Literature DB >> 24811484

Minimizing errors in acute traumatic spinal cord injury trials by acknowledging the heterogeneity of spinal cord anatomy and injury severity: an observational Canadian cohort analysis.

Marcel F Dvorak1, Vanessa K Noonan, Nader Fallah, Charles G Fisher, Carly S Rivers, Henry Ahn, Eve C Tsai, A G Linassi, Sean D Christie, Najmedden Attabib, R John Hurlbert, Daryl R Fourney, Michael G Johnson, Michael G Fehlings, Brian Drew, Christopher S Bailey, Jérôme Paquet, Stefan Parent, Andrea Townson, Chester Ho, B C Craven, Dany Gagnon, Deborah Tsui, Richard Fox, Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, Brian K Kwon.   

Abstract

Clinical trials of therapies for acute traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) have failed to convincingly demonstrate efficacy in improving neurologic function. Failing to acknowledge the heterogeneity of these injuries and under-appreciating the impact of the most important baseline prognostic variables likely contributes to this translational failure. Our hypothesis was that neurological level and severity of initial injury (measured by the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale [AIS]) act jointly and are the major determinants of motor recovery. Our objective was to quantify the influence of these variables when considered together on early motor score recovery following acute tSCI. Eight hundred thirty-six participants from the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry were analyzed for motor score improvement from baseline to follow-up. In AIS A, B, and C patients, cervical and thoracic injuries displayed significantly different motor score recovery. AIS A patients with thoracic (T2-T10) and thoracolumbar (T11-L2) injuries had significantly different motor improvement. High (C1-C4) and low (C5-T1) cervical injuries demonstrated differences in upper extremity motor recovery in AIS B, C, and D. A hypothetical clinical trial example demonstrated the benefits of stratifying on neurological level and severity of injury. Clinically meaningful motor score recovery is predictably related to the neurological level of injury and the severity of the baseline neurological impairment. Stratifying clinical trial cohorts using a joint distribution of these two variables will enhance a study's chance of identifying a true treatment effect and minimize the risk of misattributed treatment effects. Clinical studies should stratify participants based on these factors and record the number of participants and their mean baseline motor scores for each category of this joint distribution as part of the reporting of participant characteristics. Improved clinical trial design is a high priority as new therapies and interventions for tSCI emerge.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bias; motor score; neurological recovery; spinal cord injury; statistical error

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24811484      PMCID: PMC4161054          DOI: 10.1089/neu.2013.3278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurotrauma        ISSN: 0897-7151            Impact factor:   5.269


  35 in total

1.  The Sygen multicenter acute spinal cord injury study.

Authors:  F H Geisler; W P Coleman; G Grieco; D Poonian
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Report of international clinical trials workshop on spinal cord injury February 20-21, 2004, Vancouver, Canada.

Authors:  J Steeves; J Fawcett; M Tuszynski
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.772

3.  Clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction: should we adjust for baseline characteristics?

Authors:  E W Steyerberg; P M Bossuyt; K L Lee
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  Recovery of motor function after spinal-cord injury--a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with GM-1 ganglioside.

Authors:  F H Geisler; F C Dorsey; W P Coleman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1991-06-27       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  A randomized, controlled trial of methylprednisolone or naloxone in the treatment of acute spinal-cord injury. Results of the Second National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study.

Authors:  M B Bracken; M J Shepard; W F Collins; T R Holford; W Young; D S Baskin; H M Eisenberg; E Flamm; L Leo-Summers; J Maroon
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-05-17       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Autologous incubated macrophage therapy in acute, complete spinal cord injury: results of the phase 2 randomized controlled multicenter trial.

Authors:  D P Lammertse; L A T Jones; S B Charlifue; S C Kirshblum; D F Apple; K T Ragnarsson; S P Falci; R F Heary; T F Choudhri; A L Jenkins; R R Betz; D Poonian; J P Cuthbert; A Jha; D A Snyder; N Knoller
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 2.772

7.  Injury severity as primary predictor of outcome in acute spinal cord injury: retrospective results from a large multicenter clinical trial.

