ABvac40
BiologicalABvac40 consists in a conjugate of Aβx-40 with a carrier protein (KLH) vehiculated in phosphate buffer containing 0.35% aluminum hydroxide as adjuvant.
NCT Number: NCT03461276
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia, accounting for 50-75% of the estimated 47 million people with dementia worldwide. The amyloid cascade hypothesis of AD proposes that amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide accumulation in the brain, caused by an imbalance between Aβ production and clearance, is the initiating factor of a cascade ultimately leading to dementia.
Aβ peptides are generated from sequential cleavage of the amyloid precursor protein (APP), including Aβ40 and Aβ42. Aβ40 is the predominant variant (90%) among the secreted Aβ forms and although Aβ42 is more hydrophobic and prone to aggregate, and Aβ42 oligomers are regarded to be the most neurotoxic species, Aβ40 can also produce highly toxic diffusible aggregates, which can be prevented in vitro by specific anti-Aβ40 antibodies.
Several studies have proposed that a high concentration of Aβ40 in the brain distinguishes patients with AD from those who have senile plaques but are cognitively normal, pointing to the importance of Aβ40 in the onset of dementia. In keeping with this, previous studies have demonstrated that specific anti-Aβ40 antibodies label NFTs in the entorhinal cortex and the hippocampus of AD brains, and that these do not co-localize with tau NFTs, suggesting the presence of degenerating neuronal populations filled with C-terminal fragments of Aβx-40. In addition, Aβ40 is the main component of amyloid deposition around cerebral arteries causing cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), which has a prevalence of about 80-90% in patients with AD (for more information see Lacosta et al. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy (2018) 10:12 DOI 10.1186/s13195-018-0340-8).
Considering those previous results suggesting that strategies targeting Aβ40 could represent novel disease-modifying therapies, we have developed ABvac40, the first active vaccine targeting the C-terminal end of the Aβ40 peptide.
The purpose of this Phase II study is to confirm in patients with a-MCI or vm-AD the level of safety and tolerability obtained in the ABvac40 Phase I clinical trial in patients with mm-AD. In addition, the study is aimed to better characterize the immune response elicited by ABvac40 and to explore its effects on AD biomarkers.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me55 year–80 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 2
Hôpital François Mitterrand, Dijon, Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, France
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
A subject must meet all the following inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria
A subject meeting any of the following exclusion criteria is NOT eligible for participation in the study.
ABvac40 consists in a conjugate of Aβx-40 with a carrier protein (KLH) vehiculated in phosphate buffer containing 0.35% aluminum hydroxide as adjuvant.
Placebo consists in the vaccine's vehicle (phosphate buffer containing 0.35% aluminum hydroxide) without the conjugate.
Time frame: Part A (Baseline, and post-Baseline visits at Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
Average maximal increment (MΔ) of plasma anti-Aβ40 antibody signal (optical density [OD] in ELISA) in each subject with regard to Baseline visit.
Time frame: Entire study duration (Week 0 to Week 104 in Part A, and Week 0 to Week 77 in Part B)
Number of withdrawn subjects due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) during the whole study.
Time frame: Entire study duration (Week 0 to Week 104 in Part A, and Week 0 to Week 77 in Part B)
Clinically significant (CS) abnormalities in physical examination reported during the study.
Time frame: Entire study duration (Week 0 to Week 104 in Part A, and Week 0 to Week 77 in Part B)
Clinically significant (CS) abnormalities in neurological examination reported during the study.
Time frame: Entire study duration (Week 0 to Week 104 in Part A, and Week 0 to Week 77 in Part B)
Clinically significant (CS) abnormalities in hematology parameters reported during the study.
Time frame: Entire study duration (Week 0 to Week 104 in Part A, and Week 0 to Week 77 in Part B)
Clinically significant (CS) abnormalities in biochemistry parameters reported during the study.
Time frame: Entire study duration (Week 0 to Week 104 in Part A, and Week 0 to Week 77 in Part B)
Clinically significant (CS) abnormalities in coagulation parameters reported during the study.
