Citations 1
Recent Cochrane review has serious flaws: A perspective of clinicians and researchers from around the world
Snyder, Heather M. , Tampi, Malavika P. , Aisen, Paul S., Allegri, Ricardo, Apostolova, Liana G., Atri, Alireza, Aurora, Sheena, Caramelli, Paulo, Cummings, Jeffrey, Fox, Nick C., Hardy, John, Lamb, Bruce T., Levey, Allan, Lopez, Oscar, Mummery, Catherine, Nitrini, Ricardo, Pahlke, Sarah, Petersen, Ronald C., Pike, K. Joanne, Porsteinsson, Anton P., Rabinovici, Gil D., Rafii, Michael, Raman, Rema, Sabbagh, Marwan N., Salloway, Stephen P., Scheltens, Philip, Schott, Jonathan M., Selkoe, Dennis J., Sevlever, Gustavo, Sperling, Reisa, Tansey, Malu Gamez, Dyck, Christopher van, Zetterberg, Henrik, Carrillo, Maria C., Hardy, John , Grinberg, Lea Tenenholz, Hardy, John , Aisen, Paul , Allegri, Ricardo , Apostolova, Liana G. , Atri, Alireza , Caramelli, Paulo , Crivelli, Lucía , Cummings, Jeffrey L. , Strooper, Bart De , Fox, Nick C, Grinberg, Lea T. , Lamb, Bruce T. , López, Oscar L. , Mummery, Catherine J. , Nitríni, Ricardo , Pahlke, Sarah , Petersen, Ronald C. , Porsteinsson, Anton P. , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Rafii, Michael S. , Raman, Rema, Salloway, Stephen , Scheltens, Philip , Schott, Jonathan M. , Selkoe, Dennis J. , Sevlever, Gustavo Emilio , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Tansey, Malú G. , Dyck, Christopher H. van , Zetterberg, Henrik , Carrillo, María C.
Alzheimer's & Dementia | July 28, 2026 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 7 | Pages: No page available
Abstract In response to a Cochrane review (published in April 2026) on the clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies targeting beta amyloid, this perspective outlines a number of critiques. The scientists, methodologists, subject‐matter experts, and clinicians on this perspective strongly recommend that the Cochrane editorial board consider a call for editorial response, correction of press materials, or commissioned reply to this review for four overarching reasons: (1) decision to pool antibodies that do and do not clear beta amyloid, (2) decision to include studies from a time when biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease were not available, (3) analytical and methodological limitations of the approach used, (4) conflating the distinct roles and methodological processes of systematic review and guideline methodologies, (5) contextualizing the present critique within the existing evidence‐synthesis literature, and (6) mechanistic inference beyond the scope of the presented analyses. Conclusions that may not accurately reflect treatment‐specific effects could cause significant downstream clinical and psychosocial harm to those currently undergoing treatment and their family members as well as individuals considering participation in Alzheimer's clinical trials.