2023
DOI: 10.1002/trc2.12388
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disease severity and minimal clinically important differences in clinical outcome assessments for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 8 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, the MCID for CDR‐SB was estimated to be 0.54, 0.98 and 1.63 over a one‐year period for an individual with no cognitive impairment, mild cognitive impairment, and early Alzheimer disease respectively 20 . It may appear that the mAB trials fail to meet this threshold, but these values indicated meaningful thresholds for within‐patient progression, and not group‐level differences 8,21 . A personalised assessment of MCID (Box 2) may help frame whether mAB treatment would be beneficial.…”
Section: Discussing Trial Data With Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the MCID for CDR‐SB was estimated to be 0.54, 0.98 and 1.63 over a one‐year period for an individual with no cognitive impairment, mild cognitive impairment, and early Alzheimer disease respectively 20 . It may appear that the mAB trials fail to meet this threshold, but these values indicated meaningful thresholds for within‐patient progression, and not group‐level differences 8,21 . A personalised assessment of MCID (Box 2) may help frame whether mAB treatment would be beneficial.…”
Section: Discussing Trial Data With Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%