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 antibodies in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included the recorded outcome value as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 antibodies in plasma from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included the recorded outcome value as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. A compound symmetric variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in levels of antibody-secreting cells from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included the recorded outcome value as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 peptides in plasma (ABtest-IA) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in levels of anti-Aβ42 peptides in plasma (ABtest-IA) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in levels of anti-Aβ40 peptides in plasma (ABtest-MS) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. A compound symmetric variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in levels of anti-Aβ42 peptides in plasma (ABtest-MS) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in amyloid-PET (a-PET) standard centiloid global cortical area (reference Pons) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
The percent change in brain volume from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 104A)
The percent change in right and left hippocampal volume from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
The percent change in ventricular volume from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of Aβ42 peptides in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of Aβ40 peptides in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of total Tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable postbaseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of p-Tau 181 in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of neurofilament light in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in levels of neurogranin in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (baseline, and post-baseline at Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in MMSE score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set.
MMSE is an 11-question measure that tests 5 areas of cognitive function: orientation, registration, attention and calculation, recall, and language. MMSE score ranges: 0-30, with lower scores indicating worst cognition.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in CDR-SB score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set.
CDR-SB assesses 6 cognitive and functional domains: Memory, Orientation, Judgment & Problem Solving, Community Affairs, Home & Hobbies, Personal Care. CDR-SB score ranges: 0-18. The higher scores mean a worst outcome.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in RBANS total score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set.
RBANS assesses 5 cognitive domains: Immediate Memory, Visuospatial/constructional, Language, Attention, Delayed Memory. Total score (range 40-160) sums the 5 domain scores. The higher scores mean a better outcome.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
The change in ADCS-ADL MCI total score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set.
ADCS-ADL MCI is a 24-item scale that includes 6 basic activities of daily living (ADL) items and 16 instrumental ADL items that provide a total score: 0-78, with a lower score indicating greater severity.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
Change in TMT score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a MMRM and the ITT analysis set.
TMT has 2 parts in which the patient connects 25 dots in order as quickly as possible. In TMT-A, targets are numbers 1-25; in TMT-B, targets are numbers 1-13 interleaved with letters A-L. Lower timings indicate better outcome.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, and Week 104A)
Change in IGE from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using MMRM and ITT analysis set.
IGE at baseline:1-Good general status;2-Slight deterioration;3-Moderate deterioration;4-Bad general status.
IGE after baseline:1-Marked improvement;2-Moderate improvement;3-Slight improvement;4-No change;5-Slight worsening;6-Moderate worsening;7-Marked worsening.
MMRM included IGE after baseline as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix is used. Following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly significantly associated with response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 24A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
Subjects with suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior since last visit.
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
Change in EQ-5D-5L overall severity index from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using MMRM and ITT analysis set.
EQ-5D-5L has 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression; rated: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Week 50A and Week 104A)
The change in EQ-5D-5L - VAS score from baseline to each applicable post-baseline efficacy visit (Part A) was analyzed using a Mixed-Model Repeated Measures (MMRM), and the ITT analysis set.
VAS records the patient's self-rated health on a vertical scale, ranging from 100 = 'Best imaginable health state' down to 0 = 'Worst imaginable health state'.
The MMRM included change from baseline in the efficacy parameter as the dependent variable; treatment, protocol-specified visits, treatment-by-visit interaction, and amyloid positivity as the fixed effects; baseline efficacy parameter and baseline age as covariates; and measures within-patient at each visit as a repeated measure. An unstructured variance-covariance matrix was used. The following factors may also have been included in the model: ApoE carrier status, baseline use of AD symptomatic medication and clinical subgroup - MCI or vmAD, if found to be significantly associated with the response measure (p < 0.15).
Time frame: Part A (Baseline, and post-Baseline visits at Week 2A, Week 6A, Week 10A, Week 14A, Week 18A, Week 24A, Week 40A, Week 44A, Week 50A, Week 77A, and Week 104A)
Average maximal increment (MΔ) of plasma anti-Aβ40 antibody signal (optical density [OD] in ELISA) in each subject with regard to Baseline visit.
Sensitivity analyses in the PP (Part A) analysis set.
Araclon Biotech S.L.
Industry
A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, 24 Months Study in Patients With Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment or Very Mild Alzheimer's Disease to Investigate the Safety, Tolerability and Immune Response of Repeated Subcutaneous Injections of ABvac40
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06347172
Alzheimer Disease, Brain Diseases
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT03933696
Alzheimer Disease, Brain Diseases
New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05584241
Alzheimer Disease, Amnestic Mild Cognitive Disorder
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06121986
Adherence, Alzheimer Disease
Tallahassee, Florida, United States
View Trial Details