Lecanemab in Real-World Practice: What Early Alzheimer’s Patients Are Actually Experiencing

Introduction

Lecanemab has fundamentally altered the therapeutic landscape of Alzheimer’s disease by introducing a disease modifying approach aimed at one of the condition’s central pathological hallmarks. For decades, the management of Alzheimer’s disease focused primarily on symptomatic treatments, supportive interventions, safety planning, caregiver education, and strategies to address cognitive, behavioral, and functional decline. While medications such as cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists provided modest symptomatic benefits, they did not directly target the underlying neurodegenerative processes responsible for disease progression. The emergence of lecanemab has shifted this paradigm by targeting aggregated amyloid beta, a key pathological feature implicated in the development and progression of Alzheimer’s disease.

The clinical significance of lecanemab was highlighted by the CLARITY AD trial, a large, randomized, placebo controlled study involving patients with mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease and mild Alzheimer’s dementia who had confirmed cerebral amyloid pathology. The trial demonstrated that treatment with lecanemab resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the rate of cognitive and functional decline over an 18 month period compared with placebo. These findings provided some of the strongest evidence to date that modifying amyloid burden can influence the clinical trajectory of early Alzheimer’s disease. However, the magnitude of benefit observed was modest, emphasizing the importance of realistic expectations among clinicians, patients, and caregivers.

Lecanemab should not be viewed as a cure for Alzheimer’s disease. It does not restore lost cognitive function, reverse established neurodegeneration, or completely halt disease progression. Rather, its primary clinical value lies in slowing the rate of decline. For patients in the earliest symptomatic stages of the disease, even a modest delay in progression may translate into prolonged independence, delayed functional impairment, and extended periods of meaningful engagement in daily activities. Nevertheless, the degree of benefit varies among individuals, and not all patients experience the same therapeutic response.

Translating clinical trial findings into routine practice introduces a range of complexities that extend beyond efficacy data. Patients encountered in memory clinics and general neurological practice often differ substantially from those enrolled in pivotal clinical trials. Real world populations tend to be older, more medically complex, and more likely to have coexisting neurological and systemic conditions. Mixed dementia pathologies, including vascular cognitive impairment, Lewy body disease, and other neurodegenerative processes, are common in clinical settings and may influence treatment outcomes. In addition, many patients present with significant cardiovascular comorbidities, frailty, polypharmacy, mobility limitations, and social determinants of health that were underrepresented in controlled research environments.

The administration of lecanemab also requires a level of healthcare infrastructure that extends beyond standard dementia care. Treatment is delivered through regular intravenous infusions, necessitating reliable access to infusion facilities, scheduling systems, and clinical personnel trained in the management of infusion related therapies. Equally important is the need for ongoing radiological surveillance to detect amyloid related imaging abnormalities, commonly referred to as ARIA. These imaging findings, which may manifest as cerebral edema, effusions, or microhemorrhages, represent one of the most crucial safety considerations associated with anti amyloid monoclonal antibody therapy.

Effective ARIA monitoring requires baseline and serial magnetic resonance imaging examinations, timely interpretation by experienced neuroradiologists, and established clinical pathways for responding to abnormal findings. Healthcare providers must be prepared to recognize symptoms suggestive of ARIA, including headache, confusion, dizziness, visual disturbances, and focal neurological deficits. Management may involve treatment interruption, additional imaging, specialist consultation, and careful reassessment of risks and benefits. Consequently, successful implementation of lecanemab therapy depends not only on prescribing the medication but also on maintaining a coordinated multidisciplinary framework capable of supporting safe and effective treatment delivery.

Patient selection has therefore become a critical component of clinical decision making. Appropriate candidates generally include individuals with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease who have objective evidence of amyloid pathology and who can adhere to the monitoring requirements associated with treatment. Factors such as genetic risk, particularly apolipoprotein E ε4 carrier status, concurrent anticoagulant use, cerebrovascular disease burden, and overall health status may influence both safety and expected benefit. Comprehensive discussions regarding treatment goals, potential risks, logistical requirements, and anticipated outcomes are essential to support informed decision making.

