳内のアミロイドβ(Aβ)ペプチドの蓄積が、最終的に認知症につながるカスケードの開始因子であると提唱しています。
Aβ ペプチドは、Aβ40 および Aβ42 を含むアミロイド前駆体タンパク質 (APP) の連続的な切断から生成されます。 Aβ40 は、分泌される Aβ 型の中で優勢なバリアント (90%) であり、Aβ42 は疎水性が高く、凝集しやすく、Aβ42 オリゴマーは最も神経毒性のある種であると見なされていますが、Aβ40 は毒性の高い拡散性凝集体を生成することもあり、これを防ぐことができます。特異的な抗Aβ40抗体によるin vitro。
いくつかの研究では、脳内の高濃度の Aβ40 が、アルツハイマー病の患者と、認知症の発症における Aβ40 の重要性を指摘して、老人斑はあるが認知機能が正常な患者とを区別することが提案されています。 これに合わせて、以前の研究では、特定の抗Aβ40抗体がAD脳の嗅内皮質および海馬のNFTを標識し、これらがタウNFTと共局在しないことが実証されており、Cで満たされた変性ニューロン集団の存在が示唆されています。 -Aβx-40の末端フラグメント。 さらに、Aβ40 は脳アミロイド血管障害 (CAA) を引き起こす脳動脈周囲のアミロイド沈着の主成分であり、AD 患者の約 80 ~ 90% の有病率を示します (詳細については、Lacosta et al. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy (2018) 10:12 DOI 10.1186/s13195-018-0340-8).
Aβ40 を標的とする戦略が新しい疾患修飾療法となりうることを示唆する以前の結果を考慮して、Aβ40 ペプチドの C 末端を標的とする最初の活性型ワクチンである ABvac40 を開発しました。
この第 II 相試験の目的は、a-MCI または vm-AD 患者で、mm-AD 患者を対象とした ABvac40 第 I 相臨床試験で得られた安全性と忍容性のレベルを確認することです。 さらに、この研究は、ABvac40 によって誘発される免疫応答をよりよく特徴付け、AD バイオマーカーに対するその影響を調査することを目的としています。
調査の概要
研究の種類
入学 (実際)
段階
- フェーズ2
連絡先と場所
研究場所
-
-
-
Brescia、イタリア、25125
- San Giovanni di Dio - Fatebenefratelli
-
-
-
-
-
Stockholm、スウェーデン、141 86
- Karolinska Universitetssjukhuset
-
-
-
-
Alicante
-
Alicante、Alicante、スペイン、03010
- Hospital General Universitario de Alicante
-
-
Barcelona
-
Barcelona、Barcelona、スペイン、08025
- Hospital de La Santa Creu i Sant Pau
-
Barcelona、Barcelona、スペイン
- Hospital Del Mar
-
Barcelona、Barcelona、スペイン、08035
- Hospital Vall d'hebrón
-
Barcelona、Barcelona、スペイン、08005
- Barcelona Beta Brain Research Center (BBRC)
-
Barcelona、Barcelona、スペイン、08028
- Fundació ACE
-
Terrassa、Barcelona、スペイン、08221
- Hospital Mutua De Terrasa
-
-
Burgos
-
Burgos、Burgos、スペイン、09006
- Hospital U. de Burgos
-
-
Guipuzcoa
-
Donostia / San Sebastian、Guipuzcoa、スペイン、20014
- Hospital Universitario Donosti
-
-
La Rioja
-
Logroño、La Rioja、スペイン、26006
- Hospital San Pedro
-
-
Lleida
-
Lleida、Lleida、スペイン、25198
- Hospital Santa Maria de Lleida
-
-
Madrid
-
Colmenar Viejo、Madrid、スペイン、28034
- Hospital Ramon y Cajal
-
Madrid、Madrid、スペイン、28040
- Hospital Clinico San Carlos
-
Madrid、Madrid、スペイン、28006
- Complejo Hospitalario Ruber Juan Bravo
-
Madrid、Madrid、スペイン、28010
- Hospital Universitario 12 Octubre
-
-
Navarre
-
Pamplona、Navarre、スペイン、31008
- CUN - Clínica Universidad de Navarra
-
-
Vizcaya
-
Algorta、Vizcaya、スペイン、48993
- CAE Oroitu
-
-
Zaragoza
-
Zaragoza、Zaragoza、スペイン、50009
- Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa
-
-
-
-
-
Montpellier、フランス、34295
- CHU de Montpellier
-
Toulouse、フランス、31059
- Centre de Recherche Clinique du Gérontopôle
-
