CHICAGO — An investigational Alzheimer’s drug significantly slowed patients’ cognitive decline in a large clinical trial, unexpected and unprecedented results that could move the treatment’s makers to roll the dice on an early approval.

In the study, the highest-tested dose of a drug from Biogen and Eisai was markedly better than placebo at delaying the memory-destroying effects of Alzheimer’s. After 18 months, patients who got the drug, called BAN2401, performed 30 percent better on a cognitive test than those getting placebo.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus. Try it FREE for 30 days!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is a premium subscription that delivers daily market-moving biopharma coverage and in-depth science reporting from a team with decades of industry experience.

What's included?

  • Authoritative biopharma coverage and analysis, interviews with industry pioneers, policy analysis, and first looks at cutting edge laboratories and early stage research
  • Subscriber-only networking events and panel discussions across the country
  • Monthly subscriber-only live chats with our reporters and experts in the field
  • Discounted tickets to industry events and early-bird access to industry reports

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • Hi Damian:
    Thanks for this post. As a private investor, I don’t have STAT Plus.
    If possible pls make available a transcript of your STAT plus event @ 10AM today.
    One other ? Pls confirm that all placebo and active treatment grps are stat similar with respect to demo and disease criteria. Want to r/o any difference bet the highest dos and other grps.
    Regards, Alan Appel

    • Allen: as an investor, I assure you the $ for StatPlus would be money very well spent (not attached to StatNews — just a very content Stat+ Subscriber).

  • Why would a study develop their own measure of effectiveness when the goal should be to compare effectiveness with other available interventions. I smell a rat.

  • Must have qualification for statisticians to be hired by pharma companies:

    – proven ability to find the right statistical trick that can turn disappointing clinical results in technically statistically significant efficacy

  • ‘unexpected and unprecedented results!’ ‘markedly better than placebo!’ But, oops. It’s a secondary outcome in a phase 2 trial. Maybe temper your enthusiastic writing a little bit? I give you credit for eventually reporting the story well, but the first three paragraphs sound like a press release.

    • It is essentially a press release, and that is fine. It is exciting, and it up to you to follow up on the subject. The article gives you some avenues from which to do just that.
      Cordially

    • Thanks for clearing that up Olivier. Here I was thinking that this was a news article written by an independent journalist.

      I hate to tell you this but there is a big difference between a press release (written by a company to hype their product) and a news article (which is supposed to be balanced journalism). STAT is supposed to be journalism, not a bunch of press releases.

Sign up for our Daily Recap newsletter

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy