The breakthough narrative

Clinical science stories are the opposite of most current events coverage: the good news is dramatic and has an army of publicists; the bad is slow and boring.

In September 2016 there was a flurry of news articles about a new candidate treatment for Alzheimer’s

In the Herald (from the Telegraph)

• Hope for drug to beat Alzheimer’s. Scientists show they can halt mental decline by cleaning brain of sticky plaque.

(from the Washington Post)

• A glimmer of hope for an Alzheimer’s drug. An initial trial of an antibody therapy that targets Alzheimer’s disease has shown promising results and could signal a long-awaited breakthrough in treating the devastating brain disorder that affects millions.

Stuff (from the Telegraph)

• Alzheimer’s drug could be ‘game changer’. The first drug to combat Alzheimer’s disease is on the horizon after scientists proved they can halt mental decline by clearing the sticky plaques from the brain that cause dementia.

TVNZ

• Alzheimers treatment drug trial gives researchers hope. A drug which reduces the amount of protein plaque – called amyloid – in the brain is giving hope to researchers and Alzheimers sufferers alike.

Radio NZ

• Science: Alzheimer’s breakthrough. A new drug that seems to stop the progress of Alzheimer’s Disease has been tested on patients in America.

Now, in 2019, two large clinical trials were just stopped because the treatment didn’t work.  This sort of thing happens a lot; drug development is hard, especially when we don’t actually understand the disease very well.

The coverage of Alzheimer’s treatment candidates has two big problems, though. First, promising initial results are almost always oversold. Second, the failures usually aren’t covered, except perhaps in the business pages.