Lilly’s Disappointing Phase II Results Cast Doubt on Donanemab for Alzheimer’s

Eli Lilly’s donanemab for early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease (AD) has most experts dubious of the drug’s clinical benefit due to marginal and mixed Phase II results, despite the primary endpoint meeting statistical significance. Although the ongoing Phase III trial will likely produce similar results with greater statistical precision, the study is not designed to address these critical concerns, they said.

Still, because the Phase II TRAILBLAZER-ALZ trial its primary endpoint, the delay in disease progression could provide a significant benefit if it is replicated in the Phase III TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2, two experts said.

However, four other experts were more sceptical of the primary endpoint of Integrated Alzheimer’s Disease Rating Scale (iADRS), as the two subscales within iADRS, while well-established, did not reach statistical significance on their own. Additionally, iADRS has not traditionally been used in AD trials, making it difficult for clinicians to interpret the meaning of the combined results of two subscales, one expert explained. The overall benefit shown was not clinically meaningful, and it was unlikely to show a significantly greater magnitude of effect in TRAILBLAZER-ALZ-2, which uses the same iADRS primary endpoint, the four experts said.

Furthermore, the Phase III is the same duration as the Phase II, which experts noted is too short to assess durability and fully understand the possible long-term consequences of the common adverse event (AE) of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA). Since the disease progressed in both the placebo and treatment groups, and because the difference in progression between the two groups did not necessarily increase with time in each endpoint, experts’ concerns have increased.

While the two more optimistic experts pointed to the pending approval of Biogen’s amyloid-targeting aducanumab as evidence this target has promise, others agreed the controversial aducanumab data, whose efficacy was rebuked by a panel of experts in a November 2020 FDA AdCom, was more evidence of the target’s failure. In response to request for comment, a Lilly spokesperson said the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ findings suggest a role for amyloid and tau imaging in AD research and the potential for long-term disease modification following fixed duration treatment.

TRAILBLAZER-ALZ data were published on 13 March (Saturday), and Lilly’s stock dropped 9% by end of day on 15 March (Monday). Lilly’s market cap is $179.79bn. TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 was originally recruiting as a 500-patient Phase II but was updated to a Phase III on ClinicalTrials.gov on 25 March. The primary completion date is February 2023.

How well do you really know your competitors?

Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.

View profiles in store

Company Profile – free sample

Thank you!

Your download email will arrive shortly

Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample

We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form

By GlobalData

Submit

UK USA Afghanistan Åland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Democratic Republic of the Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d"Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati North Korea South Korea Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Réunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates US Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam British Virgin Islands US Virgin Islands Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Kosovo

Industry * Academia & Education Aerospace, Defense & Security Agriculture Asset Management Automotive Banking & Payments Chemicals Construction Consumer Foodservice Government, trade bodies and NGOs Health & Fitness Hospitals & Healthcare HR, Staffing & Recruitment Insurance Investment Banking Legal Services Management Consulting Marketing & Advertising Media & Publishing Medical Devices Mining Oil & Gas Packaging Pharmaceuticals Power & Utilities Private Equity Real Estate Retail Sport Technology Telecom Transportation & Logistics Travel, Tourism & Hospitality Venture Capital

Tick here to opt out of curated industry news, reports, and event updates from Clinical Trials Arena.

Submit and download

Visit our Privacy Policy for more information about our services, how we may use, process and share your personal data, including information of your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications. Our services are intended for corporate subscribers and you warrant that the email address submitted is your corporate email address.

The spokesperson said the company believes replicating the Phase II results is important, and the company aims to do so in TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2.

Scepticism over primary endpoint, benefit shown

Although donanemab showed a statistically significant change in its primary endpoint, most experts were dubious about whether the measure was designed to detect a meaningful change or just any change at all. Lilly developed iADRS, which combines traditional cognitive and functional scales, Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog₁₃) and the Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study-Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-iADL), respectively. Because iADRS has not traditionally been used in AD trials, it is harder for clinicians to determine what this data actually means for clinical use, noted Robert Howard, Professor of Old Age Psychiatry, University College London, UK.

A difference of 3.20 points on the 144-point iADRS, particularly for an intensive 72-week treatment with no signs of stopping disease progression, holds little clinical value, said Jorge Barrio, PhD, professor, Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases, University of California, Los Angeles. The treatment and placebo groups, which each had a baseline of 106 on the iADRS, showed a -6.86 and -10.06 change, respectively (Mintun, M, et al. New England Journal of Medicine, 13 March 2021).

The two scales comprising iADRS also did not reach statistical significance separately, Howard noted. Combining the statistically insignificant data from the cognitive and functional scales should not be considered clinically meaningful even though the composite score narrowly reached statistical significance (p=0.04), he added.

Typically, clinicians consider a 3-point ADAS-Cog₁₃ improvement to be a noticeable, albeit small, effect, Howard explained. The 85-point ADAS- Cog₁₃ scale showed a 1.86-point difference (95% CI, −3.63 to −0.09) and the 59-point ADCS-iADL scale a 1.21-point difference (95% CI, −0.77 to 3.20). The Lilly spokesperson told this publication the ADAS- Cog₁₃ component, which was not corrected for multiple comparisons, was nominally statistically significant (p=0.04) with a 39% slowing of disease progression, and the ADCS-iADL component was nominally significant in three of the four last time points, with a 23% slowing of disease progression.