Cost and access considerations further complicate the integration of lecanemab into routine practice. The financial burden extends beyond the medication itself and includes diagnostic testing, amyloid confirmation procedures, serial imaging studies, infusion services, specialist consultations, and long term monitoring. Geographic disparities in access to memory clinics, infusion centers, and advanced imaging facilities may limit treatment availability for many patients. In addition, caregiver involvement often plays a crucial role in ensuring adherence to treatment schedules and monitoring protocols, highlighting the importance of social support systems in determining treatment feasibility.

As a result, the central clinical question is no longer simply whether lecanemab is effective. A more meaningful question is which patients with early Alzheimer’s disease are most likely to derive clinically significant benefit while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. Equally important is determining how clinicians should counsel patients and families regarding realistic expectations, balancing hope with evidence based understanding of the therapy’s limitations. Finally, healthcare systems must address the infrastructure, workforce, and resource requirements necessary to deliver anti amyloid therapies responsibly, equitably, and sustainably.

The introduction of lecanemab represents an important milestone in Alzheimer’s disease therapeutics and provides proof of concept that disease modifying interventions can alter the course of neurodegenerative disease. However, its successful integration into clinical practice requires careful patient selection, comprehensive monitoring strategies, multidisciplinary collaboration, and ongoing evaluation of real world outcomes. As additional disease modifying therapies emerge, the lessons learned from lecanemab will help shape the future of precision medicine in Alzheimer’s disease and guide the development of more effective and accessible treatment paradigms.

What Lecanemab Has Proven

The strongest evidence for lecanemab comes from randomized clinical trial data. CLARITY AD enrolled patients with early Alzheimer’s disease, defined as mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease or mild Alzheimer’s dementia, with confirmed amyloid pathology. Participants received lecanemab or placebo for 18 months. Lecanemab reduced amyloid markers and slowed clinical decline on the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes. The trial reported a 27% relative slowing of decline compared with placebo on the primary outcome.

This result is clinically important, but it must be communicated carefully. A relative slowing of decline does not mean most patients improve. It means the average treated patient declined less than the average placebo patient over the trial period. Some patients may appear stable for months. Some may decline despite treatment. Some may discontinue because of adverse events, logistics, cost, or evolving goals of care.

A realistic clinical message is:

Lecanemab may slow progression in appropriately selected patients with early amyloid-positive Alzheimer’s disease. It is not a cure, and it does not guarantee stability or improvement.

What Early Real-World Data Suggests

Early real-world reports are encouraging but limited. Observational cohorts and conference reports have described many treated patients remaining clinically stable over 6 to 12 months, with ARIA rates broadly similar to those observed in clinical trials. Some sites have reported short-term stability on cognitive or functional measures, biomarker improvement, and high treatment persistence among selected patients.

These data are valuable because they show that lecanemab can be delivered outside a trial setting. However, they should be interpreted cautiously. Real-world datasets often include small samples, short follow-up, selected specialty-center patients, variable cognitive testing, incomplete follow-up, and no randomized control group. Clinical stability over six or twelve months may reflect treatment effect, but it can also reflect selection of slower progressors, practice effects on cognitive testing, survivor bias, dropout of patients who worsen, or measurement variability.

A more accurate interpretation is:

Early real-world data suggest feasible implementation and encouraging short-term clinical stability in selected patients, but broad real-world effectiveness remains uncertain and requires longer, controlled, systematically collected data.

Patient Selection: Who Is the Trial-Validated Candidate?

Lecanemab is indicated for patients with early Alzheimer’s disease, specifically mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease, with confirmed amyloid pathology. The trial-validated population had mild symptomatic disease, not moderate or severe dementia.

