Malte Roar1, Zsolt Illes2, Tobias Sejbaek1. 1. Department of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Sdr. Boulevard 29, Odense 5000, Denmark. 2. Department of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Sdr. Boulevard 29, Odense 5000, Denmark; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark. Electronic address: zsolt.illes@rsyd.dk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: How practice effect influences cognitive testing measured by monthly Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) during natalizumab treatment, and what factors confound such effect. METHODS: Eighty patients were examined monthly with SDMT for 26.2±8.4 months. After 26.0±8.1 months, SDMT was also performed with a rearranged key in 59 cases. Results of SDMTs with the rearranged and previous regular key were compared. We examined if gender, age, Extended Disability Status Scale (EDSS), relapses, and disability progression/improvement influence SDMT performed with the regular and the rearranged key, respectively. We also explored if natalizumab applied before regular monthly SDMT may influence practice effect and cognition. RESULTS: SDMT performance improved by 1.2 points/test during the first six months and by 0.4 points/test thereafter. Rearranging the symbols of the key after 26.0±8.1 months returned SDMT scores to baseline indicating a practice effect. Such practice effect was more significant after longer testing period, but was not influenced by gender, age, relapses, disability progression and prior natalizumab treatment. Although the change from baseline to 2.5 years was significant in subgroups with EDSS 0-3, 3.5-5.5 and 6-7.5, this was higher in patients with EDSS 0-3 compared to 6-7.5. CONCLUSIONS: Practice effect significantly contributes to continuous improvement in SDMT performance during natalizumab treatment: to test cognition, a change in key is required. Practice effect is less pronounced in patients with advanced disease. Cognition remains stable even in patients with progressive disease during more than 2 years of natalizumab treatment indicated by scores corresponding to baseline after changing the key. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVES: How practice effect influences cognitive testing measured by monthly Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) during natalizumab treatment, and what factors confound such effect. METHODS: Eighty patients were examined monthly with SDMT for 26.2±8.4 months. After 26.0±8.1 months, SDMT was also performed with a rearranged key in 59 cases. Results of SDMTs with the rearranged and previous regular key were compared. We examined if gender, age, Extended Disability Status Scale (EDSS), relapses, and disability progression/improvement influence SDMT performed with the regular and the rearranged key, respectively. We also explored if natalizumab applied before regular monthly SDMT may influence practice effect and cognition. RESULTS: SDMT performance improved by 1.2 points/test during the first six months and by 0.4 points/test thereafter. Rearranging the symbols of the key after 26.0±8.1 months returned SDMT scores to baseline indicating a practice effect. Such practice effect was more significant after longer testing period, but was not influenced by gender, age, relapses, disability progression and prior natalizumab treatment. Although the change from baseline to 2.5 years was significant in subgroups with EDSS 0-3, 3.5-5.5 and 6-7.5, this was higher in patients with EDSS 0-3 compared to 6-7.5. CONCLUSIONS: Practice effect significantly contributes to continuous improvement in SDMT performance during natalizumab treatment: to test cognition, a change in key is required. Practice effect is less pronounced in patients with advanced disease. Cognition remains stable even in patients with progressive disease during more than 2 years of natalizumab treatment indicated by scores corresponding to baseline after changing the key. Copyright Â
Authors: Kevin Duff; Jeffrey S Anderson; Atul K Mallik; Kayla R Suhrie; Taylor J Atkinson; Bonnie C A Dalley; Sarah Shizuko Morimoto; John M Hoffman Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2018-08-22 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Anthony Feinstein; Maria Pia Amato; Giampaolo Brichetto; Jeremy Chataway; Nancy Chiaravalloti; Ulrik Dalgas; John DeLuca; Peter Feys; Massimo Filippi; Jennifer Freeman; Cecilia Meza; Matilde Inglese; Robert W Motl; Maria Assunta Rocca; Brian M Sandroff; Amber Salter; Gary Cutter Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: L De Meijer; D Merlo; O Skibina; E J Grobbee; J Gale; J Haartsen; P Maruff; D Darby; H Butzkueven; A Van der Walt Journal: Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin Date: 2018-12-10
Authors: Andreas Johnen; Paul-Christian Bürkner; Nils C Landmeyer; Björn Ambrosius; Pasquale Calabrese; Jeremias Motte; Nicole Hessler; Gisela Antony; Inke R König; Luisa Klotz; Muna-Miriam Hoshi; Lilian Aly; Sergiu Groppa; Felix Luessi; Friedemann Paul; Björn Tackenberg; Florian Then Bergh; Tania Kümpfel; Hayrettin Tumani; Martin Stangel; Frank Weber; Antonios Bayas; Brigitte Wildemann; Christoph Heesen; Uwe K Zettl; Frauke Zipp; Bernhard Hemmer; Sven G Meuth; Ralf Gold; Heinz Wiendl; Anke Salmen Journal: J Neurol Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Daniel Merlo; David Darby; Tomas Kalincik; Helmut Butzkueven; Anneke van der Walt Journal: Ther Adv Neurol Disord Date: 2019-07-12 Impact factor: 6.570
Authors: Charidimos Tsagkas; M Mallar Chakravarty; Laura Gaetano; Yvonne Naegelin; Michael Amann; Katrin Parmar; Athina Papadopoulou; Jens Wuerfel; Ludwig Kappos; Till Sprenger; Stefano Magon Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 5.038