Authors:  William P Coleman; Fred H Geisler
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 8.  Type II error in the spine surgical literature.

Authors:  Christopher S Bailey; Charles G Fisher; Marcel F Dvorak
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Factors associated with improved neurologic outcomes in patients with incomplete tetraplegia.

Authors:  Matthew E Pollard; David F Apple
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  Neuroprotection as initial therapy in acute stroke. Third Report of an Ad Hoc Consensus Group Meeting. The European Ad Hoc Consensus Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.762

View more
  24 in total

1.  Optimization of the mean arterial pressure and timing of surgical decompression in traumatic spinal cord injury: a retrospective study.

Authors:  A Dakson; D Brandman; G Thibault-Halman; S D Christie
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 2.772

2.  Developing a spinal cord injury research strategy using a structured process of evidence review and stakeholder dialogue. Part III: outcomes.

Authors:  J W Middleton; L Piccenna; R Lindsay Gruen; S Williams; G Creasey; S Dunlop; D Brown; P E Batchelor; D J Berlowitz; S Coates; J A Dunn; J B Furness; M P Galea; T Geraghty; B K Kwon; S Urquhart; D Yates; P Bragge
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 3.  Cell transplantation therapy for spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Peggy Assinck; Greg J Duncan; Brett J Hilton; Jason R Plemel; Wolfram Tetzlaff
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  The Effect of Non-Gabapentinoid Anticonvulsants on Sensorimotor Recovery After Human Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Freda M Warner; Catherine R Jutzeler; Jacquelyn J Cragg; Bobo Tong; Lukas Grassner; Frank Bradke; Fred Geisler; John K Kramer
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 5.  Adaptive trial designs for spinal cord injury clinical trials directed to the central nervous system.

Authors:  James D Guest; John D Steeves; M J Mulcahey; Linda A T Jones; Frank Rockhold; Rϋediger Rupp; John L K Kramer; Steven Kirshblum; Andrew Blight; Daniel Lammertse
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 6.  Recommendations for the National Institute for Neurologic Disorders and Stroke spinal cord injury common data elements for children and youth with SCI.

Authors:  M J Mulcahey; L C Vogel; M Sheikh; J C Arango-Lasprilla; M Augutis; E Garner; E M Hagen; L B Jakeman; E Kelly; R Martin; J Odenkirchen; A Scheel-Sailer; J Schottler; H Taylor; C C Thielen; K Zebracki
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.772

7.  The influence of time from injury to surgery on motor recovery and length of hospital stay in acute traumatic spinal cord injury: an observational Canadian cohort study.

Authors:  Marcel F Dvorak; Vanessa K Noonan; Nader Fallah; Charles G Fisher; Joel Finkelstein; Brian K Kwon; Carly S Rivers; Henry Ahn; Jérôme Paquet; Eve C Tsai; Andrea Townson; Najmedden Attabib; Christopher S Bailey; Sean D Christie; Brian Drew; Daryl R Fourney; Richard Fox; R John Hurlbert; Michael G Johnson; A G Linassi; Stefan Parent; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 5.269

8.  Characterization of the Antibody Response after Cervical Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Antigona Ulndreaj; Apostolia Tzekou; Andrea J Mothe; Ahad M Siddiqui; Rachel Dragas; Charles H Tator; Emina E Torlakovic; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2016-12-21       Impact factor: 5.269

9.  Protection and Repair After Spinal Cord Injury: Accomplishments and Future Directions.

Authors:  W Dalton Dietrich
Journal:  Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil       Date:  2015-04-12

10.  Methylprednisolone for the Treatment of Patients with Acute Spinal Cord Injuries: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study from a Canadian Multi-Center Spinal Cord Injury Registry.

Authors:  Nathan Evaniew; Vanessa K Noonan; Nader Fallah; Brian K Kwon; Carly S Rivers; Henry Ahn; Christopher S Bailey; Sean D Christie; Daryl R Fourney; R John Hurlbert; A G Linassi; Michael G Fehlings; Marcel F Dvorak
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 5.269

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.