Appropriate candidates generally have:

• A clinical syndrome consistent with early Alzheimer’s disease.
• Mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease or mild Alzheimer’s dementia.
• Confirmed amyloid pathology by amyloid PET or cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers.
• Ability to undergo baseline and serial MRI.
• No MRI findings that create unacceptable hemorrhage risk.
• A reliable care partner or support system.
• Ability to attend biweekly infusions and monitoring visits.
• Understanding that the expected benefit is slowing, not cure.

Common caution or exclusion factors include:

Factor	Why it matters
Moderate or severe dementia	Not the population studied in CLARITY AD
Amyloid-negative biomarker result	No rationale for anti-amyloid therapy
Inability to undergo MRI	ARIA cannot be monitored safely
More than 4 baseline cerebral microhemorrhages	Increased hemorrhagic risk and trial exclusion
Superficial siderosis	Increased ARIA-H risk
Prior macrohemorrhage larger than 10 mm	Safety concern
Vasogenic edema	Safety concern
Recent stroke, transient ischemic attack, or seizure	Trial exclusion and safety concern
Severe small vessel disease	May increase hemorrhagic risk and reduce benefit
Need for anticoagulation	Major caution or exclusion in many appropriate-use protocols
Unreliable follow-up	Unsafe due to required MRI and symptom monitoring

The FDA label recommends confirming amyloid pathology before treatment and obtaining a recent baseline brain MRI before initiation. It also recommends additional MRI monitoring during early therapy.

Biomarker Confirmation

Amyloid confirmation is required before initiating lecanemab. Clinical diagnosis alone is insufficient because memory symptoms may result from vascular cognitive impairment, Lewy body disease, frontotemporal degeneration, depression, sleep disorders, medication effects, or mixed pathology.

Amyloid PET

Amyloid PET directly visualizes fibrillar amyloid plaque burden. It is useful when available and can help resolve diagnostic uncertainty. Limitations include cost, access, insurance requirements, scanner availability, and regional disparities.

Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers

CSF testing can demonstrate an Alzheimer’s biomarker profile using amyloid and tau measures. Automated platforms have improved reliability, but local assay methods and cutoffs matter. Lumbar puncture is less expensive than amyloid PET in many systems, but it is invasive and may be unacceptable to some patients.

Blood-based biomarkers

Blood biomarkers, especially plasma p-tau217, are increasingly useful for triage and diagnostic probability. They may eventually streamline access to disease-modifying therapy. However, treatment programs commonly still require amyloid confirmation through accepted pathways, depending on institutional, payer, and regulatory requirements.

APOE ε4 Genotyping and Counseling

APOE ε4 status is important because it affects ARIA risk. The FDA label recommends testing for APOE ε4 status before starting treatment to inform ARIA risk discussions. Patients should receive counseling about the implications of testing, including ARIA risk, Alzheimer’s disease genetic risk, family implications, privacy concerns, and psychological impact.

APOE ε4 homozygotes have the highest ARIA risk. In CLARITY AD, ARIA-E and ARIA-H occurred more often in APOE ε4 homozygotes than in heterozygotes or noncarriers. This does not automatically exclude all homozygotes from treatment, but it requires careful counseling, shared decision-making, and heightened monitoring.

A practical counseling statement is:

APOE testing helps estimate ARIA risk. It is not required to prove Alzheimer’s disease, and it does not determine with certainty whether someone will or will not develop ARIA. It helps patients and clinicians make a more informed decision about treatment risk.

ARIA: The Central Safety Issue

Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities are the most important safety concern with lecanemab. ARIA is usually detected on MRI and may be asymptomatic, but it can become symptomatic, serious, or rarely fatal.

ARIA includes:

• ARIA-E, which refers to edema or effusion.
• ARIA-H, which includes microhemorrhage, superficial siderosis, or macrohemorrhage.

Symptoms can include headache, confusion, dizziness, visual symptoms, nausea, gait change, focal neurologic deficits, or seizures. Many cases are asymptomatic and detected only through scheduled MRI surveillance.

