Fenster schließen  |  Fenster drucken

Ach ja, die alte Amyloid-Hypothese ....



https://endpts.com/merck-study-may-signal-doom-for-a-broad-g…

Merck study may signal doom for a broad group of pivotal Alzheimer’s studies

by john carroll — on May 3, 2018 08:53 AM EDT
Updated: 09:17 AM


The BACE the­ory in Alzheimer’s R&D is sim­ple. Cut off the flow of amy­loid beta to the brain and you can elim­i­nate what is widely be­lieved — though not proven — to be a cause of the dis­ease. Do that, and you could bend the course of this dev­as­tat­ing ill­ness in mil­lions of peo­ple with mild to mod­er­ate forms of the dis­ease.

And Merck $MRK just spent a for­tune to demon­strate that it may well be com­pletely wrong.

To be sure, Merck ran a clean study for verube­ce­s­tat, the lead­ing BACE drug in the clinic, and dis­played the data on 1,958 pa­tients for all to see today in the New Eng­land Jour­nal of Med­i­cine. In­ves­ti­ga­tors care­fully tracked amy­loid beta flows in cere­brospinal cords and found that the drug did what it was in­tended to do, with a dra­matic re­duc­tion of the toxic pro­tein. 

It had no ef­fect, with pa­tients in the two dosage groups track­ing in par­al­lel de­cline on both cog­ni­tion and func­tion, the two clas­sic mea­sures for Alzheimer’s. 

The con­clu­sion they reached is that the dam­age al­ready pre­sent in the brains of pa­tients with Alzheimer’s may be too ex­ten­sive to treat with any BACE drug. And they also con­cede that the amy­loid the­ory it­self may be just flat wrong.

This sug­gests that once de­men­tia is pre­sent, dis­ease pro­gres­sion may be in­de­pen­dent of Aβ pro­duc­tion or, al­ter­na­tively, that the amy­loid hy­poth­e­sis of Alzheimer’s dis­ease may not be cor­rect. Be­cause Aβ de­po­si­tion takes place years be­fore clin­i­cal symp­toms be­come ap­par­ent, it has been pro­posed that treat­ments tar­get­ing amy­loid should be im­ple­mented early in the dis­ease process, be­fore the onset of clin­i­cal symp­toms.

Soon after this study failed, Merck also threw in the towel on their sec­ond piv­otal trial, not­ing it too was a flop. Those data are still being eval­u­ated, but it un­der­scores the be­lief that all of the BACE stud­ies — in­clud­ing those at Eli Lilly $LLY, part­nered with As­traZeneca$AZN, or Bio­gen $BIIB, al­lied with Eisai — are headed straight to fail­ure.

Bio­gen is also rolling the dice on ad­u­canumab, which the com­pany has touted as a lead­ing amy­loid beta ther­apy. But with in­ves­ti­ga­tors in the field openly won­der­ing whether the amy­loid the­ory has lured a long lineup into a clin­i­cal dis­as­ter zone, it’s likely to face grow­ing skep­ti­cism that it can de­velop a safe, ef­fec­tive ther­apy with just one drug.

This doesn’t by any means elim­i­nate work in the area. True, Pfizer re­cently pulled out after spend­ing hun­dreds of mil­lions of dol­lars on their pro­grams. But star­tups like De­nali be­lieve that new and bet­ter tech­nol­ogy can give them bet­ter odds at suc­cess, while Cel­gene is jump­ing in with its own new pipeline. Oth­ers want to see if com­bi­na­tion ap­proaches using tau and amy­loid beta to­gether could work. 

Merck’s sug­ges­tion about going even ear­lier in the dis­ease process has also prompted a range of stud­ies in pre-symp­to­matic pa­tients, while the FDA has sig­naled its in­ter­est in com­ing up with bio­mark­ers to help speed new stud­ies.

After more than 200 R&D pro­jects ended in dis­as­ter, though, Alzheimer’s is look­ing like an in­creas­ingly daunt­ing chal­lenge, with no clear path for­ward that would in­spire con­fi­dence among pa­tients with the dis­ease.
 
aus der Diskussion: Morphosys – fachliche Überlegungen zur Entwicklungspipeline
Autor (Datum des Eintrages): Joschka Schröder  (03.05.18 18:17:13)
Beitrag: 762 von 772 (ID:57688485)
Alle Angaben ohne Gewähr © wallstreetONLINE