Emanuele Spina1, Antonietta Topa2, Rosa Iodice2, Stefano Tozza2, Lucia Ruggiero2, Raffaele Dubbioso2, Marcello Esposito2, Pasquale Dolce3, Lucio Santoro2, Fiore Manganelli4. 1. Department of Neurosciences, Odontostomatology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Naples " Federico II ", Via Pansini, 5, 81025, Naples, Italy. ema.spina@libero.it. 2. Department of Neurosciences, Odontostomatology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Naples " Federico II ", Via Pansini, 5, 81025, Naples, Italy. 3. Department of Public Health, University of Naples " Federico II ", Naples, Italy. 4. Department of Neurosciences, Odontostomatology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Naples " Federico II ", Via Pansini, 5, 81025, Naples, Italy. fiore.manganelli@unina.it.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The current clinical measures (ONLS, R-ODS, mRS, and MRC) may not be so sensitive in capturing minimal variations or measuring fatigue in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). Our aim was to assess if 6-min walk test (6MWT) is able to increase the sensitivity in detecting response to therapy and to capture fatigue in CIDP patients. METHODS: We tested 6MWT in 42 CIDP patients. Using both anchor-based and distribution-based approaches, we estimated the meaningful clinical change after therapy by calculating the minimum improvement cutoff (Minimal Clinically Important Difference Score-MCID) required for considering a patient as responder. We calculated the sensitivity of the 6MWT versus the other clinical outcomes. We analysed fatigue by comparing the velocities between first and sixth minutes of the 6MWT and the effect of treatment on fatigue using an ANOVA model for repeated measures. RESULTS: MCID resulted equal to 20 m. The combination of 6MWT-MCID cutoff with the other clinical measures led to identify 74% of responders. The sensitivity of the 6MWT was 90% versus 77% of the other clinical measures. The 6MWT was also sensitive in capturing fatigue-related changes, even though fatigue was not influenced by treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of the 6MWT with the other clinical measures increased the chance to detect the quote of responders. We propose to include the 6MWT in the routine assessment of CIDP patients and the MCID cutoff at 20 m could be set for identifying the responders and properly guiding the therapy management.
OBJECTIVE: The current clinical measures (ONLS, R-ODS, mRS, and MRC) may not be so sensitive in capturing minimal variations or measuring fatigue in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). Our aim was to assess if 6-min walk test (6MWT) is able to increase the sensitivity in detecting response to therapy and to capture fatigue in CIDPpatients. METHODS: We tested 6MWT in 42 CIDPpatients. Using both anchor-based and distribution-based approaches, we estimated the meaningful clinical change after therapy by calculating the minimum improvement cutoff (Minimal Clinically Important Difference Score-MCID) required for considering a patient as responder. We calculated the sensitivity of the 6MWT versus the other clinical outcomes. We analysed fatigue by comparing the velocities between first and sixth minutes of the 6MWT and the effect of treatment on fatigue using an ANOVA model for repeated measures. RESULTS: MCID resulted equal to 20 m. The combination of 6MWT-MCID cutoff with the other clinical measures led to identify 74% of responders. The sensitivity of the 6MWT was 90% versus 77% of the other clinical measures. The 6MWT was also sensitive in capturing fatigue-related changes, even though fatigue was not influenced by treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of the 6MWT with the other clinical measures increased the chance to detect the quote of responders. We propose to include the 6MWT in the routine assessment of CIDPpatients and the MCID cutoff at 20 m could be set for identifying the responders and properly guiding the therapy management.
Authors: Craig M McDonald; Erik K Henricson; Jay J Han; R Ted Abresch; Alina Nicorici; Leone Atkinson; Gary L Elfring; Allen Reha; Langdon L Miller Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: J Montes; M P McDermott; W B Martens; S Dunaway; A M Glanzman; S Riley; J Quigley; M J Montgomery; D Sproule; R Tawil; W K Chung; B T Darras; D C De Vivo; P Kaufmann; R S Finkel Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-03-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: J Matt McCrary; David Goldstein; David Wyld; Robert Henderson; Craig R Lewis; Susanna B Park Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Massimo Russo; Christian Lunetta; Riccardo Zuccarino; Gian L Vita; Maria Sframeli; Andrea Lizio; Stefania La Foresta; Cristina Faraone; Valeria A Sansone; Giuseppe Vita; Sonia Messina Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 4.379