Preventing and Treating Dementia: Research Priorities to Accelerate Progress (2025)
Chapter: Appendix C: Disclosure of Unavoidable Conflicts of Interest
Appendix C
Disclosure of Unavoidable Conflicts of Interest
The conflict-of-interest policy of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (https://www.nationalacademies.org/about/institutional-policies-and-procedures/conflict-of-interest-policies-and-procedures) prohibits the appointment of an individual to a committee like the one that authored this Consensus Study Report if the individual has a conflict of interest that is relevant to the task to be performed. An exception to this prohibition is permitted only if the National Academies determine that the conflict is unavoidable and the conflict is promptly and publicly disclosed.
When the committee that authored this report was established, a determination of whether there was a conflict of interest was made for each committee member given the individual’s circumstances and the task being undertaken by the committee. A determination that an individual has a conflict of interest is not an assessment of that individual’s actual behavior or character or ability to act objectively despite the conflicting interest.
Rhoda Au was determined to have a conflict of interest because of her compensated membership on the scientific advisory boards of Biogen and Novo Nordisk, which are involved in the development of interventions for the prevention and treatment of AD/ADRD, and Signant Health, which is involved in the design and conduct of digitally enabled clinical trials.
Rita Balice-Gordon was determined to have a conflict of interest because she is CEO of Muna Therapeutics, which focuses on disease modifying therapies for neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease.
Jeffrey Dage was determined to have a conflict of interest because he provides advisory services to companies developing novel treatments
for AD/ADRD, including ALZPath, Genotix Biotechnologies, and Prevail Therapeutics. Additionally, he is a consultant for and holds stock in Monument Biosciences and holds stock in Eli Lilly and Company.
Reisa Sperling was determined to have a conflict of interest because she is a paid consultant to the following companies involved in drug development for the prevention and treatment of AD/ADRD: AC Immune, Alector, Acumen, Bristol-Myers Squib, Genentech, Janssen, Neuraly, Oligomerix, Prothena, Renew, Vaxxinity, Merck, and Biohaven.
The National Academies determined that the experience and expertise of these individuals were needed for the committee to accomplish the task for which it was established. The National Academies could not find other available individuals with the equivalent experience and expertise who did not have a conflict of interest. Therefore, the National Academies concluded that the conflict was unavoidable and publicly disclosed it on its website (www.nationalacademies.org).
