Confirming the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin in CIDP through minimum clinically important differences: Shifting from statistical significance to clinical relevance

Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry

Volumn 81, Issue 11, 2010, Pages 1194-1199

  Merkies, Ingemar S J ^a,b   Van Nes, S I ^b   Hanna, K ^c   Hughes, R A C ^d   Deng, C ^c  

^a Infection and Immunology   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Talecris Biotherapeutics Inc   (United States)

^d KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMAN IMMUNOGLOBULIN; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CHRONIC INFLAMMATORY DEMYELINATING POLYRADICULONEUROPATHY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; GRIP STRENGTH; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NERVE CONDUCTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POLYRADICULONEUROPATHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SHORT FORM 36; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

DIFFERENTIAL THRESHOLD; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HAND STRENGTH; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; IMMUNOGLOBULINS, INTRAVENOUS; INFUSIONS, INTRAVENOUS; NEURAL CONDUCTION; PLACEBOS; POLYRADICULONEUROPATHY, CHRONIC INFLAMMATORY DEMYELINATING; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 78649628912     PISSN: 00223050     EISSN: 1468330X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2009.194324     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Köller H, Kieseier BC, Jander S, et al. Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1343-56.
2. Barohn RJ, Kissel JT, Warmolts JR, et al. Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy: clinical characteristics, course, and recommendations for diagnostic criteria. Arch Neurol 1989;46:878-84.
3. Merkies ISJ, Bril V, Dalakas MC, et al, ICE Study Group. Health-related quality-of-life improvements in CIDP with immune globulin IV 10%: the ICE Study. Neurology 2009;72:1337-44.
4. Hughes RAC, Donofrio P, Bril V, et al. ICE Study Group. Intravenous immune globulin (10% caprylate-chromatography purified) for the treatment of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (ICE study): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:136-44.
5. Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, et al. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 2007;7:541-6.
6. Sloan J, Symonds T, Vargas-Chanes D, et al. Practical guidelines for assessing the clinical significance of health-related quality of life changes within clinical trials. Drug Inf J 2003;37:23-31.
7. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-15.
8. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002;14:109-14.
9. Hughes R, Bensa S, Willison H, et al. Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) Group. Randomized controlled trial of intravenous immunoglobulin versus oral prednisolone in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. Ann Neurol 2001;50:195-201.
10. Merkies IS, Lauria G. 131st ENMC international workshop: selection of outcome measures for peripheral neuropathy clinical trials 10-12 December 2004, Naarden, The Netherlands. Neuromuscul Disord 2006;16:149-56.
11. Lunn MP, Léger JM, Merkies IS, et al. Inflammatory Neuropathy Consortium. 151st ENMC international workshop: inflammatory Neuropathy Consortium 13th-15th April 2007, Schiphol, The Netherlands. Neuromuscul Disord 2008;18:85-9.
12. World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en (accessed 22 Jan 2010).
13. Aaronson NK. Quality of life: what is it? How should it be measured? Oncology (Williston Park) 1988;2:69-76.
14. Merkies ISJ. Evaluation of scales and measurement instruments in immunemediated polyneuropathies [thesis]. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Department of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Centre, 2001. ISBN: 90-9014393-9.
15. Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 health survey: manual and interpretation guide. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated, 2000.
16. Chiou CF, Sherbourne CD, Cornelio I, et al. Development and validation of the revised Cedars-Sinai health-related quality of life for rheumatoid arthritis instrument. Arthritis Rheum 2006;55:856-63.
17. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum 2001;45:384-91.
18. Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, et al. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the oswestry disability index, medical outcomes study questionnaire short form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 2008;8:968-74.
19. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003;41:582-92.
20. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, et al. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:81-7.
21. Cella DF. Quality of life outcomes: measurement and validation. Oncology (Williston Park) 1996;10(11 Suppl):233-46.
22. Merkies ISJ, Schmitz PIM, Samijn JPA, et al. Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) Group. Assessing grip strength in healthy individuals and patients with immune-mediated polyneuropathies. Muscle Nerve 2000;23:1393-401.
23. Wyrwich KW, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD. Further evidence supporting an SEMbased criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 1999;52:861-73.
24. Wyrwich KW. Minimal important difference thresholds and the standard error of measurement: is there a connection? J Biopharm Stat 2004;14:97-110.
25. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989;27(3 Suppl):S178-89.
26. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, 1988.
27. Bril V, Katzberg H, Donofrio P, et al, ICE Study Group. Electrophysiology in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy with IGIV. Muscle Nerve 2009;39:448-55.
28. Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, et al. Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:139-44.
29. Schwartz N. Autobiographical memory and the validity of retrospective reports. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1994.
30. Cella D, Eton DT, Fairclough DL, et al. What is a clinically meaningful change on the functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung (FACT-L) questionnaire? Results from eastern cooperative oncology group (ECOG) Study 5592. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:285-95.
31. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in healthrelated quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:395-407.
32. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, et al. Sensitivity to change of the rolandmorris back pain questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther 1998;78:1186-96.
33. Lai J-S, Eton DT. Clinically meaningful gaps. Rasch Meas Trans 2002;15:850.
34. Kolotkin RL, Crosby RD, Williams GR. Integrating anchor-based and distribution-based methods to determine clinically meaningful change in obesity-specific quality of life. Qual Life Res 2002;11:670.
35. Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol 1991;59:12-19.
36. vanNes SI, Faber CG, Hermans MCE, et al. A Rasch/built, linearly/weighted overall disability sumscore for immune/mediated neuropathies. J Periph Nerv Syst 2009;14:149-50.
37. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, et al. OMERACT MCID Working Group. Looking for important change/differences in studies of responsiveness. outcome measures in rheumatology. Minimal clinically important difference. J Rheumatol 2001;8:400-5.
38. Wells G, Anderson J, Boers M, et al. MCID/low disease activity state workshop: summary, recommendations, and research agenda. J Rheumatol 2003;30:1115-18.
39. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, et al. Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:371-83.