Over 200 publications, including the composite endpoints regulators now recognize. We publish our methodology in the open so reviewers meet it before your submission does.
Alzheimer's Association International Conference (AAIC) · 2024:Poster Tue-17 · Hendrix, Dickson et al.
Companies recently identified clinical study sites engaging in fraudulent practices, reducing success in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. Successful trials are reliable…
When the sample size a conventional design demands is larger than the trial you can run, a Global Statistical Test lets the clinical-endpoint hypotheses be tested anyway. The paper sets out when GST applies, how it is pre-specified, and how it has been received in review.
4 publications
Sorted newest first
2025 · CNS Drugs
Hendrix, Suzanne · Dickson, Samuel · Durrant, Abe
Amyloid-plaque reduction is currently the only recognized surrogate outcome for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) trials, allowing accelerated approval of plaque-clearing amyloid antibodies. However, plaque reduction does not facilitate the development of new non-plaque-clearing treatments. The hippocampus is among the first brain regions affected by AD pathology, exhibiting synaptic dysfunction and neurodegeneration that manifests as hippocampal atrophy and memory decline. We evaluated hippocampal volume (HV) as a potential surrogate outcome that can predict clinical benefit in disease-modification trials. Using published data from observational and interventional studies that examined both cognition and HV on volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (vMRI), we evaluated the cross-sectional correlations of HV to cognitive performance, the longitudinal correlations of HV atrophy to cognitive decline, HV sensitivity to drug effects, and the correlations between drug effects on HV atrophy and cognitive decline. We also examined the magnitude of HV protection that corresponds to meaningful clinical benefit. Analyses from 30 observational studies encompassing 13,187 individuals (2633 cognitively normal; 10,554 early AD) showed significant cross-sectional correlations between baseline HV and cognition, and longitudinal correlations between HV atrophy and cognitive decline over ≥ 1 year. The relationship of HV–cognitive drug effects was examined at the group level in nine placebo-controlled trials of five antiamyloid agents that evaluated HV in early AD trials of at least 18 months’ duration. These trials included four amyloid antibodies (aducanumab, lecanemab, donanemab, and gantenerumab) and one oral anti-oligomer agent (valiltramiprosate). Individual-level HV–cognition relationships were examined in two valiltramiprosate studies, one of which included diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) providing microstructural correlates of HV drug effects and helping distinguish neuroprotection from brain edema. Across these anti-amyloid drug trials (total N ~10,000), there was a linear relationship between drug effects on slowing of cognitive decline and slowing of HV atrophy. Two anti-oligomer trials (valiltramiprosate) reported significant subject-level correlations between drug effects on HV and cognition over 18–24 months (r = −0.40 to −0.44, p < 0.005, N = 50/69), with significant correlations of drug effects on brain microstructure (decreased mean diffusivity) with both HV and cognitive benefits, supporting reduced neurodegeneration. The minimal HV preservation at the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) stage that is associated with clinical benefit is estimated to be ≥ 40 mm3 or ≥ 10% of atrophy in the placebo arm over 18 months. Our findings demonstrate that hippocampal atrophy is an early indicator of cognitive decline in AD, linked to amyloid and tau-related neurodegeneration. HV on standardized vMRI is sensitive to anti-amyloid treatments, demonstrating strong correlations between slowed hippocampal atrophy and slowed cognitive decline. Data from over 23,000 subjects over three decades support HV as a surrogate marker for predicting clinical benefit in early symptomatic AD.
2025 · Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
Haaland, Benjamin · Dickson, Samuel · Christensen, Joshua · Mallinckrodt, Craig · Hendrix, Suzanne
Background The AFF006 trial (NCT01117818) provided unexpected evidence of benefits of the vaccine adjuvant AD04 (aluminum oxyhydroxide) in patients with early Alzheimer's disease (AD), compared with AD02, a vaccine consisting of a peptide that mimics the N-terminal region of human amyloid-β (Aβ) conjugated with keyhole limpet hemocyanin. Objective The objective of this post hoc analysis was to assess whether this unexpected benefit of AD04 was an artifact of multiple testing (i.e., type I error inflation) or a robust result. Methods In this post hoc assessment, we used permutation testing to estimate type I error inflation due to the evaluation of multiple outcomes in AFF006. Efficacy was assessed using a patient-level global statistical test combining composite endpoints of cognition, function, and global AD. In addition, we examined the observed treatment benefits of AD04 in the context of effects observed in trials of aducanumab, donanemab, and lecanemab, monoclonal anti-Aβ antibodies that received regulatory approval for AD. Results The global statistical test suggested a treatment benefit of AD04 versus ineffective AD02 arms, even after accounting for multiplicity (primary methodology p-value, 0.03; permutation test p-value, 0.02). The observed effect estimates for AD04 compared favorably with approved monoclonal antibodies. Conclusions Post-hoc analyses are hypothesis generating rather than confirmatory. Adjusting for multiplicity using permutation testing can determine whether post-hoc effects are worth pursuing, or unlikely to be confirmed. These analyses have motivated a follow-up prospective randomized controlled trial, ADVANCE (EudraCT 2022-003532-73), in which optimized AD04 dosing will be compared to placebo in early AD.
2023 · Alzheimers Res Ther
Dickson, Samuel · Hennessey, Sean · Nicodemus-Johnson, Jessie · Knowlton, Newman · Hendrix, Suzanne
Key points of disagreement between the aducanumab FDA statistical review, which had primarily negative conclusions, and the clinical review, which had primarily positive conclusions, were investigated. Results from secondary endpoints in positive Study 302 were significant and these endpoints provided meaningful additional information. Findings indicate the statistical review of the aducanumab data was incorrect in a number of key areas. Greater placebo decline was not responsible for the significant results in Study 302. Correlations did exist between reduction in β-amyloid and clinical outcomes. Missing data and functional unblinding did not likely bias results. In contrast, the clinical review went too far in saying the negative results in Study 301 did not detract from the positive results in Study 302, as all clinical data should be considered in the evaluation, and the clinical review accepted the company's explanation for divergence of the results between the studies although much of the divergence remained unexplained. Interestingly, both the statistical review and the clinical review considered the available efficacy evidence despite both studies being terminated early. Implications of these findings include that the divergence in results seen in the two phase 3 aducanumab studies can be expected in other studies with similar design and analysis. Therefore, further research is needed to determine if analysis methods other than MMRM and/or optimized outcomes will provide more consistent results across studies.
2022 · The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
Loading more publications…
Looking for older work, or a specific methodology paper? Our research team can point you to the right reference.
Ask our team
