As researchers strive to discover a definitive cure for Alzheimer’s disease, significant strides have been made in developing treatments aimed at alleviating symptoms and postponing their onset. This includes the recent approval of cutting-edge therapies such as lecanemab and donanemab.

Both medications received approval from U.S. regulatory bodies in the past few years, functioning primarily by reducing the accumulation of amyloid protein plaques in the brain, a hallmark associated with Alzheimer’s. Nevertheless, there remains considerable debate regarding their overall efficacy.

To evaluate the effectiveness of lecanemab and donanemab in a more quantifiable manner, researchers at the Washington University School of Medicine (WashU Medicine) conducted a study involving 282 volunteers diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, examining the lasting impacts of these treatments over an average duration of almost three years.

According to Sarah Hartz, a professor of psychiatry at WashU Medicine, “Our objective was to provide patients with information that is relatable and aids them in making informed decisions about their care.” She emphasizes that many individuals wish to understand how long they may maintain their independence, rather than abstract metrics of decline.

The researchers distinguished two facets of independence: one pertaining to the management of everyday responsibilities, such as handling appointments and bills, and another related to personal self-care, including basic hygiene and dressing.

For individuals with mild Alzheimer’s symptoms—characterized by occasional difficulties in remembering dates and medications—the study estimates that, without treatment, they could expect to live independently for an average of 29 additional months.

Those with similar levels of dementia might anticipate approximately 10 extra months of independence when treated with lecanemab, and around 13 months with donanemab. Nevertheless, it’s crucial to recognize that these estimates represent averages, and individual responses to the treatments may vary.

As Dr. Suzanne Schindler, a physician and professor of neurology at WashU Medicine, remarks, patients often inquire about the duration of their ability to drive, maintain personal hygiene, and how much time these treatments could provide. The decision to utilize these medications is multifaceted, influenced not only by medical considerations but also by the patient’s priorities, preferences, and tolerance for risk.

It is essential to acknowledge that these therapies carry inherent challenges: they are not only costly but also necessitate regular infusions and may result in significant adverse effects, including potential brain swelling and hemorrhaging.

Consequently, individuals with Alzheimer’s, along with their families, must carefully weigh both the potential benefits and drawbacks, considering the implications for their future. “The intent of this study is neither to promote nor disparage these medications,” adds Hartz. “Rather, it aims to contextualize the effects of these treatments in a manner that facilitates informed decision-making for patients and their families.”