-
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté
-
Dijon、Bourgogne-Franche-Comté、フランス、21000
- Hôpital François Mitterrand
-
-
参加基準
適格基準
就学可能な年齢
健康ボランティアの受け入れ
説明
包含基準:
サブジェクトは、次のすべての包含基準を満たす必要があります。
- -インフォームドコンセントに署名した時点で、55〜80歳の男性または女性。
- 患者(または該当する場合は法定代理人)と近親者/介護者は、被験者情報シートを読み、臨床試験への参加に同意し、インフォームドコンセントフォームに署名する必要があります(患者と近親者/介護者)。
- -患者の研究訪問に出席するための安定した介護者の存在。
- 年齢と教育レベルに応じて、ミニ精神状態検査 (MMSE) のスコアが 24 ~ 30 点 (包括的) であること。
- 臨床認知症評価 (CDR) スケールスコア 0.5。
- 85以下の遅延記憶指数(DMI)の神経心理学的状態(RBANS)スコアの評価のための反復可能なバッテリー。
- 患者の MRI 脳スキャンの結果は、次の基準に従って臨床 a-MCI または vm-AD の診断と一致する必要があります: シェルテンス スケール、白質および過去の出血の測定。
- -患者がADの治療を受けている場合、選択訪問の2か月前から安定していなければなりません。
- -付随する疾患の治療は、研究の治療前の前月の間安定していなければなりません。
- 研究の要件と手順を遵守するための研究者による候補者の肯定的な評価。
除外基準:
次の除外基準のいずれかを満たす被験者は、研究への参加資格がありません。
- -ワクチンの成分に対する既知のアレルギー、またはアナフィラキシーの既往歴、重度のアレルギー反応、または製剤の成分に対する過敏症の病歴。 魚介類または甲殻類に対するアレルギー。
- 活動性感染症(すなわち、 B型、C型肝炎)。 陽性の梅毒血清学。
- -軽度の湿疹、鼻炎または乾癬を除く、自己免疫疾患の病歴または存在。
- -免疫不全の存在または病歴(すなわち HIV)。
- 重大な腎臓および/または肝臓疾患。
- -過去6か月の喘息または気管支痙攣を伴う反応性気道疾患の病歴、または現在定期的な治療を受けています。
- コントロールされていない重大な全身状態(例: 糖尿病、うっ血性心不全、高血圧)。
- がんの病歴(最後の特定の治療から5年以内)。 例外:基底細胞がん。
- 血液学的、生化学的または尿分析パラメーター、特にビタミン B12、葉酸または甲状腺検査のレベルに関連するパラメーターの著しい変化。
- -他の中枢神経系障害の病歴、変性または非変性の神経学的または精神医学的状態 研究者の意見では、認知症の原因である可能性がある、または認知障害を説明する可能性がある、または認知機能を直接またはその処理。
- Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS; 短縮版)、スコア > 5
- -C-SSRSの自殺念慮項目4または5、またはスクリーニング前6か月以内の自殺行動に「はい」の回答がある、またはスクリーニング前の過去5年間に入院または自殺行動の治療を受けました。
- -脳血管疾患(虚血性または出血性脳卒中、一過性脳虚血発作)の病歴または徴候、またはNINDS-AIREN基準による血管性認知症の可能性、可能性、または明確な診断。
- -関連する微小血管疾患のパターンのMRI上の存在(Leukoaraiosis、Fazekasスコアが深部白質スケールで2以上、またはグローバルスコアで4以上)または複数のラクナまたは領域の梗塞。 調査官の意見では、被験者の認知障害の関連する原因である可能性があるその他のMRI所見。 最大 3 つの微小出血の存在は許容されます。
- -出血性疾患または素因となる状態の病歴、血液凝固、またはスクリーニング時の凝固プロファイルに関する臨床的に重大な異常な結果は、治験責任医師によって決定されます。
- 抗凝固薬または抗凝集療法で治療されている患者(1日325mg以下の予防用量のアスピリンまたは1日75mg以下のクロピドグレルは許可されています)は、研究に採用されるべきではありません。
- 修正ハチンスキー虚血性尺度、スコア 4 以上。
- -過去3か月以内の手術(全身麻酔を伴う) 試験に含まれるか、研究期間中にプログラムされます。
- -来院前30日以内の全身性コルチコステロイドまたは他の免疫抑制剤による治療。
- -最初のIMP投与前2か月以内のインフルエンザまたはその他のワクチンに対するワクチン接種。
- -この試験で以前に無作為化された患者。
- -スクリーニング訪問までの過去1か月以内の別の臨床試験への参加、またはスクリーニング訪問までの最後の投与後12か月以内の被験者の場合、ADの進行を修正することを意図した治験薬を使用した試験に参加した場合を除くプラセボの受領書が入手可能です。 実験薬がIVIGまたはアルツハイマー病に対するワクチンを含む免疫療法薬である場合、プラセボの受領に関する文書が利用可能でない限り、患者を研究に含めることはできません。
- アルコールまたは薬物乱用または依存症のある患者。
- -絶対的(ペースメーカーまたは植込み型除細動器を使用)または相対的(ベアメタルステントまたは過去6か月に埋め込まれたステント)禁忌 MRI検査。 閉所恐怖症の感覚は、MRIまたはPETスキャンを実行させません。
- -プロトコルを遵守する可能性が低い患者(例:フォローアップの訪問に戻ることができない)。
- 出産の可能性がある、妊娠中または授乳中の女性。
- 患者にとって追加のリスクに関連する心電図の重大な変化。
研究計画
研究はどのように設計されていますか?
