Cited by 2,932Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research

Donanemab in Early Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease: The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Sims, John R., Zimmer, Jennifer A., Evans, Cynthia D., Lu, Ming, Ardayfio, Paul, Sparks, JonDavid, Wessels, Alette M., Shcherbinin, Sergey +301 more·2023·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: There are limited efficacious treatments for Alzheimer disease. Objective: To assess efficacy and adverse events of donanemab, an antibody designed to clear brain amyloid plaque. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter (277 medical research centers/hospitals in 8 countries), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 18-month phase 3 trial that enrolled 1736 participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer disease (mild cognitive impairment/mild dementia) with amyloid and low/medium or high tau pathology based on positron emission tomography imaging from June 2020 to November 2021 (last patient visit for primary outcome in April 2023). Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive donanemab (n = 860) or placebo (n = 876) intravenously every 4 weeks for 72 weeks. Participants in the donanemab group were switched to receive placebo in a blinded manner if dose completion criteria were met. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in integrated Alzheimer Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) score from baseline to 76 weeks (range, 0-144; lower scores indicate greater impairment). There were 24 gated outcomes (primary, secondary, and exploratory), including the secondary outcome of change in the sum of boxes of the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR-SB) score (range, 0-18; higher scores indicate greater impairment). Statistical testing allocated α of .04 to testing low/medium tau population outcomes, with the remainder (.01) for combined population outcomes. Results: Among 1736 randomized participants (mean age, 73.0 years; 996 [57.4%] women; 1182 [68.1%] with low/medium tau pathology and 552 [31.8%] with high tau pathology), 1320 (76%) completed the trial. Of the 24 gated outcomes, 23 were statistically significant. The least-squares mean (LSM) change in iADRS score at 76 weeks was −6.02 (95% CI, −7.01 to −5.03) in the donanemab group and −9.27 (95% CI, −10.23 to −8.31) in the placebo group (difference, 3.25 [95% CI, 1.88-4.62]; P < .001) in the low/medium tau population and −10.2 (95% CI, −11.22 to −9.16) with donanemab and −13.1 (95% CI, −14.10 to −12.13) with placebo (difference, 2.92 [95% CI, 1.51-4.33]; P < .001) in the combined population. LSM change in CDR-SB score at 76 weeks was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.00-1.41) with donanemab and 1.88 (95% CI, 1.68-2.08) with placebo (difference, −0.67 [95% CI, −0.95 to −0.40]; P < .001) in the low/medium tau population and 1.72 (95% CI, 1.53-1.91) with donanemab and 2.42 (95% CI, 2.24-2.60) with placebo (difference, −0.7 [95% CI, −0.95 to −0.45]; P < .001) in the combined population. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities of edema or effusion occurred in 205 participants (24.0%; 52 symptomatic) in the donanemab group and 18 (2.1%; 0 symptomatic during study) in the placebo group and infusion-related reactions occurred in 74 participants (8.7%) with donanemab and 4 (0.5%) with placebo. Three deaths in the donanemab group and 1 in the placebo group were considered treatment related. Conclusions and Relevance: Among participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer disease and amyloid and tau pathology, donanemab significantly slowed clinical progression at 76 weeks in those with low/medium tau and in the combined low/medium and high tau pathology population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04437511

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2023.13239

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent therapies targeting Aβ clearance using anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies during early stages of AD provide minimal cognitive benefit.

    “Recent therapies targeting Aβ clearance using anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies (mabs) during the early stages of AD provide minimal cognitive benefit”

    From Perineuronal net deglycosylation associates with tauopathy‐induced gliosis and neurodegeneration (2024) · cites this paper as Sims et al. 2023

    The Primary Outcome section reports that donanemab slowed decline on a cognition-and-function scale by 35.1% in the low/medium-tau group and 22.3% in the combined group versus placebo. The Discussion explicitly calls the benefit clinically meaningful, contrary to describing the benefit as minimal. This trial evaluates donanemab, not every anti-Aβ antibody. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Phase 2 and phase 3 trials of aducanumab, lecanemab, donanemab, and gantenerumab targeting Aβ required PET or CSF evidence of amyloid pathology for trial enrolment.

    “Phase 2 and phase 3 trials of the monoclonal antibodies -- aducanumab, lecanemab, and donanemab, as well as the discontinued gantenerumab -that target Aβ plaques, fibrils, soluble protofibrils, and oligomeric Aβ species all required PET or CSF evidence of amyloid pathology for trial enrolment. (460-463)”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2024 report of the Lancet standing Commission (2024) · cites this paper as [462]

    The Trial Design and Participants section says the phase 3 donanemab trial required amyloid pathology confirmed by PET for enrollment. The paper mentions a phase 2 donanemab trial and studies of aducanumab and lecanemab, but the passages do not establish their enrollment requirements or those of gantenerumab trials. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Post-diagnosis management challenges are increasing because new therapeutics require intensive monitoring.

