Disability outcome measures in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: Current status and future prospects

The Lancet Neurology

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 467-476

  Cohen, Jeffrey A ^a   Reingold, Stephen C ^b   Polman, Chris H ^c   Wolinsky, Jerry S ^d  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b Scientific and Clinical Review Associates LLC   (United States)

^c VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARM MOVEMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COGNITION; DISABILITY; DISABILITY SEVERITY; DISEASE COURSE; EXPANDED DISABILITY STATUS SCALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MOBILIZATION; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; BRAIN; DISABILITY EVALUATION; DISEASE PROGRESSION; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RETINA; TOMOGRAPHY, OPTICAL COHERENCE;

EID: 84859813422     PISSN: 14744422     EISSN: 14744465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70059-5     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Herndon R Proceedings of the International Conference on Therapeutic Trials in Multiple Sclerosis. Grand Island, NY, April 23-24, 1982. Arch Neurol 1983, 40:663-710.
2. Whitaker JN, McFarland HF, Rudge P, Reingold SC Outcomes assessment in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: a critical analysis. Mult Scler 1995, 1:37-47.
3. Rudick R, Antel J, Confavreux C, et al. Recommendations from the National Multiple Sclerosis Society Clinical Outcomes Assessment Task Force. Ann Neurol 1997, 42:379-382.
4. Cutter GR, Baier ML, Rudick RA, et al. Development of a multiple sclerosis functional composite as a clinical trial outcome measure. Brain 1999, 122:871-882.
5. Cohen JA, Cutter GR, Fischer JS, et al. Benefit of interferon β-1a on MSFC progression in secondary progressive MS. Neurology 2002, 59:679-687.
6. Disabilities WHO, (accessed March 15, 2012). http://www.who.int/topics/disabilities/en/.
7. Kurtzke JF Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983, 33:1444-1452.
8. Sormani MP, Bonzano L, Roccatagliata L, Mancardi GL, Uccelli A, Bruzzi P Surrogate endpoints for EDSS worsening in multiple sclerosis. A meta-analytic approach. Neurology 2010, 75:302-309.
9. Hobart J, Freeman J, Thompson A Kurtzke scales revisited: the application of psychometric methods to clinical intuition. Brain 2000, 123:1027-1040.
10. Amato MP, Fratiglioni L, Groppi C, Siracusa G, Amaducci L Interrater reliability in assessing functional systems and disability on the Kurtzke scale in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1988, 45:746-748.
11. Noseworthy JH, Vandervoort MK, Wong CJ, Ebers GC, the Canadian Cooperative MS Study Group Interrater variability with the expanded disability status scale (EDSS) and functional systems (FS) in a multiple sclerosis clinical trial. Neurology 1990, 40:971-975.
12. Francis DA, Bain P, Swan AV, Hughes RAC An assessment of disability rating scales used in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1991, 48:299-301.
13. Goodkin DE, Cookfair D, Wende K, et al. Inter- and intrarater scoring agreement using grades 1.0 to 3.5 of the Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology 1992, 42:859-863.
14. Weinshenker BG, Rice GPA, Noseworthy JH, Carriere W, Baskerville J, Ebers GC The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study. 4. Applications to planning and interpretation of clinical therapeutic trials. Brain 1991, 114:1057-1067.
15. Lublin FD, Baier M, Cutter G Effect of relapses on development of residual deficit in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2003, 61:1528-1532.
16. Ozakbas S, Ormeci B, Idiman E Utilization of the multiple sclerosis functional composite in follow-up: relationship to disease phenotype, disability and treatment strategies. J Neurol Sci 2005, 232:65-69.
17. Rudick RA, Polman CH, Cohen JA, et al. Assessing disability progression with the multiple sclerosis functional composite. Mult Scler 2009, 15:984-997.
18. Kalkers NF, Bergers L, de Groot V, et al. Concurrent validity of the MS Functional Composite using MRI as a biological disease marker. Neurology 2001, 56:215-219.
19. Miller DM, Rudick RA, Cutter G, Baier M, Fischer JS Clinical significance of the multiple sclerosis functional composite. Relationship to patient-reported quality of life. Arch Neurol 2000, 57:1319-1324.
20. Honarmand K, Akbar N, Kou N, Feinstein A Predicting employment status in multiple sclerosis patients: the utility of the MS functional composite. J Neurol 2011, 258:244-249.
21. Shawaryn MA, Schultheis MT, Garay E, DeLuca J Assessing functional status: exploring the relationship between the multiple sclerosis functional composite and driving. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002, 83:1123-1129.
22. Rudick RA, Cutter G, Baier M, et al. Use of the multiple sclerosis functional composite to predict disability in relapsing MS. Neurology 2001, 56:1324-1330.
23. Fisher E, Rudick RA, Cutter G, et al. Relationship between brain atrophy and disability: an 8-year follow up study of multiple sclerosis patients. Mult Scler 2000, 6:373-377.