Risk is higher in:

• APOE ε4 homozygotes.
• Patients with baseline microhemorrhages.
• Patients with superficial siderosis.
• Patients with more advanced cerebral amyloid angiopathy.
• Patients requiring anticoagulation.
• Patients exposed to thrombolytics.
• Patients with small vessel disease.

MRI Monitoring

MRI monitoring is mandatory for safe lecanemab use. The FDA label recommends obtaining a recent baseline MRI before treatment and additional MRIs within approximately one week before the 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 14th infusions. This reflects updated safety monitoring after FDA review of early serious ARIA cases.

This schedule is clinically important. Earlier monitoring before the 3rd infusion was added because serious ARIA-E cases can occur early in treatment. Practices using older schedules should update protocols to align with current labeling.

A practical MRI monitoring schedule includes:

Time point	Purpose
Baseline MRI	Assess eligibility and exclude high-risk hemorrhagic findings
Before 3rd infusion	Detect early ARIA
Before 5th infusion	Continue early risk surveillance
Before 7th infusion	Monitor the period of highest ARIA vulnerability
Before 14th infusion	Later early-treatment safety assessment
Symptom-triggered MRI	Evaluate new neurologic symptoms at any time

MRI reports should be reviewed by clinicians familiar with ARIA. Radiology workflows should clearly flag ARIA-E, ARIA-H, microhemorrhage count, superficial siderosis, macrohemorrhage, and vasogenic edema.

ARIA Management

Management depends on symptoms and radiographic severity. Mild asymptomatic ARIA may be monitored with close follow-up and repeat MRI, while moderate or severe ARIA usually requires treatment interruption. Symptomatic ARIA generally requires holding therapy and monitoring until resolution or stabilization. Decisions to restart should be individualized.

A responsible lecanemab program should have:

• Written ARIA grading criteria.
• MRI review workflow.
• Same-day response plan for symptomatic patients.
• Protocols for holding and restarting treatment.
• Emergency department communication guidance.
• Patient and caregiver education.
• Documentation of shared decision-making after ARIA.

Patients and caregivers should be taught to report new headache, confusion, vision changes, weakness, dizziness, gait instability, seizure, or acute neurologic symptoms promptly.

Anticoagulants, Antiplatelets, and Thrombolytics

Antithrombotic therapy is a critical safety issue. Many older adults with Alzheimer’s disease also have atrial fibrillation, prior stroke, coronary disease, venous thromboembolism, or vascular risk factors. Lecanemab programs must carefully evaluate bleeding risk and the likelihood that anticoagulation will be needed.

Appropriate-use recommendations generally advise caution or avoidance in patients requiring anticoagulation because of concern for macrohemorrhage and severe ARIA-H. Antiplatelet therapy requires individualized assessment. The risk-benefit balance differs between low-dose aspirin, dual antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation, and thrombolytic exposure.

If a lecanemab-treated patient presents with acute stroke-like symptoms, clinicians must consider ARIA in the differential diagnosis before thrombolysis. Thrombolytic therapy in patients receiving anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies has been associated with catastrophic hemorrhage in case reports. Emergency plans should clearly identify lecanemab treatment status.

Infusion Reactions

Infusion-related reactions are common, especially with the first dose. Symptoms may include fever, chills, flu-like symptoms, nausea, vomiting, headache, rash, blood pressure changes, or rigors. Most are mild or moderate. Severe reactions are uncommon.

Common management strategies include:

• Observation after early infusions.
• Symptom treatment with acetaminophen or antihistamines when appropriate.
• Slower infusion rate or premedication for patients with prior reactions.
• Clear escalation plan for severe reactions.
• Documentation of reaction severity and recurrence.

Patients should be told that early infusion reactions are possible and usually manageable, but they should report symptoms during or after infusion.

