Small patient pool in Alzheimer’s drug trial casts shadow on positive results

dementia x
Image credit: Choice

Facing pressing questions about its latest clinical trial in Alzheimer’s disease, Biogen may have sowed further doubt on the future of an investigational treatment on [October 25].

At a medical conference in Spain, Biogen and partner Eisai presented data on the drug, BAN2401, meant to clear up concerns that its earlier observed benefits were a mirage. But the explanation revealed that BAN2401’s glimmer of promise is based on results from a small subset of patients in an otherwise large trial, which could be difficult to replicate in later studies.

Eisai argued in favor of the drug, presenting new analysis showing that patients on placebo saw their Alzheimer’s worsen at similar rates regardless of whether they had the genetic mutation [which worsens Alzheimer’s], called APOE4. Digging into the data from the high-dose group, Eisai said patients with APOE4 actually did better on BAN2401 than those without, compared to placebo.

“Therefore we believe that the treatment effect was not due to an imbalance in subject allocation, but that it may have actually underestimated the overall BAN2401 effect,” said Chad Swanson, Eisai’s director of clinical research in neuroscience.

But that conclusion is based on an analysis of only 10 patients with APOE4 mutations who got the high dose of BAN2401, and their results are compared against 113 subjects on placebo.

Read full, original post: Biogen’s ‘positive’ Alzheimer’s trial has a problem with small numbers

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-01_23_27-PM-2
Viewpoint: Will AI democratize personalized cancer treatment or fuel medical misinformation?
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-11_27_01-AM-2
AI likely to improve health care, research shows—but not for blacks and ethnic minorities
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-3.15.53-PM
Chiropractors may no longer be modern-day snake oil salesmen, but the benefits of their therapy are limited–at best
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-12.15.17-PM
UK gene-editing milestone: Livestock barley that increases ruminant value and reduces methane emissions is first-approved CRISPR crop
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.