Jeffrey Cummings

Prof. Dr. Jeffrey Cummings

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

32Years (1995-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
3 July 2014 in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJeffrey Cummings
Jeffrey Cummings
TMTravis Morstorf
Travis Morstorf
KZKate Zhong
Kate Zhong
Introduction: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is increasing in frequency as the global population ages. Five drugs are approved for treatment of AD, including four cholinesterase inhibitors and an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)-receptor antagonist. We have an urgent need to find new therapies for AD. Methods: We examined Clinicaltrials.gov, a public website that records ongoing clinical trials. We examined the decade of 2002 to 2012, to better understand AD-drug development. We reviewed trials by sponsor, sites, drug mechanism of action, duration, number of patients required, and rate of success in terms of advancement from one phase to the next. We also reviewed the current AD therapy pipeline. Results: During the 2002 to 2012 observation period, 413 AD trials were performed: 124 Phase 1 trials, 206 Phase 2 trials, and 83 Phase 3 trials. Seventy-eight percent were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. The United States of America (U.S.) remains the single world region with the greatest number of trials; cumulatively, more non-U.S. than U.S. trials are performed. The largest number of registered trials addressed symptomatic agents aimed at improving cognition (36.6%), followed by trials of disease-modifying small molecules (35.1%) and trials of disease-modifying immunotherapies (18%). The mean length of trials increases from Phase 2 to Phase 3, and the number of participants in trials increases between Phase 2 and Phase 3. Trials of disease-modifying agents are larger and longer than those for symptomatic agents. A very high attrition rate was found, with an overall success rate during the 2002 to 2012 period of 0.4% (99.6% failure). Conclusions: The Clinicaltrials.gov database demonstrates that relatively few clinical trials are undertaken for AD therapeutics, considering the magnitude of the problem. The success rate for advancing from one phase to another is low, and the number of compounds progressing to regulatory review is among the lowest found in any therapeutic area. The AD drug-development ecosystem requires support.

1 July 2004 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JCJeffrey Cummings
Jeffrey Cummings
The prevalence of Alzheimer's disease is predicted to reach 13.2 million cases in the United States. This article considers current therapeutic approaches for Alzheimer's disease. Optimal management requires accurate diagnosis, which is increasingly based on an understanding of pathophysiology. Neuroprotective strategies, cholinesterase inhibitors, psychopharmacologic agents that may reduce behavioral disturbances, and newer agents such as memantine are discussed.

22 March 2023 in The Journal Of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJeffrey Cummings
Jeffrey Cummings
LAL. Apostolova
L. Apostolova
GRG. D. Rabinovici
G. D. Rabinovici
AAA. Atri
A. Atri
PAP. Aisen
P. Aisen
SSS. Salloway
S. Salloway
Lecanemab (Leqembi®) is approved in the United States for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) to be initiated in early AD (mild cognitive

17 April 2021 in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CSChad J. Swanson
Chad J. Swanson
YZYong Zhang
Yong Zhang
SDShobha Dhadda
Shobha Dhadda
JWJinping Wang
Jinping Wang
JKJune Kaplow
June Kaplow
JCJeffrey Cummings
Jeffrey Cummings
Background: Lecanemab (BAN2401), an IgG1 monoclonal antibody, preferentially targets soluble aggregated amyloid beta (Aβ), with activity across oligomers, protofibrils, and insoluble fibrils. BAN2401-G000-201, a randomized double-blind clinical trial, utilized a Bayesian design with response-adaptive randomization to assess 3 doses across 2 regimens of lecanemab versus placebo in early Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and mild AD dementia.Methods: BAN2401-G000-201 aimed to establish the effective dose 90% (ED90), defined as the simplest dose that achieves ≥90% of the maximum treatment effect. The primary endpoint was Bayesian analysis of 12-month clinical change on the Alzheimer’s Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS) for the ED90 dose, which required an 80% probability of ≥25% clinical reduction in decline versus placebo. Key secondary endpoints included 18-month Bayesian and frequentist analyses of brain amyloid reduction using positron emission tomography; clinical decline on ADCOMS, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum-of-Boxes (CDR-SB), and Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog14); changes in CSF core biomarkers; and total hippocampal volume (HV) using volumetric magnetic resonance imaging.Results: A total of 854 randomized subjects were treated (lecanemab, 609; placebo, 245). At 12 months, the 10-mg/kg biweekly ED90 dose showed a 64% probability to be better than placebo by 25% on ADCOMS, which missed the 80% threshold for the primary outcome. At 18 months, 10-mg/kg biweekly lecanemab reduced brain amyloid (−0.306 SUVr units) while showing a drug-placebo difference in favor of active treatment by 27% and 30% on ADCOMS, 56% and 47% on ADAS-Cog14, and 33% and 26% on CDR-SB versus placebo according to Bayesian and frequentist analyses, respectively. CSF biomarkers were supportive of a treatment effect. Lecanemab was well-tolerated with 9.9% incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema/effusion at 10 mg/kg biweekly.Conclusions: BAN2401-G000-201 did not meet the 12-month primary endpoint. However, prespecified 18-month Bayesian and frequentist analyses demonstrated reduction in brain amyloid accompanied by a consistent reduction of clinical decline across several clinical and biomarker endpoints. A phase 3 study (Clarity AD) in early Alzheimer’s disease is underway.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01767311.

