Cited by 536Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Failure to demonstrate efficacy of aducanumab: An analysis of the EMERGE and ENGAGE trials as reported by Biogen, December 2019

Open access

Abstract

Aducanumab recently underwent two large phase III clinical trials that were stopped prematurely by the sponsor Biogen. One trial was trending positive while the other showed no benefits from aducanumab. Post hoc analyses led the sponsor to assert that there was a sufficient efficacy signal to justify a new drug application as a treatment for Alzheimer's disease. The sponsor claimed that subsets of participants receiving sufficiently high doses of aducanumab demonstrated benefits in both trials. In contrast, we identified alternative accounts for the apparent drug benefits in post hoc subgroups that are unrelated to dose effects. Biomarker data were consistent with target engagement, but no evidence was presented to correlate biomarker changes to cognitive benefits. Our analysis supports the conduct of a third, phase III trial with high‐dose aducanumab. Aducanumab's efficacy as a treatment for the cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease cannot be proven by clinical trials with divergent outcomes.

Overview

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 · 10.1002/alz.12213

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 13 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 536

Metadata

Authors
Knopman, D. S., Jones, D. T., & Greicius, M. D.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Knopman, David S.
Venue
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-11
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
696-701
ISSN
  • 1552-5260 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5279
OpenAlex
W3097527510
Cited by
524
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 107 · 2022: 151 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 4
FWCI
51.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alzheimer s & Dementia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
Keywords
aducanumab, Alzheimer's disease
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Amyloid, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Biomarkers, Treatment Outcome, Treatment Failure, Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized

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