Study partner profile effects on CDR-SB change in anti-amyloid therapy evaluation
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
INTRODUCTION
The Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), a primary outcome in anti-amyloid therapy (AAT) trials, integrates information from participants and study partners. CDR-SB scores may vary by study partner characteristics, but their impact on 18-month change interpretation remains unclear.
METHODS
Using the NACC Uniform Data Set, we fitted linear mixed-effects calibration models in an Alzheimer’s disease (AD)-primary early symptomatic cohort and propagated study partner-associated coefficients through Monte Carlo simulations. We estimated components of 18-month CDR-SB change under observed profile changes, simulated follow-up imbalance in a common female living-with profile, and tipping-point scenarios. Analyses were repeated in amyloid-positive and trial-like cohorts.
RESULTS
The AD-primary cohort included 15,061 participants and 7,683 baseline-to-18-month pairs. Observed profile changes generated a negligible cohort-level component (mean 0.0014 points, 95% simulation interval 0.0006 to 0.0022). Simulated follow-up imbalance generated differences of 0.014 to 0.071 points across 10% to 50% reassignment. Under the primary calibration model, generating a 0.45-point difference, equal to the reported Clarity AD CDR-SB group difference, required median net imbalance >100% and was feasible in 48% of iterations. Amyloid-positive and trial-like cohorts had lower median tipping points but wider intervals, reflecting coefficient imprecision.
DISCUSSION
In the large AD-primary cohort, observed study partner profile changes and simulated follow-up imbalance generated CDR-SB differences that were small relative to the 0.45-point Clarity AD benchmark. Biomarker-confirmed estimates were less stable because of coefficient imprecision. These findings suggest limited impact under typical AD-primary conditions but support systematic study partner profile collection and sensitivity analyses in observational and external-comparator CDR-SB studies for AAT evaluation.
