Talk:Lecanemab

BBC reporting
Some BBC reporting might help someone improve this article further. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-63749586 (talk) 03:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

More objective reporting please
Right now the article has this:

"It was announced in late November 2022 that drug was a success in clinical trials and exceeded it’s goal in reaching primary endpoints."

That reads like promo, though. Additionally there is no citation, so who added this sentence without giving a source/citation?

Anyway. This is not why I am here or writing this, though. Today I read news about **lecanemab** here:

https://science.orf.at/stories/3216342/

This is in german though.

The to me interesting part was:

"In über einem Fünftel der Fälle traten jedoch den Angaben zufolge Hirnblutungen oder -schwellungen auf – im Vergleich zu nur gut zehn Prozent mit Placebo, berichteten die Forscher."

That means (as a short, incomplete summary) that there are more issues in regards to brain swelling or brain bleeding or something along those lines. Perhaps someone could compare it with the article at "New England Journal of Medicine": https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2212948

Wikipedia should be as objective as possible. The currently uncited sentence is weird, and that there is no mention of side effects (the 1/5 in german means 20%, whereas the placebo control is at 10% does mean there is some difference that is noticable). Even the article at New England mentions this: "but was associated with adverse events" so I don't understand why wikipedia does not mention that at all. Was the entry older at wikipedia and not recently updated? That could explain it. Either way the wikipedia article should be updated. As I was the one to report this, I'll avoid making any changes and leave this up to others to evaluate the merit of the above suggestions. 2A02:8388:1641:5500:8207:8CE:DF2:AB90 (talk) 16:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

No mention of improvement or reduction in dementia
Article has No mention of improvement or reduction in dementia. What were the primary endpoints of the trial ? Any mental ones or just surrogate biomarkers ? - Rod57 (talk) 23:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Controversy Around FDA’s Approval of Biogen Alzheimer’s Drug
https://nutritionfacts.org/video/aducanumab-for-alzheimers/?subscriber=true&utm_source=NutritionFacts.org&utm_campaign=9eed745943-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_7_26_2022_12_48_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_40f9e497d1-9eed745943-25816069&mc_cid=9eed745943&mc_eid=04b95231ca 45.149.228.231 (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Lecanemab demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction
This sentence in the article has litterally no meaning whatsever.

'Satistically significant' means that an effect exists, but reveals literally nothing of the magnitude thereof.

'Clinically meaningful findings' are (according to NIH) 'those which improve medical care resulting in the improvement of individual's physical function'. This also lacks every form of quantification.

The sentence is thus 'framing' and nothing else (which in my view is unacceptable in an encyclopedia). Fjvelsen (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)