1 January 2019 in Alzheimer's & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JCJeffrey Cummings
Jeffrey Cummings
GLGaram Lee
Garam Lee
ARAaron Ritter
Aaron Ritter
MSMarwan Sabbagh
Marwan Sabbagh
KZKate Zhong
Kate Zhong
Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) has few available treatments, and there is a high rate of failure in AD drug development programs. Study of the AD drug development pipeline can provide insight into the evolution of drug development and how best to optimize development practices. Methods: We reviewed clinicaltrials.gov and identified all pharmacologic AD trials of all agents currently being developed for treatment of AD. Results: There are 132 agents in clinical trials for the treatment of AD. Twenty‐eight agents are in 42 phase 3 trials; 74 agents are in 83 phase 2 trials; and 30 agents are in 31 phase 1 trials. There is an increase in the number of agents in each phase compared with that in the 2018 pipeline. Nineteen agents in trials target cognitive enhancement, and 14 are intended to treat neuropsychiatric and behavioral symptoms. There are 96 agents in disease modification trials; of these, 38 (40%) have amyloid as the primary target or as one of several effects. Eighteen of the antiamyloid agents are small molecules, and 20 are monoclonal antibodies or biological therapies. Seven small molecules and ten biologics have tau as a primary or combination target (18%). Amyloid is the most common specific target in phase 3 and phase 2 disease modification trials. Novel biomarkers (e.g., neurofilament light), new outcomes (e.g., AD Composite Score [ADCOMS]), enrollment of earlier populations, and innovative trial designs (e.g., Bayesian adaptive designs) are new features in recent clinical trials. Discussion: Drug development continues robustly at all phases despite setbacks in several programs in the recent past. Continuing unmet needs require a commitment to growing and accelerating the pipeline.

9 August 2017 in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PAPaul S. Aisen
Paul S. Aisen
JCJeffrey Cummings
Jeffrey Cummings
CJClifford R. Jack Jr
Clifford R. Jack Jr
JMJohn C. Morris
John C. Morris
RSReisa Sperling
Reisa Sperling
BDBruno Dubois
Bruno Dubois
Basic research advances in recent years have furthered our understanding of the natural history of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). It is now recognized that pathophysiological changes begin many years prior to clinical manifestations of disease and the spectrum of AD spans from clinically asymptomatic to severely impaired. Defining AD purely by its clinical presentation is thus artificial and efforts have been made to recognize the disease based on both clinical and biomarker findings. Advances with biomarkers have also prompted a shift in how the disease is considered as a clinico-pathophysiological entity, with an increasing appreciation that AD should not only be viewed with discrete and defined clinical stages, but as a multifaceted process moving along a seamless continuum. Acknowledging this concept is critical to understanding the development process for disease-modifying therapies, and for initiating effective diagnostic and disease management options. In this article, we discuss the concept of a disease continuum from pathophysiological, biomarker, and clinical perspectives, and highlight the importance of considering AD as a continuum rather than discrete stages. While the pathophysiology of AD has still not been elucidated completely, there is ample evidence to support researchers and clinicians embracing the view of a disease continuum in their study, diagnosis, and management of the disease.