    “After diagnosis, challenges with management are growing as new therapeutics with intensive requirements for monitoring are emerging, adding both urgency and complexity.13,14”

    From Review of Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Use in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Randomization and Intervention section describes scheduled MRIs, additional imaging every 4 to 6 weeks when abnormalities were detected, and criteria for interrupting and resuming donanemab. This supports intensive monitoring for one therapy, but the trial does not establish that post-diagnosis management challenges are increasing as new therapies emerge. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ2 phase 3 study, donanemab treatment significantly slowed cognitive decline on the primary outcome of the integrated AD Rating Scale (iADRS) by 40% and improved all secondary clinical endpoints.

    “On 4 May 2023, Lilly announced positive results for this phase 3 study, as treatment significantly slowed cognitive decline on the primary outcome of the integrated AD Rating Scale (iADRS) by 40% and improved all secondary clinical endpoints [68,69].”

    From Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease: Beyond Symptomatic Therapies (2023) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Primary Outcome section reports significant slowing on iADRS, but the reported figures are 35.1% in the low/medium tau population and 22.3% in the combined population—not 40%. The Clinical Assessments section reports benefits on several secondary clinical measures, but the paper does not establish that all secondary clinical endpoints improved. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • ChEIs are still the primary treatment for mild Alzheimer's disease, enhancing acetylcholine levels to support cognitive and functional abilities.

    “ChEIs are still the primary treatment for mild AD, enhancing acetylcholine levels to support cognitive and functional abilities.9,19”

    From A 2025 update on treatment strategies for the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum (2025) · cites this paper as [19]

    The baseline-characteristics table (section labeled Conclusions; page unavailable) reports acetylcholinesterase inhibitor and/or memantine use among participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer disease. It does not separate ChEI use from memantine, establish ChEIs as the primary treatment for mild disease, or discuss acetylcholine levels or benefits to cognition and function. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [25]25. Wessels AM, Rentz DM, Case M, Lauzon S, Sims JR. Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale: clinically meaningful change estimates. Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2022;8(1):e12312. doi:10. 1002/trc2.12312
  2. [28]28. US Food and Drug Administration. Patient-focused drug development public workshop: incorporating clinical outcome assessments into endpoints for regulatory decision-making. December 6, 2019. Accessed July 11, 2023. https://www.fda.gov/media/132505/ download

