Potential Alzheimer’s drug fails first of four key trials

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Pfizer Inc., Johnson & Johnson and Elan Corp.’s experimental Alzheimer’s treatment failed to improve symptoms of dementia in the first of four pivotal studies testing the drug.

Bapineuzumab, designed to target the brain plaques that serve as a hallmark of Alzheimer’s, didn’t aid cognitive or functional ability in patients who carry a gene, called ApoE4, that makes them more likely to get the disease, Pfizer said Monday in a prepared statement. Doctors now await results from trials in patients without the higher genetic risk.

Bapineuzumab is in a race with a similar product from Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. to become the first therapy to target a cause for Alzheimer’s, rather than just its symptoms. While patients in the failed study, dubbed 302, have now been taken off the drug, the other trials will continue, New York-based Pfizer said in its statement.

“There was no reason to believe, unless there was a miracle, that this would be positive,” said Rudolph Tanzi, professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School in Boston. “It will only be the results of the non-ApoE4 carriers that will inform us about the future.”

Both bapineuzumab and the Lilly drug work by slowing the production of beta amyloid, the protein that makes up the plaques. Since research began on these drugs, other theories of the disease have developed, including activity by a protein called tau that tangles in the brains of patients.

It’s still too early to determine which therapy may work best to eliminate the disease, researchers said,

“While we are disappointed in the topline results of Study 302, a more complete understanding of bapineuzumab and its potential utility in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease will be gained,” said Steven Romano, Pfizer’s head of medicine development for primary care, in the statement.

The first Alzheimer’s drugs, should they prove successful, would lead to a market for the treatments worth $20 billion, according to Barbara Ryan, an analyst with Deutsche Bank, in a June note to clients.

The companies are conducting trials in two groups of patients, in four total studies. The data outlined Monday were from U.S. patients with the ApoE4 gene, who tend to show symptoms of Alzheimer’s earlier in life.

Researchers haven’t been optimistic that the drug would be effective in patients with the gene, said Tanzi.

Patients with the Alzheimer’s gene didn’t benefit from treatment in earlier studies, and they were given a lower dose because of side effects, he said in a telephone interview.

The companies will “expedite the completion” of a second study in patients with the gene outside the U.S. That data should come this summer, said Mackay Jimeson, a Pfizer spokesman, and the companies will do additional analyses of patients in the failed study.

Full data are expected in September, when the companies have said they will present findings from people without the ApoE4 gene in Stockholm at the European Federation of Neurological Societies meeting.

“While we are disappointed in the results of this first study, the phase 2 trials suggested that ApoE4 non-carriers may have a better chance of benefiting from bapineuzumab than ApoE4 carriers, and the results of the second study in non-carriers due later this summer will shed more light on this possibility,” J&J spokesman Bill Price said in a statement.

Pfizer decided to announce the trial had failed now because it had patients stop taking the drug and was concerned news would leak out before it could complete other trials, Jimeson said. The companies previously said that they would release results from the two U.S. studies at the same time.

The failure was no surprise, said Mark Schoenebaum, an analyst with ISI Group in New York. “Our current model carries a 25-percent probability of success,” he said in a client note.

The Pfizer-J&J drug and the one from Lilly are based on one of the first research strategies designed to combat the disease.

After autopsies of Alzheimer’s victims showed an accumulation of beta amyloid plaques in their brains, drugmakers began focusing on that as a potential cause. Since then, other contributing factors have surfaced, including the overdevelopment of a different protein, known as tau.

While most of the strategies currently in the third and final stage of testing required for regulatory approval target amyloid, the field is now moving beyond amyloid-only targets, said Maria Carrillo, director of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association.

There are more than 40 different compounds currently in mid-stage tests for the disease, according to an accounting from the association.

“We don’t think amyloid is going to be a magic bullet, but it is important,” Carrillo said in an interview at the association’s annual meeting last week. “This is a maturing field with a variety of approaches, and we’re going to need multiple approaches. We feel very hopeful about the maturation of the field and the variety of approaches in development.”

One main complaint about the current studies with bapineuzumab and Lilly’s drug solanezumab is that they were given to patients who already displayed dementia.

New research shows that amyloid build up begins decades before symptoms start, leaving patients potentially too damaged to benefit from treatment. Studies are now planned to test treatments in people at risk for the disease before signs of dementia appear, based on brain imaging scans, age and genetics.

“We know a heck of a lot more now than we did 15 years ago, when the first studies of bapineuzumab were being designed,” Carrillo said prior to the latest findings being released. “We are slowly moving the needle back in time for these amyloid plaque busters.”


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

  2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

  3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

  4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

  5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.