Elucidating the phase 1 trial experience among study participants following completion of the INTERCEPT-AD study of sabirnetug (ACU193) for early Alzheimer’s disease: a qualitative interview study

Abstract Background Recruitment and retention remain persistent challenges in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) clinical trials, particularly as studies increasingly focus on earlier disease stages and require longer participation and more invasive procedures. Understanding how trial enrollment and participation are experienced is critical to improving acceptability and sustaining engagement. Qualitative interviews conducted alongside clinical trials offer an opportunity to capture participant and study partner perspectives on the trial experience. In INTERCEPT-AD, a phase 1 trial evaluating safety and tolerability of the Aβ oligomer-selective monoclonal antibody sabirnetug (ACU193) among participants with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD), semi-structured qualitative interviews concerning trial experience were conducted with a subset of participants and their study partners. Methods Participant/study partner dyads completed qualitative interviews following the final study visit. A semi-structured interview guide elicited descriptions regarding motivations for participating, enrollment decision-making, and positive and negative aspects of participation. Principles of applied qualitative thematic analysis guided the qualitative analyses. Exploratory analyses examined how factors differ by participant gender. Results Twenty-eight participants (64.2% female) and their study partners were interviewed, representing 43% of the trial population (n = 65; 53.8% female). Participants and study partner dyads described varied pathways to trial awareness and enrollment decision-making, including both independent and family-involved decisions. Motivations for participation reflected anticipated personal benefit as well as altruistic goals. While interactions with study staff were viewed positively, dyads reported meaningful burdens related to travel, time commitment, and study procedures, with cognitive testing more frequently described as challenging than invasive procedures. A recurring theme was the desire for clearer communication and greater access to study-related information, including test results and treatment assignment. Exploratory analyses suggested that perceived burden and enrollment decision-making may differ by participant gender. Conclusions Study findings suggest opportunities to enhance the AD trial experience by addressing trial-related burdens and logistical aspects of participation. Exploratory gender analyses yielded additional insight into the patient trial experience but should be further examined along with race/ethnicity and study partner characteristics to enhance clinical study design and execution.