Why Patients May Decline Despite Treatment

Some patients will decline while receiving lecanemab. This does not necessarily mean treatment failed in a simple sense. Lecanemab slows amyloid-related disease progression on average, but Alzheimer’s disease biology is complex.

Reasons patients may decline include:

• The drug slows decline but does not stop disease.
• Tau burden may already be advanced.
• Mixed dementia pathology may be present.
• Cerebrovascular disease may contribute to symptoms.
• Baseline disease may be beyond the optimal treatment window.
• Depression, sleep disorders, delirium, or medication effects may worsen cognition.
• Cognitive tests vary over time.
• Dosing interruptions may reduce exposure.
• Functional decline may reflect comorbid illness rather than Alzheimer’s progression alone.

The article’s original discussion of galantamine and semagacestat nonresponders should be removed because those drugs are mechanistically different from lecanemab and do not provide a clinically useful framework for predicting lecanemab response.

A better approach is to define treatment goals in advance:

• Slow decline.
• Maintain function longer.
• Preserve independence where possible.
• Support caregiver planning.
• Monitor safety.
• Reassess benefit, burden, and goals over time.

Age and Response: Interpret Early Signals Cautiously

Some early observational reports have suggested that younger patients may decline more over short follow-up than older patients. This is interesting but not practice-changing. Younger symptomatic Alzheimer’s patients may have more aggressive biology, different baseline characteristics, atypical phenotypes, or higher tau burden. Short follow-up and small samples also increase the risk of misleading signals.

The trial-validated population remains early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease with amyloid positivity. Current evidence does not support excluding younger patients simply because one small real-world cohort observed more decline over six months. Instead, age should be interpreted alongside disease stage, amyloid confirmation, tau burden when available, comorbidity, MRI risk, functional status, and goals of care.

Infrastructure Requirements

Lecanemab is not a simple prescription. It is a program.

A functioning treatment pathway requires:

• Memory specialist or trained clinician for diagnosis.
• Amyloid confirmation pathway.
• Baseline MRI access.
• APOE counseling and testing workflow.
• Infusion center capacity every two weeks.
• MRI surveillance before scheduled infusions.
• Radiology expertise in ARIA detection.
• Nursing protocols for infusion reactions.
• Emergency plan for neurologic symptoms.
• Insurance authorization support.
• Patient and caregiver education.
• Follow-up cognitive and functional assessment.
• Documentation of benefit, burden, and adverse events.

Many clinics cannot deliver this safely without restructuring. Rural patients may face long travel times for memory specialists, amyloid PET, MRI, and infusion centers. Even well-resourced academic centers report that lecanemab programs are labor-intensive.

Access and Equity

Real-world access is uneven. Patients in rural areas, underserved communities, and regions without specialty memory centers may have limited access to amyloid confirmation, infusion therapy, MRI monitoring, or clinicians experienced with ARIA.

Potential equity barriers include:

• Limited neurologist or memory specialist availability.
• Long travel distances.
• PET and MRI access limitations.
• Infusion center capacity.
• Insurance authorization delays.
• Out-of-pocket costs.
• Caregiver transportation burden.
• Language barriers.
• Lower rates of biomarker evaluation in underserved populations.
• Underrepresentation of diverse populations in trials.

Health systems should not measure success only by number of patients treated. They should also track who is being evaluated, who is excluded, who declines, and why.

Cost and Coverage

The annual list price of lecanemab is approximately $26,500 for the drug alone. Total cost is higher when including amyloid confirmation, infusion administration, MRI surveillance, clinician visits, APOE counseling, laboratory work, and management of adverse events.

Medicare Part B generally covers FDA-approved anti-amyloid therapy when coverage criteria are met, but beneficiaries without supplemental coverage may be responsible for 20% coinsurance. Commercial coverage, Medicare Advantage authorization, and patient assistance options vary.