デザインの詳細
- 主な目的:処理
- 割り当て:ランダム化
- 介入モデル:クロスオーバー割り当て
- マスキング:トリプル
武器と介入
参加者グループ / アーム |
介入・治療 |
|---|---|
|
実験的:ABvac40
ABvac40の6回の投与;最初の 5 回は 4 週間に 1 回、6 回目は 42 週に 1 回投与されました。
各投与は、ABvac40 の 1 mL 皮下注射で構成されます。
|
ABVAC40は、アジュバントとして0.35%の水酸化アルミニウムを含むリン酸緩衝液で車両を搭載したキャリアタンパク質(KLH)を含むAβX-40の共役で構成されています。
|
|
プラセボコンパレーター:プラセボ
プラセボの6回の投与;最初の 5 回は 4 週間に 1 回、6 回目は 42 週に 1 回投与されました。
各投与は、有効成分を含まないワクチンのビヒクルバッファーの 1 mL 皮下注射で構成されます。
|
プラセボは、コンジュゲートなしでワクチンの媒体(0.35%の水酸化アルミニウムアルミニウムを含むリン酸緩衝液)で構成されています。
|
この研究は何を測定していますか?
主要な結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
抗Aβ40抗体シグナルの平均最大増分(ELISAの光密度[OD])
時間枠:パートA(ベースライン、およびベースライン後の訪問は、第2A週、第6A週、10週目、14日、18A、第24A週、40A、44A、第50A週、77A、週、104A週、および第40週目、第40週、第40日、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、
|
ベースライン訪問に関する各被験者の血漿抗Aβ40抗体シグナル(ELISAの光学密度[OD])の平均最大増分(Mδ)。
|
パートA(ベースライン、およびベースライン後の訪問は、第2A週、第6A週、10週目、14日、18A、第24A週、40A、44A、第50A週、77A、週、104A週、および第40週目、第40週、第40日、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、
|
二次結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Teaesによる被験者の中止
時間枠:研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
研究全体中に治療に浸透した有害事象(TEAE)による撤回された被験者の数。
|
研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
|
身体検査に臨床的に有意な異常を持つ被験者の数
時間枠:研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
研究中に報告された身体検査の臨床的に有意な(CS)異常。
|
研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
|
神経学的検査に臨床的に有意な異常を持つ被験者の数
時間枠:研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
研究中に報告された神経学的検査の臨床的に有意な(CS)異常。
|
研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
|
分析的血液学に臨床的に有意な異常を持つ被験者の数
時間枠:研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
研究中に報告された血液学的パラメーターの臨床的に有意な(CS)異常。
|
研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
|
分析生化学に臨床的に有意な異常を持つ被験者の数
時間枠:研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
研究中に報告された生化学パラメーターの臨床的に有意な(CS)異常。
|
研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
|
凝固に臨床的に有意な異常を有する被験者の数
時間枠:研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
研究中に報告された凝固パラメーターの臨床的に有意な(CS)異常。
|
研究期間全体(パートAの第0週から104週目、第0週から第77週のパートb)
|
|
コロンビア自殺重大度評価尺度
時間枠:パートA(24a、50a、週77a、104a週)
|
前回の訪問以来、自殺念慮または自殺行動の被験者。
|
パートA(24a、50a、週77a、104a週)
|
|
Level of Anti-Aβ40 Antibodies in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 antibodies in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included the recorded outcome value as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Anti-Aβ40 Antibodies in Plasma
時間枠:Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 antibodies in plasma from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included the recorded outcome value as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. A compound symmetric variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Antibody-secreting Cells
時間枠:Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of antibody-secreting cells from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included the recorded outcome value as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Aβ40 Peptides in Plasma - ABtest-IA
時間枠:Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 peptides in plasma (ABtest-IA) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Aβ42 Peptides in Plasma - ABtest-IA
時間枠:Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of anti-Aβ42 peptides in plasma (ABtest-IA) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Aβ40 Peptides in Plasma - ABtest-MS
時間枠:Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 peptides in plasma (ABtest-MS) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. A compound symmetric variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Aβ42 Peptides in Plasma - ABtest-MS
時間枠:Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of anti-Aβ42 peptides in plasma (ABtest-MS) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Cortical Fibrillary Amyloid Deposition Assessed by a-PET Scans
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in amyloid-PET (a-PET) standard centiloid global cortical area (reference Pons) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Percentage of Change in Brain Volume
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
|
The percent change in brain volume from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Percentage of Change in Hippocampal Volume
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 104A)
|
The percent change in right and left hippocampal volume from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 104A)
|
|
Percentage of Change in Ventricular Volume
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
|
The percent change in ventricular volume from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Aβ42 Peptides in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of Aβ42 peptides in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Aβ40 Peptides in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of Aβ40 peptides in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Aβ42/Aβ40 Ratio in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Total Tau in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of total Tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of p-Tau 181 in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of p-Tau 181 in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Neurofilament Light in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of neurofilament light in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Level of Neurogranin in CSF
