Safety, Efficacy, and Feasibility of Intranasal Insulin for the Treatment of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Disease Dementia: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Open accessAbstract
Importance: Insulin modulates aspects of brain function relevant to Alzheimer disease and can be delivered to the brain using intranasal devices. To date, the use of intranasal insulin to treat persons with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease dementia remains to be examined in a multi-site trial. Objective: To examine the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of intranasal insulin for the treatment of persons with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease dementia in a phase 2/3 multisite clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized (1:1) double-blind clinical trial was conducted between 2014 and 2018. Participants received 40 IU of insulin or placebo for 12 months during the blinded phase, which was followed by a 6-month open-label extension phase. The clinical trial was conducted at 27 sites of the Alzheimer's Therapeutic Research Institute. A total of 432 adults were screened, and 144 adults were excluded. Inclusion criteria included adults aged 55 to 85 years with a diagnosis of amnestic mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer disease (based on National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer Association criteria), a score of 20 or higher on the Mini-Mental State Examination, a clinical dementia rating of 0.5 or 1.0, and a delayed logical memory score within a specified range. A total of 289 participants were randomized. Among the first 49 participants, the first device (device 1) used to administer intranasal insulin treatment had inconsistent reliability. A new device (device 2) was used for the remaining 240 participants, who were designated the primary intention-to-treat population. Data were analyzed from August 2018 to March 2019. Interventions: Participants received 40 IU of insulin (Humulin-RU-100; Lilly) or placebo (diluent) daily for 12 months (blinded phase) followed by a 6-month open-label extension phase. Insulin was administered with 2 intranasal delivery devices. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome (mean score change on the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale 12) was evaluated at 3-month intervals. Secondary clinical outcomes were assessed at 6-month intervals. Cerebrospinal fluid collection and magnetic resonance imaging scans occurred at baseline and 12 months. Results: A total of 289 participants (155 men [54.6%]; mean [SD] age, 70.9 [7.1] years) were randomized. Of those, 260 participants completed the blinded phase, and 240 participants completed the open-label extension phase. For the first 49 participants, the first device used to administer treatment had inconsistent reliability. A second device was used for the remaining 240 participants (123 men [51.3%]; mean [SD] age, 70.8 [7.1] years), who were designated the primary intention-to-treat population. No differences were observed between treatment arms for the primary outcome (mean score change on ADAS-cog-12 from baseline to month 12) in the device 2 ITT cohort (0.0258 points; 95% CI, -1.771 to 1.822 points; P = .98) or for the other clinical or cerebrospinal fluid outcomes in the primary (second device) intention-to-treat analysis. No clinically important adverse events were associated with treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, no cognitive or functional benefits were observed with intranasal insulin treatment over a 12-month period among the primary intention-to-treat cohort. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01767909.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The recent multisite phase 2/3 clinical trial of IN insulin for MCI and AD faced unexpected methodological obstacles.
“the recent multisite phase 2/3 clinical trial of IN insulin for MCI and AD, which was conducted at 27 sites and included 289 participants (155 men) between 55 and 85 years of age with a diagnosis of amnestic MCI or AD, faced unexpected methodological obstacles.49”
From Intranasal insulin (2021) · cites this paper as [49]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 389
- Authors
- Craft, S., Raman, R., Chow, T. W., Rafii, M. S., Sun, C.-K., Rissman, R. A., Donohue, M. C., Brewer, J. B., Jenkins, C., Harless, K., Gessert, D., & Aisen, P. S.
- Affiliations
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- University of Southern California (US)
- Corresponding author
- Craft, Suzanne
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Neurology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2020-09-01
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1099
- ISSN
- 2168-6149 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7309571
- OpenAlex
- W3035782677
- Cited by
- 389
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 58 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 13
- FWCI
- 30.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Neurology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (P30AG049638, RF1AG041845)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
- Keywords
- intranasal insulin, Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment, amnestic mild cognitive impairment, cognitive function, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, amyloid-beta, tau protein, neuroinflammation, neurodegeneration, treatment safety, treatment efficacy, feasibility, open-label extension, neuroprotection
- MeSH terms
- Administration, Intranasal, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Double-Blind Method, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, 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