24. Balcer LJ, Baier ML, Cohen JA, et al. Contrast letter acuity as a visual component for the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite. Neurology 2003, 61:1367-1373.
25. Balcer LJ, Frohman EM Evaluating loss of visual function in multiple sclerosis as measured by low-contrast letter acuity. Neurology 2010, 74(suppl 3):S16-S23.
26. Balcer LJ, Galetta SL, Calabresi PA, et al. Natalizumab reduces visual loss in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2007, 68:1299-1304.
27. Talman LS, Bisker ER, Sackel DJ, et al. Longitudinal study of vision and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2010, 67:749-760.
28. Gronwall DMA Paced auditory serial addition task: a measure of recovery from concussion. Percept Mot Skills 1977, 44:367-373.
29. Chiaravalloti ND, DeLuca J Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2008, 7:1139-1151.
30. Benedict RHB, Zivadinov R Risk factors for and management of cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 2011, 7:332-342.
31. Nagels G, Geentjens L, Kos D, et al. Paced visual serial addition test in multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2005, 107:218-222.
32. Cohen JA, Cutter GR, Fischer JS, et al. Use of the multiple sclerosis functional composite as an outcome measure in a phase 3 clinical trial. Arch Neurol 2001, 58:961-967.
33. Smith A Symbol digit modalities test: Manual 1982, Western Psychological Services, Torrance, CA.
34. Drake AS, Weinstock-Guttman B, Morrow SA, Hojnacki D, Munchauer FE, Benedict RHB Psychometrics and normative data for the multiple sclerosis functional composite: replacing the PASAT with the symbol digit modalities test. Mult Scler 2010, 16:228-237.
35. Benedict RH Effects of using same- versus alternate-form memory tests during short-interval repeated assessments in multiple sclerosis. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2005, 11:727-736.
36. Benedict RHB, Cookfair D, Gavett R, et al. Validity of the minimal assessment of cognitive function in multiple sclerosis (MACFIMS). J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2006, 12:549-558.
37. Portaccio E, Goretti B, Zipoli V, et al. Reliability, practical effects, and change indices for Rao's brief repeatable battery. Mult Scler 2010, 16:611-617.
38. Benedict RH, Weinstock-Guttman B, Fishman I, Sharma J, Tjoa CW, Bakshi R Prediction of neuropsychological impairment in multiple sclerosis: comparison of conventional magnetic resonance imaging measures of atrophy and lesion burden. Arch Neurol 2004, 61:226-230.
39. Benedict RH, Bruce JM, Dwyer MG, et al. Neocortical atrophy, third ventricular width, and cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2006, 63:1301-1306.
40. Goldman MD, Marrie RA, Cohen JA Evaluation of the six-minute walk in multiple sclerosis subjects and healthy controls. Mult Scler 2008, 14:383-390.
41. Duncan PW, Jorgensen HS, Wade DT Outcome measures in acute stroke trials: a systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice. Stroke 2000, 31:1429-1438.
42. Fox RJ, Lee J-C, Rudick RA Optimal reference population for the multiple sclerosis functional composite. Mult Scler 2007, 13:909-914.
43. Schwid SR, Goodman AD, McDermott MP, Bever CF, Cook SD Quantitative functional measures in MS: what is a reliable change?. Neurology 2002, 58:1294-1296.
44. Lublin FD Disease free activity status. Mult Scler Relat Dis 2012, 1:6-7.
45. Havrdova E, Galetta S, Hutchinson M, et al. Effect of natalizumab on clinical and radiological disease activity in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (AFFIRM) study. Lancet Neurol 2009, 8:254-260.
46. Kappos L, Radue EW, O'Connor P, et al. Fingolimod treatment increases the proportion of patients who are free from disease activity in multiple sclerosis: results from a Phase 3, placebo-controlled study (FREEDOMS) (Poster PD6.002). Neurology 2011, 76(suppl 4):A563.
47. Giovannoni G, Cook S, Rammohan K, et al. Sustained disease-activity-free status in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treated with cladribine tablets in the CLARITY study: a post-hoc and subgroup analysis. Lancet Neurol 2011, 10:329-337.
48. Horga A, Castillo J, Rio J, et al. An observational study of the effectiveness and safety of natalizumab in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Rev Neurol 2011, 52:321-330.
49. Rankin J Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scott Med J 1957, 2:200-215.
50. Farrell B, Godwin J, Warlow C The United Kingdom transient ischaemic attack (UK-TIA) aspirin trial: final results. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1991, 54:1044-1054.
51. Mahoney F, Barthel D Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J 1965, 14:61-65.
52. Smith SJ, Young CA The role of affect on the perception of disability in multiple sclerosis. Clin Rehabil 2000, 14:50-54.
53. Airlie J, Baker GA, Smith SJ, Young CA Measuring the impact of multiple sclerosis on psychosocial functioning: the development of a new self-efficacy scale. Clin Rehabil 2001, 15:259-265.
54. Conwit R, Cofield SS, Cutter GR, Wolinsky JS, Lublin FD The modified Rankin scale, EDSS and MRI measures using CombiRx baseline assessments (P05.070). Neurology 2008, 70(suppl 1):A270.
55. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims Food and Drug Administration, (accessed March 15, 2012). http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf.
56. Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related quality of life (HRQL) meaures in the evaluation of medicinal products European Medicines Agency, (accessed March 15, 2012). http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/pages/includes/document/open_document.jsp?webContentId=WC500003637.
57. Stewart AL, Hays R, Ware J The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1988, 26:724-735.
58. Vickrey BG, Hays RD, Harooni R, Myers LW, Ellison GW A health related quality of life measure for multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res 1995, 4:187-206.
59. Fischer JS, LaRocca NG, Miller DM, Ritvo PG, Andrews H, Paty D Recent developments in the assessment of quality of life in multiple sclerosis (MS). Mult Scler 1999, 5:251-259.
60. Hobart J, Lamping D, Fitzpatrick R, Riazi A, Thompson A The multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS-29): a new patient-based outcome measure. Brain 2001, 124:962-973.
61. van der Linden FA, Kragt JJ, Klein M, van der Ploeg HM, Polman CH, Uitdehaag BM Psychometric evaluation of the multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS-29) for proxy use. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005, 76:1677-1681.
62. Hobart JC, Riazi A, Lamping DL, et al. Measuring the impact of MS on walking ability: the 12-item MS walking scale (MSWS-12). Neurology 2003, 60:31-36.
63. Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1961, 4:561-571.
64. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001, 16:606-613.
65. Fisk JD, Pontefract A, Ritvo PG, Archibald CJ, Murray TJ The impact of fatigue on patients with multiple sclerosis. Can J Neurol Sci 1994, 21:9-14.
66. Bonzano L, Sormani MP, Tacchino A, Abate L, Mancardi GL, Uccelli A Validation of a new quantitative and objective tool for the assessment of hand motor disability in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2011, 17(suppl 10):S43.
67. Snook E, Morand A, Scott CL A functional living outcome measure for multiple sclerosis: combining GPS and activity data (S34). Int J MS Care 2011, 13(suppl 3):26.
68. Sosnoff JJ, Socie MJ, Boes MK, Sandroff BM, Motl RW Ambulatory mobility monitoring in people with multiple sclerosis (S125). Int J MS Care 2011, 13(suppl 3):69-70.
69. Weikert ML, Dlugonski D, Suh Y, Sandroff B, Motl RW Accelerometry measures walking mobility, not physical activity, in multiple sclerosis (S36). Int J MS Care 2011, 13(suppl 3):27.
70. Coles AJ, Fox E, Vladic A, et al. Alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1-a in early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: post-hoc and subset analyses of clinical efficacy outcomes. Lancet Neurol 2011, 10:338-348.
71. Phillips JT, Giovannoni G, Lublin FD, et al. Sustained improvement in expanded disability status scale as a new efficacy measure of neurologic change in multiple sclerosis: treatment effects with natalizumab in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J 2011, 17:970-979.
72. Goodman AD, Brown TR, Krupp LB, et al. Sustained-release oral fampridine in multiple sclerosis: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Lancet 2009, 373:732-738.
73. Goodman AD, Brown TR, Edwards KR, et al. A phase 3 trial of extended release oral dalfampridine in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2010, 68:494-502.
74. Barkhof F, Simon JH, Fazekas F, et al. MRI monitoring of immunomodulation in relapse-onset multiple sclerosis trials. Nat Rev Neurol 2011, 8:13-21.
75. Sormani MP, Bonzano L, Roccatagliata L, Cutter GR, Mancardi GL, Bruzzi P Magnetic resonance imaging as a potential surrogate for relapses in multiple sclerosis: a meta-analytic approach. Ann Neurol 2009, 65:268-275.
76. Kappos L, Weinshenker B, Pozzilli C, et al. Interferon beta-1b in secondary progressive MS. A combined analysis of the two trials. Neurology 2004, 63:1779-1787.
77. Barkhof F, Calabresi PA, Miller DH, Reingold SC Imaging outcomes for neuroprotection and repair in multiple sclerosis trials. Nat Rev Neurol 2009, 5:256-266.
78. 11C]-2-(4'-methylaminophenyl)-6-hydroxybenzothiazole. Ann Neurol 2011, 69:673-680.
79. Wolinsky JS, Narayana PA, Noseworthy JH, et al. Linomide in relapsing and secondary progressive MS. Part II: MRI results. Neurology 2000, 54:1734-1741.
80. Petzold A, de Boer JF, Schippling S, et al. Optical coherence tomography in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol 2010, 9:921-932.
81. Sakai RE, Feller DJ, Galetta KM, Galetta SL, Balcer LJ Vision in multiple sclerosis: the story, structure-function correlations, and models for neuroprotection. J Neuroophthalmol 2011, 31:362-373.
82. Graber JJ, Dhib-Jalbut S Biomarkers of disease activity in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 2011, 305:1-10.
83. Innovation or stagnation: critical path opportunities report and list Food and Drug Administration, (accessed March 15, 2012). http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/CriticalPathInitiative/CriticalPathOpportunitiesReports/UCM077254.pdf.
84. Woodcock J, Woosley R The FDA critical path initiative and its influence on new drug development. Annu Rev Med 2008, 59:1-12.