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sims, J. R., Zimmer, J. A., Evans, C. D., Lu, M., Ardayfio, P., Sparks, J., Wessels, A. M., Shcherbinin, S., Wang, H., Monkul Nery, E. S., Collins, E. C., Solomon, P., Salloway, S., Apostolova, L. G., Hansson, O., Ritchie, C., Brooks, D. A., Mintun, M., Skovronsky, D. M., TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Investigators, Abreu, R., Agarwal, P., Aggarwal, P., Agronin, M., Allen, A., Altamirano, D., Alva, G., Andersen, J., Anderson, A., Anderson, D., Arnold, J., Asada, T., Aso, Y., Atit, V., Ayala, R., Badruddoja, M., Badzio-jagiello, H., Bajacek, M., Barton, D., Bear, D., Benjamin, S., Bergeron, R., Bhatia, P., Black, S., Block, A., Bolouri, M., Bond, W., Bouthillier, J., Brangman, S., Brew, B., Brisbin, S., Brisken, T., Brodtmann, A., Brody, M., Brosch, J., Brown, C., Brownstone, P., Bukowczan, S., Burns, J., Cabrera, A., Capote, H., Carrasco, A., Cevallos Yepez, J., Chavez, E., Chertkow, H., Chyrchel-paszkiewicz, U., Ciabarra, A., Clemmons, E., Cohen, D., Cohen, R., Cohen, I., Concha, M., Costell, B., Crimmins, D., Cruz-pagan, Y., Cueli, A., Cupelo, R., Czarnecki, M., Darby, D., Dautzenberg, P. L. J., De Deyn, P., De La Gandara, J., Deck, K., Dibenedetto, D., Dibuono, M., Dinnerstein, E., Dirican, A., Dixit, S., Dobryniewski, J., Drake, R., Drysdale, P., Duara, R., Duffy, J., Ellenbogen, A., Faradji, V., Feinberg, M., Feldman, R., Fishman, S., Flitman, S., Forchetti, C., Fraga, I., Frank, A., Frishberg, B., Fujigasaki, H., Fukase, H., Fumero, I., Furihata, K., Galloway, C., Gandhi, R., George, K., Germain, M., Gitelman, D., Goetsch, N., Goldfarb, D., Goldstein, M., Goldstick, L., Gonzalez Rojas, Y., Goodman, I., Greeley, D., Griffin, C., Grigsby, E., Grosz, D., Hafner, K., Hart, D., Henein, S., Herskowitz, B., Higashi, S., Higashi, Y., Ho, G., Hodgson, J., Hohenberg, M., Hollenbeck, L., Holub, R., Hori, T., Hort, J., Ilkowski, J., Ingram, K. J., Isaac, M., Ishikawa, M., Janu, L., Johnston, M., Julio, W., Justiz, W., Kaga, T., Kakigi, T., Kalafer, M., Kamijo, M., Kaplan, J., Karathanos, M., Katayama, S., Kaul, S., Keegan, A., Kerwin, D., Khan, U., Khan, A., Kimura, N., Kirk, G., Klodowska, G., Kowa, H., Kutz, C., Kwentus, J., Lai, R., Lall, A., Lawrence, M., Lee, E., Leon, R., Linker, G., Lisewski, P., Liss, J., Liu, C., Losk, S., Lukaszyk, E., Lynch, J., Macfarlane, S., Macsweeney, J., Mannering, N., Markovic, O., Marks, D., Masdeu, J., Matsui, Y., Matsuishi, K., Mcallister, P., Mcconnehey, B., Mcelveen, A., Mcgill, L., Mecca, A., Mega, M., Mensah, J., Mickielewicz, A., Minaeian, A., Mocherla, B., Murphy, C., Murphy, P., Nagashima, H., Nair, A., Nair, M., Nardandrea, J., Nash, M., Nasreddine, Z., Nishida, Y., Norton, J., Nunez, L., Ochiai, J., Ohkubo, T., Okamura, Y., Okorie, E., Olivera, E., O'mahony, J., Omidvar, O., Ortiz-Cruz, D., Osowa, A., Papka, M., Parker, A., Patel, P., Patel, A., Patel, M., Patry, C., Peckham, E., Pfeffer, M., Pietras, A., Plopper, M., Porsteinsson, A., Poulin Robitaille, R., Prins, N., Puente, O., Ratajczak, M., Rhee, M., Ritter, A., Rodriguez, R., Rodriguez Ables, L., Rojas, J., Ross, J., Royer, P., Rubin, J., Russell, D., Rutgers, S. M., Rutrick, S., Sadowski, M., Safirstein, B., Sagisaka, T., Scharre, D., Schneider, L., Schreiber, C., Schrift, M., Schulz, P., Schwartz, H., Schwartzbard, J., Scott, J., Selem, L., Sethi, P., Sha, S., Sharlin, K., Sharma, S., Shiovitz, T., Shiwach, R., Sladek, M., Sloan, B., Smith, A., Solomon, P., Sorial, E., Sosa, E., Stedman, M., Steen, S., Stein, L., Stolyar, A., Stoukides, J., Sudoh, S., Sutton, J., Syed, J., Szigeti, K., Tachibana, H., Takahashi, Y., Tateno, A., Taylor, J. D., Taylor, K., Tcheremissine, O., Thebaud, A., Thein, S., Thurman, L., Toenjes, S., Toji, H., Toma, M., Tran, D., Trueba, P., Tsujimoto, M., Turner, R., Uchiyama, A., Ussorowska, D., Vaishnavi, S., Valor, E., Vandersluis, J., Vasquez, A., Velez, J., Verghese, C., Vodickova-borzova, K., Watson, D., Weidman, D., Weisman, D., White, A., Willingham, K., Winkel, I., Winner, P., Winston, J., Wolff, A., Yagi, H., Yamamoto, H., Yathiraj, S., Yoshiyama, Y., & Zboch, M.
Affiliations
  • Eli Lilly (United States) (US)
  • Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana
  • Brown University (US)
  • Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Scottish Brain Sciences, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  • for the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Investigators
Corresponding author
Sims, John R.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2023-08-08
Volume
330
Issue
6
Pages
512
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W4384522480
Cited by
2,932
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1022 · 2025: 1006 · 2024: 749 · 2023: 155
FWCI
523.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Eli Lilly and Company
  • National Institutes of Health (1s10od025214-01)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Keywords
donanemab, Alzheimer's disease, amyloid plaque clearance, anti-amyloid antibodies, mild cognitive impairment, mild dementia, tau pathology, Clinical Dementia Rating, cognitive decline, treatment efficacy, adverse events, PET imaging biomarkers, trial discontinuation, intravenous infusion safety
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Brain, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Treatment Outcome, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review