A more accurate cost statement is:

Lecanemab’s drug acquisition cost is about $26,500 per year, but total treatment cost is higher after including diagnostics, infusion administration, MRI monitoring, clinical visits, and management of complications. Patient out-of-pocket cost depends on insurance design and supplemental coverage.

Patient and Caregiver Experience

Treatment burden is substantial. Patients receive infusions every two weeks, undergo serial MRI monitoring, and require ongoing cognitive and safety follow-up. Caregivers often coordinate transportation, appointment tracking, symptom monitoring, insurance communication, and decision-making.

Despite this burden, many patients and families choose treatment because even modest slowing may be meaningful. A few extra months of preserved function can matter if it allows continued independence, family engagement, planning, or participation in valued activities.

Counseling should include:

• Expected benefit is slowing, not improvement.
• Treatment requires ongoing infusions.
• MRI monitoring is mandatory.
• ARIA can occur without symptoms.
• New neurologic symptoms require urgent evaluation.
• Treatment may be paused or stopped.
• Goals should be revisited over time.

Practical Clinical Workflow

Step 1: Confirm syndrome

Establish that the patient has mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia consistent with Alzheimer’s disease. Rule out reversible or competing causes where appropriate.

Step 2: Confirm amyloid

Use amyloid PET or CSF biomarkers through an accepted pathway. Blood biomarkers may help triage but often do not yet replace confirmatory testing in treatment programs.

Step 3: Assess MRI eligibility

Obtain baseline MRI. Exclude high-risk hemorrhagic findings, notable ARIA-like abnormalities, or inability to undergo serial MRI.

Step 4: Counsel on APOE

Discuss APOE ε4 testing, ARIA risk, genetic implications, and patient preferences.

Step 5: Evaluate treatment burden

Confirm transportation, caregiver support, infusion access, MRI scheduling, cost coverage, and ability to report symptoms.

Step 6: Start treatment with monitoring plan

Schedule infusions and required MRIs before the 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 14th infusions. Educate patient and caregiver on ARIA symptoms and infusion reactions.

Step 7: Reassess benefit and burden

Track cognition, function, adverse events, treatment interruptions, caregiver burden, and evolving goals of care.

Common Clinical Mistakes

Mistake	Why it matters
Calling lecanemab a cure	Creates unrealistic expectations
Treating amyloid positivity alone	Patients also need compatible early clinical syndrome
Treating moderate or severe dementia	Not the trial-validated population
Skipping APOE counseling	Misses major ARIA risk discussion
Using outdated MRI monitoring schedules	May miss early ARIA
Ignoring anticoagulation needs	Increases hemorrhage risk
Underestimating infusion burden	Leads to poor adherence or caregiver strain
Failing to prepare emergency departments	Stroke-like symptoms may represent ARIA
Overinterpreting early real-world stability	Observational data are not definitive
Not reassessing goals of care	Treatment burden may outweigh benefit over time

 

Frequently Asked Questions

Can lecanemab cure Alzheimer’s disease?

No. Lecanemab does not cure Alzheimer’s disease. It may slow decline in selected patients with early amyloid-positive Alzheimer’s disease.

Who is eligible for lecanemab?

The best-supported candidates are patients with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease, confirmed amyloid pathology, MRI eligibility, and ability to complete infusion and monitoring requirements.

Does a positive amyloid test mean someone should receive lecanemab?

No. Amyloid positivity is required, but treatment also requires compatible symptoms, early disease stage, MRI safety, follow-up reliability, and shared decision-making.

What is ARIA?

ARIA stands for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. It includes brain edema or effusion, called ARIA-E, and hemorrhagic findings such as microhemorrhage or superficial siderosis, called ARIA-H.

How often are MRIs needed?

Current FDA labeling recommends a baseline MRI and additional MRIs within approximately one week before the 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 14th infusions, plus symptom-triggered imaging when needed.

Why does APOE ε4 matter?

APOE ε4, especially having two copies, increases the risk of ARIA. Testing helps inform risk counseling before treatment.

