Contribute Try STAT+ Today

Ahead of a widely anticipated regulatory review of Biogen’s experimental Alzheimer’s drug, a small survey found an overwhelming majority of physicians viewed the treatment favorably after combing through the briefing documents.

Specifically, 57% of the doctors believed Biogen (BIIB) presented strong evidence that its medicine, aducanumab, has a positive effect on Alzheimer’s. And 70% believe the Food and Drug Administration is more likely or significantly more likely to approve the drug based on the information that will be reviewed at the Friday advisory committee meeting.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT+ and enjoy your first 30 days free!


What is it?

STAT+ is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.
  • Can data that only 57% believe to be strong, really be that strong? If anything, this survey suggests that the strength of this data is debatable.

    • Hi MH,

      Thanks for the note. And that’s a fair point, although the survey also found that 61% believe Study 302 (EMERGE), when viewed independently and without regard for Study 301 (ENGAGE), provided strong evidence that supports the effectiveness of aducanumab for treating Alzheimer’s disease. And 70% believe Study 103 (PRIME) provides supportive evidence that the drug is effective. Of course, both were positive studies, so not a surprising response.

      In any event, slicing and dicing data is always debatable. I think the real context is the unmet medical need and how that sways views. Certainly, it’s an issue at the FDA. We’ll see what happens.

      ed at pharmalot

Comments are closed.