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in levels of neurogranin in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) Score
時間枠:Part A (baseline, and post-baseline at Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in MMSE score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set. MMSE is an 11-question measure that tests 5 areas of cognitive function: orientation, registration, attention and calculation, recall, and language. MMSE score ranges: 0-30, with lower scores indicating worst cognition. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (baseline, and post-baseline at Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) Score
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in CDR-SB score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set. CDR-SB assesses 6 cognitive and functional domains: Memory, Orientation, Judgment & Problem Solving, Community Affairs, Home & Hobbies, Personal Care. CDR-SB score ranges: 0-18. The higher scores mean a worst outcome. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) Score
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in RBANS total score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set. RBANS assesses 5 cognitive domains: Immediate Memory, Visuospatial/constructional, Language, Attention, Delayed Memory. Total score (range 40-160) sums the 5 domain scores. The higher scores mean a better outcome. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study - Activities of Daily Living, Mild Cognitive Impairment (ADCS-ADL MCI) Score
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
The change in ADCS-ADL MCI total score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set. ADCS-ADL MCI is a 24-item scale that includes 6 basic activities of daily living (ADL) items and 16 instrumental ADL items that provide a total score: 0-78, with a lower score indicating greater severity. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Trail Making Test (TMT) Scores
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
Change in TMT score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set. TMT has 2 parts in which the patient connects 25 dots in order as quickly as possible. In TMT-A, targets are numbers 1-25; in TMT-B, targets are numbers 1-13 interleaved with letters A-L. Lower timings indicate better outcome. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
|
|
Investigator Global Evaluation (IGE) Score
時間枠:Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
|
Change in IGE from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using MMRM and ITT analysis set. IGE at baseline:1-Good general status;2-Slight deterioration;3-Moderate deterioration;4-Bad general status. IGE after baseline:1-Marked improvement;2-Moderate improvement;3-Slight improvement;4-No change;5-Slight worsening;6-Moderate worsening;7-Marked worsening. MMRM included IGE after baseline as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix is used. Following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly significantly associated with response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
|
|
EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Overall Severity Index Score
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
Change in EQ-5D-5L overall severity index from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using MMRM and ITT analysis set. EQ-5D-5L has 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression; rated: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
|
EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels - Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-5D-5L - VAS) Score
時間枠:Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
The change in EQ-5D-5L - VAS score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set. VAS records the patient's self-rated health on a vertical scale, ranging from 100 = 'Best imaginable health state' down to 0 = 'Worst imaginable health state'. The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15). |
Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
|
その他の成果指標
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
抗Aβ40抗体シグナルの平均最大増分(ELISAの光学密度[OD]) - 感度
時間枠:パートA(ベースライン、およびベースライン後の訪問は、第2A週、第6A週、10週目、14日、18A、第24A週、40A、44A、第50A週、77A、週、104A週、および第40週目、第40週、第40日、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、
|
ベースライン訪問に関する各被験者の血漿抗Aβ40抗体シグナル(ELISAの光学密度[OD])の平均最大増分(Mδ)。 PP(パートA)分析セットの感度分析。 |
パートA(ベースライン、およびベースライン後の訪問は、第2A週、第6A週、10週目、14日、18A、第24A週、40A、44A、第50A週、77A、週、104A週、および第40週目、第40週、第40日、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、第40週、
|
協力者と研究者
スポンサー
捜査官
- スタディディレクター:Manuel Sarasa、Araclon Biotech Ltd
出版物と役立つリンク
研究記録日
主要日程の研究
研究開始 (実際)
一次修了 (実際)
研究の完了 (実際)
試験登録日
最初に提出
QC基準を満たした最初の提出物
最初の投稿 (実際)
学習記録の更新
投稿された最後の更新 (実際)
QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました
最終確認日
詳しくは
この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。