Because TRAILBLAZER-ALZ was the first Phase II AD trial to meet its primary endpoint, its demonstrated slowing of disease progression represents a breakthrough, noted Dr Christopher Rowe, neurologist, University of Melbourne, Australia. The iADRS has not historically been used, but its subcomponents ADCS-iADL and ADAS-Cog₁₃ are well established.

Even a small delay in disease progression could provide a sizable benefit to families of AD patients, agreed Rowe and Dr Peter Nelson, Sanders-Brown Centre on Aging, University of Kentucky, Lexington. By rejecting any form of small progress, the AD field risks missing out on a treatment with the potential to provide value to a subset of patients or provide an initial steppingstone to research with the potential to improve survival curves over time, Nelson added.

Phase III design unlikely to address concerns

While Rowe and Nelson said donanemab should be made available, provided it demonstrates similar results in TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2, other interviewed experts noted the Phase III is not designed to answer the lingering questions left in the wake of Phase II data.

Although Barrio and Howard agreed the 1,500-patient TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 could find a greater degree of statistical significance in its iADRS primary endpoint due to its larger size compared to the 257-patient TRAILBLAZER-ALZ, they do not expect a substantial change in the magnitude. As a result, donanemab likely “will never hold a place in the clinic,” Howard said.

Lilly announced a change for the TRAILBLAZER ALZ-2 primary measure from the Clinical Dementia Rating scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) to iADRS during an investor call on 15 March. The 18-point CDR-SB score showed a 0.36-point difference in the Phase II, which was not statistically significant (95% CI, −3.63 to −0.09).

Adding to the scepticism are mixed trends in the ADAS-Cog₁₃, ADCS-iADL and CDR-SB scales, which raise questions over donanemab’s durability, said Erin Abner, associate professor, Department of Epidemiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington. While ADAS- Cog₁₃ showed the greatest difference between placebo and treatment at the end of the study, both ADCS-iADL and CDR-SB demonstrated the biggest separation at week 52, which lessened through to the study end, she explained.

Without running a longer study, there is considerable uncertainty over whether the treatment effect will persist for even one or two years after the 76-week study period, Barrio and Abner agreed. The Phase III replicates the Phase II 76-week trial duration and dosing once every four weeks for 72 weeks or until patients tested amyloid negative, according to ClinicalTrials.gov.

In a disease characterised by slow disease progression over decades, follow up of least two years after treatment is necessary, Howard explained. Furthermore, because the primary endpoint includes patient- and physician-based assessments, an open-label continuation would not be sufficient, he continued. Barrio added he would not be surprised if donanemab’s effect lessened with a longer study.

Moreover, donanemab is not a benign AD treatment, as ARIA, could be damaging to patients in the long term, agreed Barrio and George Perry, PhD, Semmes Foundation Distinguished University chair in Neurobiology, University of Texas, San Antonio. Rowe noted stopping treatment reversed damage from ARIA, but Barrio said the potential long-term effects of ARIA would require a minimum of two to four years of additional study.

ARIA events occurred in 51 of the 131 donanemab-treated patients and eight of the 125 placebo-treated patients, with symptomatic ARIA-E reported in 6.1% o and 0.8% of patients, respectively. All ARIA-E symptoms were resolved by a mean of 18 weeks. One placebo patient was not included in the modified intent to treatment population.

Because patients and physicians are aware of the risk of ARIA, its presence could add some bias to the study, Rowe said. However, there is no evidence of this. Patients with signs of ARIA had a different dosing schedule, which could have given patients a signal they were most likely in the donanemab arm and in turn subconsciously influenced their assessments, he explained.

Biomarker data has experts mixed on amyloid hypothesis

Despite only finding a marginal benefit in slowing disease progression, donanemab was successful in removing amyloid plaque, casting doubt as to whether this target could have a disease-changing impact, agreed Barrio and Howard. At the end of the study 67.8% of donanemab patients were amyloid-negative, defined as amyloid plaque of less than 24.10 centiloids. They had an 85.06-centiloid greater amyloid-plaque reduction than placebo patients. The similarly marginal results seen in aducanumab studies, which also successfully reduced amyloid levels, and the long history of failed drugs targeting the amyloid pathway, demonstrate this target is unlikely to produce more than a small, nondisease-altering effect, Perry said.

Additionally, despite the trial selecting patients based on their tau levels, there was no measured effect on tau to go along with the decrease in amyloid measured. Amyloid cascade hypothesis states stopping or clearing the accumulation of misfolded amyloid plaque in the brain could have downstream effects on cognition and accumulating tau levels, explained Abner.

Without longer-term data, it cannot be determined if tau levels will eventually decrease as a result of removing amyloid, Abner explained. Still, because tau accumulation occurs slowly over years, donanemab could affect tau over a longer period, Rowe added.

William Newton is a Reporter for Clinical Trials Arena parent company GlobalData’s investigative journalism team. A version of this article originally appeared on the Insights module of GlobalData’s Pharmaceutical Intelligence Center. To access more articles like this, visit GlobalData.