Literature DB >> 20488826

Progression on the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite in multiple sclerosis: what is the optimal cut-off for the three components?

L V A E Bosma1, J J Kragt, L Brieva, Z Khaleeli, X Montalban, C H Polman, A J Thompson, M Tintoré, B M J Uitdehaag.   

Abstract

For the Timed 25-Foot Walk (T25FW) and 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT), components of the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC), cut-off points of 20% change have previously been defined as meaningful endpoints of functional decline. Recently, however, a 15% change of MSFC components was introduced. The objective of this study was to determine optimal cut-offs for all MSFC components to indicate clinical disease progression in a primary progressive (PP) multiple sclerosis (MS) population. T25FW, 9HPT and the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) were performed in 161 patients with PPMS with a 2-year interval. Absolute and relative differences in test scores were calculated. For each cut-off point of relative change, proportions of patients who progressed (deterioration beyond cut-off value) and improved (improvement beyond cut-off value) were calculated. Further, we calculated the ratio of 'improved' versus 'progressed' patients. Line graphs were created indicating: percentage progressed patients, percentage improved patients, and ratio of improved versus progressed patients. The optimal cut-off was determined by searching the cut-off point with the lowest ratio of improved versus progressed patients, while at the same time capturing a substantial amount of progression. For both T25FW and 9HPT, the ratio between patients that improved and worsened clearly decreased between the cut-offs of 15% and 20%. For the PASAT, the ratio between patients improved and worsened was persistently poor. In conclusion, a cut-off of 20% for both T25FW and 9HPT has a better signal-to-noise ratio than lower values (e.g. 15%) and is therefore preferable for the assessment of disease progression. No satisfactory cut-off point for the PASAT could be determined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20488826     DOI: 10.1177/1352458510370464

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mult Scler        ISSN: 1352-4585            Impact factor:   6.312


  13 in total

1.  Feasibility and Impact of an 8-Week Integrative Yoga Program in People with Moderate Multiple Sclerosis-Related Disability: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Evan T Cohen; David Kietrys; Susan Gould Fogerite; Mariella Silva; Kristen Logan; Donald A Barone; J Scott Parrott
Journal:  Int J MS Care       Date:  2017 Jan-Feb

2.  A pooled analysis of two phase 3 clinical trials of dalfampridine in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Andrew D Goodman; Theodore R Brown; Randall T Schapiro; Michael Klingler; Ron Cohen; Andrew R Blight
Journal:  Int J MS Care       Date:  2014

Review 3.  Assessing treatment outcomes in multiple sclerosis trials and in the clinical setting.

Authors:  Carmen Tur; Marcello Moccia; Frederik Barkhof; Jeremy Chataway; Jaume Sastre-Garriga; Alan J Thompson; Olga Ciccarelli
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 42.937

Review 4.  Treatment trials in progressive MS--current challenges and future directions.

Authors:  Marcus W Koch; Gary Cutter; Peter K Stys; V Wee Yong; Luanne M Metz
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 42.937

5.  Longitudinal changes in self-reported walking ability in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Robert W Motl; Norman Putzki; Lara A Pilutti; Diego Cadavid
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The Nine-Hole Peg Test as a manual dexterity performance measure for multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Peter Feys; Ilse Lamers; Gordon Francis; Ralph Benedict; Glenn Phillips; Nicholas LaRocca; Lynn D Hudson; Richard Rudick
Journal:  Mult Scler       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 6.312

7.  Evaluation of no evidence of progression or active disease (NEPAD) in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis in the ORATORIO trial.

Authors:  Jerry S Wolinsky; Xavier Montalban; Stephen L Hauser; Gavin Giovannoni; Patrick Vermersch; Corrado Bernasconi; Gurpreet Deol-Bhullar; Hideki Garren; Peter Chin; Shibeshih Belachew; Ludwig Kappos
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 10.422

Review 8.  Systematic literature review and validity evaluation of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Sandra Meyer-Moock; You-Shan Feng; Mathias Maeurer; Franz-Werner Dippel; Thomas Kohlmann
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 2.474

9.  Fluoxetine in progressive multiple sclerosis (FLUOX-PMS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Melissa Cambron; Jop Mostert; Patrick Haentjens; Marie D'Hooghe; Guy Nagels; Barbara Willekens; Dorothea Heersema; Jan Debruyne; Wim Van Hecke; Luc Algoed; Nina De Klippel; Erwin Fosselle; Guy Laureys; Henri Merckx; Bart Van Wijmeersch; Ludo Vanopdenbosch; Wim Verhagen; Raymond Hupperts; Gerald Hengstman; Veronique Michiels; Annick Van Merhaegen-Wieleman; Jacques De Keyser
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-01-25       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Multiple Sclerosis-Secondary Progressive Multi-Arm Randomisation Trial (MS-SMART): a multiarm phase IIb randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial comparing the efficacy of three neuroprotective drugs in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Peter Connick; Floriana De Angelis; Richard A Parker; Domenico Plantone; Anisha Doshi; Nevin John; Jonathan Stutters; David MacManus; Ferran Prados Carrasco; Frederik Barkhof; Sebastien Ourselin; Marie Braisher; Moira Ross; Gina Cranswick; Sue H Pavitt; Gavin Giovannoni; Claudia Angela Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott; Clive Hawkins; Basil Sharrack; Roger Bastow; Christopher J Weir; Nigel Stallard; Siddharthan Chandran; Jeremy Chataway
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.