Are infusion reactions common?

Yes. Infusion reactions are relatively common, especially with the first infusion, but most are mild or moderate.

Can patients on blood thinners receive lecanemab?

Patients requiring anticoagulation are often poor candidates or require very careful specialist evaluation because hemorrhage risk may be increased.

How long is lecanemab continued?

The optimal long-term duration remains an evolving question. Treatment continuation should be reassessed periodically based on safety, disease stage, treatment burden, patient goals, and emerging evidence.

What should families realistically expect?

Families should expect possible slowing of decline, not improvement or cure. The treatment also requires frequent infusions, MRI monitoring, and rapid reporting of neurologic symptoms.

References

Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Therapeutics Work Group. (2023). Lecanemab: Appropriate use recommendations. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, 10(3), 362-377.

Budd Haeberlein, S., Aisen, P. S., Barkhof, F., Chalkias, S., Chen, T., Cohen, S., Dent, G., Hansson, O., Harrison, K., von Hehn, C., Iwatsubo, T., Mallinckrodt, C., Mummery, C. J., Sandrock, A., Salloway, S., Tian, Y., van Dyck, C. H., Vellas, B., & Sevigny, J. (2022). Two randomized phase 3 studies of aducanumab in early Alzheimer’s disease. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, 9(2), 197-210.

Cummings, J., Aisen, P., Apostolova, L. G., Atri, A., Salloway, S., & Weiner, M. (2023). Lecanemab: Appropriate use recommendations. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease, 10(3), 362-377.

Eisai Inc. (2025). LEQEMBI prescribing information. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Food and Drug Administration. (2025). FDA recommends additional earlier MRI monitoring for patients with Alzheimer’s disease taking Leqembi. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Reish, N. J., Jamshidi, P., Stamm, B., Flanagan, M. E., Sugg, E., Tang, M., Agarwal, N., Beach, T. G., Serrano, G. E., Sue, L. I., Chen, K., Zamrini, E., Burke, A., Sabbagh, M. N., & Atri, A. (2023). Multiple cerebral hemorrhages in a patient receiving lecanemab and treated with t-PA for stroke. The New England Journal of Medicine, 388(5), 478-479.

Salloway, S., Farlow, M., McDade, E., Clifford, D. B., Wang, G., Llibre-Guerra, J. J., Hitchcock, J. M., Mills, S. L., Santacruz, A. M., Aschenbrenner, A. J., Hassenstab, J. J., Benzinger, T. L. S., Morris, J. C., Perrin, R. J., Xiong, C., Allegri, R., Berman, S. B., Brosch, J. R., Butler, C. R., … Bateman, R. J. (2022). A trial of gantenerumab or solanezumab in dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease. Nature Medicine, 27(7), 1187-1196.

Sims, J. R., Zimmer, J. A., Evans, C. D., Lu, M., Ardayfio, P., Sparks, J., Wessels, A. M., Shcherbinin, S., Wang, H., Monkul Nery, E. S., Collins, E. C., Solomon, P., Salloway, S., Apostolova, L. G., Hansson, O., Ritchie, C., Brooks, D. A., Mintun, M. A., Skovronsky, D. M., & TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Investigators. (2023). Donanemab in early symptomatic Alzheimer disease: The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 330(6), 512-527.

van Dyck, C. H., Swanson, C. J., Aisen, P., Bateman, R. J., Chen, C., Gee, M., Kanekiyo, M., Li, D., Reyderman, L., Cohen, S., Froelich, L., Katayama, S., Sabbagh, M., Vellas, B., Watson, D., Dhadda, S., Irizarry, M., Kramer, L. D., & Iwatsubo, T. (2023). Lecanemab in early Alzheimer’s disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 388(1), 9-21.

Wattmo, C., Blennow, K., & Hansson, O. (2020). Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker levels: Phosphorylated tau, total tau and beta-amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy, 12, 110.