Denis Crimmins

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.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the neuroradiological abnormalities associated with subjects carrying the mitochondrial myopathy, encephalopathy, lactic acidosis, and strokelike episodes (MELAS) tRNA(Leu)(UUR) A3243G point mutation METHODS: Mitochondrial genetic analysis was performed on 24 subjects from six kindreds with the MELAS tRNA(Leu)(UUR) A3243G point mutation. Cerebral CT and MRI were performed on 24 patients and 15 patients respectively. Previous neuroradiological investigations including cerebral CT from four deceased members of the families were also reviewed. Histological examination of postmortem specimens of two patients within the kindreds was performed. RESULTS: The commonest radiological finding was basal ganglia calcification. Other abnormalities included focal lesions and cerebellar and cerebral atrophy. Basal ganglia calcification was progressive, symmetric, and asymptomatic. Histologically, basal ganglia calcification in one patient was found to be in the pericapillary regions of the globus pallidus, with no neuronal involvement. Focal lesions most commonly involved the grey matter of the parietal and occipital lobes and cerebellum. Histopathological examination suggested that these were due to cellular rather than vascular dysfunction. Enlargement of the fourth ventricle was the first sign of cerebellar atrophy. Cerebral and cerebellar atrophy were only present with severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: These radiological findings, when considered in the context of the clinical and pathological findings, seem to reflect two major disease processes: an intermittent abrupt loss of function associated with cell injury from which there is at least partial recovery and a slowly progressive degenerative process causing basal ganglia calcification, and cerebral and cerebellar atrophy. The clinical and radiological features resulting from these processes are distinctive and provide insight into the consequences of mitochondrial dysfunction on the brain.

There have been few studies investigating the mechanism and nature of the hearing loss that occurs in the mitochondrial disorders. We studied 18 patients with the MELAS A3243G point mutation from four different kindreds. Pure tone audiometry, speech discrimination testing, acoustic reflexes, tympanometry, and brain stem auditory evoked responses were performed to localize the site of pathology in the auditory pathways. In 12 patients, we performed electrocochleography and otoacoustic emissions to assess cochlear involvement. Neuroimaging and promontory nerve stimulation were performed to exclude retrocochlear pathology. Audiological testing confirmed sensorineural hearing loss in 14 of the 18 patients studied; hearing loss was usually gradual in onset, was symmetrical, and initially affected the higher frequencies. In some patients, there were features that distinguished the hearing loss from presbyacusis, including a young age at onset, asymmetrical involvement, stepwise progression, and partial recovery. We treated one patient who had profound bilateral hearing loss with cochlear implantation; this restored good functional hearing. Hearing loss in MELAS syndrome appears to be due to dysfunction of the cochlea, probably resulting from metabolic failure of the stria vascularis and outer hair cells. Cochlear implantation is a therapeutic option worth considering in those patients who become deaf.