W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > February 2011

Re: beefing up PharmaOntology Queries #Q6

From: 'Christopher A Domarew' <chris@domarew.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 11:36:41 +0000
Message-Id: <6d91d572baa79fc44f112ff44e1d8330a7792719@webmail.theside.co.uk>
To: 'Eric Prud'hommeaux' <eric@w3.org>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Cc: 'Helena Deus' <helenadeus@gmail.com>

	Here is one I found :   I can get you the full text if you need
it.  Searching for more.  does this help?  C A phase 2 multiple
ascending dose trial of bapineuzumab in mild to moderate Alzheimer
disease.  AU Salloway S, Sperling R, Gilman S, Fox NC, Blennow K,
Raskind M, Sabbagh M, Honig LS, Doody R, van Dyck CH, Mulnard R,
Barakos J, Gregg KM, Liu E, Lieberburg I, Schenk D, Black R, Grundman
M,  SO Neurology. 2009;73(24):2061-70.    BACKGROUND: Bapineuzumab, a
humanized anti-amyloid-beta (Abeta) monoclonal antibody for the
potential treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD), was evaluated in a
multiple ascending dose, safety, and efficacy study in mild to
moderate AD. METHODS: The study enrolled 234 patients, randomly
assigned to IV bapineuzumab or placebo in 4 dose cohorts (0.15, 0.5,
10, or 2.0 mg/kg). Patients received 6 infusions, 13 weeks apart,
with final assessments at week 78. The prespecified primary efficacy
analysis in the modified intent-to-treat population assumed linear
decline and compared treatment differences within dose cohorts on the
Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive and Disability
Assessment for Dementia. Exploratory analyses combined dose cohorts
and did not assume a specific pattern of decline. RESULTS: No
significant differences were found in the primary efficacy analysis.
Exploratory analyses showed potential treatment differences (p

Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2011 11:37:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:52:45 UTC