Randolph, Christopher

Abstract Advances in biomarker technology, digital cognitive assessments, and amyloid‐targeting therapies have redefined the opportunities for accurate and early diagnosis and care of Alzheimer's disease (AD). These advances also create new possibilities for intervention before the onset of cognitive impairment. This paradigm shift has increased the focus on Stages 1 and 2 of AD, in which individuals are cognitively unimpaired but exhibit biological evidence of disease. While early identification of AD offers an opportunity to intervene early to delay progression and preserve quality of life, it also presents complex challenges related to communicating diagnostic results to patients and their families, contextualizing the cost effectiveness of early diagnosis and treatment, and implementation of and equitable access to treatments. Recent, successfully enrolled, preclinical AD trials highlight the complex strategies required to identify asymptomatic, biomarker‐positive individuals on a large scale, and demonstrate critical knowledge gaps in inclusion, follow‐up, and long‐term outcome measurement. The Spring 2025 Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) meeting brought together academics, clinicians, industry, and regulatory leaders to exchange perspectives on current challenges, key learnings, and potential strategies for identifying and treating individuals in very early stages of AD, effectively and safely. This paper presents key takeaways from the Spring 2025 AARR meeting. Highlights New criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) enable early identification of AD pathology. Blood tests and digital cognitive assessment tools may facilitate early and personalized care. Plasma biomarkers may be scalable in clinical settings but need confirmation or follow‐up assessments in those individuals with equivocal results. Early therapy shows best results in people with lower initial amyloid and tau burden.

Abstract The design of clinical trials in Alzheimer's disease (AD) must consider the development of new plasma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and imaging biomarkers. They must also define clinically meaningful outcomes for patients and set endpoints that measure these outcomes accurately. With the accelerated United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the first anti‐amyloid, disease‐modifying treatment for AD, a monoclonal antibody called aducanumab, the landscape of clinical trial design is evolving. Enrolment in clinical trials may be impacted by the availability of this and other treatments, and trial design must take into consideration that patients may desire a disease‐modifying treatment rather than potentially being randomized to the placebo arm. The Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) Fall 2021 meeting discussed the consideration of well‐defined AD staging criteria in protocol design and how they influence more standardized inclusion/exclusion criteria for trials, as well as what constitutes meaningful differentiation between the stages. Discussion explored the current state of knowledge regarding biomarkers and how they can inform AD staging criteria, as many trials are now designed based on specific biomarker features, further underscoring the importance of coordinating AD staging criteria and biomarkers. The relationship between cognition and biomarkers has been studied and this must continue as trials move forward. Researchers, patients, clinicians, regulatory scientists, and payers discussed the state of the field as well as the future of symptomatic Alzheimer's disease clinical trials. Highlights The Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) convened leaders from academia and industry as well as patients, care partners, clinicians, regulators, and payers to discuss the topic of operationalizing selection criteria for clinical trials and the role of biomarkers. Well‐defined Alzheimer's disease (AD) staging criteria are an important consideration in study protocol design. Staging criteria and biomarkers must be coordinated to yield high‐quality clinical trial results that have meaning for patients with AD by selecting a population most likely to benefit from a specific treatment.

Abstract Alzheimer's disease (AD) staging criteria lack standardized, empirical description. Well‐defined AD staging criteria are an important consideration in protocol design, influencing a more standardized inclusion/exclusion criteria and defining what constitutes meaningful differentiation among the stages. However, many trials are being designed on the basis of biomarker features and the two need to be coordinated. The Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) Spring 2021 meeting discussed the implementation of preclinical AD staging criteria, and provided recommendations for how they may best be incorporated into clinical trials research. Discussion also included what currently available tools for global clinical trials may best define populations in preclinical AD trials, and if are we able to differentiate preclinical from clinical stages of the disease. Well‐defined AD staging criteria are key to improving early detection, diagnostics, clinical trial enrollment, and identifying statistically significant clinical changes, and researchers discussed how emerging blood biomarkers may help with more efficient screening in preclinical stages.

Abstract Demonstrating that treatments are clinically meaningful across the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum is critical for meeting our goals of accelerating a cure by 2025. While this topic has been a focus of several Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) meetings, there remains no consensus as to what constitutes a “clinically meaningful outcome” in the eyes of patients, clinicians, care partners, policymakers, payers, and regulatory bodies. Furthermore, the field has not come to agreement as to what constitutes a clinically meaningful treatment effect at each stage of disease severity. The AARR meeting on November 19–20, 2019, reviewed current approaches to defining clinical meaningfulness from various perspectives including those of patients and care partners, clinicians, regulators, health economists, and public policymakers. Participants discussed approaches that may confer clinical relevance at each stage of the disease continuum and fostered discussion about what should guide us in the future.

Abstract The Alzheimer's Association's Research Roundtable met in November 2016 to explore how best to measure changes in cognition and function in the preclinical stage of Alzheimer's disease. This review will cover the tools and instruments currently available to identify populations for prevention trials, and measure subtle disease progression in the earliest stages of Alzheimer's disease, and will include discussions of suitable cognitive, behavioral, functional, composite, and biological endpoints for prevention trials. Current prevention trials are reviewed including TOMMOROW, Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer's Disease Trial, the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Generation Study, and the Anti‐Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic Alzheimer's to compare current approaches and tools that are being developed.

Abstract Dementia is often characterized as being caused by one of several major diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), cerebrovascular disease, Lewy body disease, or a frontotemporal degeneration. Failure to acknowledge that more than one entity may be present precludes attempts to understand interactive relationships. The clinicopathological studies of dementia demonstrate that multiple pathologic processes often coexist. How overlapping pathologic findings affect the diagnosis and treatment of clinical AD and other dementia phenotypes was the topic taken up by the Alzheimer's Association's Research Roundtable in October 2014. This review will cover the neuropathologic basis of dementia, provide clinical perspectives on multiple pathologies, and discuss therapeutics and biomarkers targeting overlapping pathologies and how these issues impact clinical trials.High prevalence of multiple pathologic findings among individuals with clinical diagnosis of AD suggests that new treatment strategies may be needed to effectively treat AD and other dementing illnesses.