Detecting clinically-relevant changes in progressive multiple sclerosis

Multiple Sclerosis Journal

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 171-179

  Bosma, L V A E ^a   Sonder, J M ^a   Kragt, J J ^a,b   Polman, C H ^a   Uitdehaag, B M J ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b REINIER DE GRAAF HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Clinical outcome; Disability tests; Disease progression; Multiple sclerosis; Outcome measurement; Patient reported outcome; Study design

Indexed keywords

4 AMINOPYRIDINE; BETA INTERFERON; GLATIRAMER; METHOTREXATE;

9 HOLE PEG TEST; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; COHORT ANALYSIS; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; EXPANDED DISABILITY STATUS SCALE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GUY NEUROLOGICAL DISABILITY SCALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SELECTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; TIMED 25 FOOT WALK; DISEASE COURSE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS, CHRONIC PROGRESSIVE; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

ADULT; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS, CHRONIC PROGRESSIVE; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 84923077098     PISSN: 13524585     EISSN: 14770970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1352458514540969     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry, patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims, www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. 2009, accessed March 20 2012.
2. Hobart J, Lamping D, Fitzpatrick R, et al. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): A new patient-based outcome measure. Brain. 2001 ; 124: 962-973
3. McGuigan C, Hutchinson M. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) is a reliable and sensitive measure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004 ; 75: 266-269
4. Costelloe L, O'Rourke K, Kearney H, et al. The patient knows best: Significant change in the physical component of the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29 physical). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007 ; 78: 841-844
5. Lublin FD, Reingold SC. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: Results of an international survey. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on clinical trials of new agents in multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 1996 ; 46: 907-911
6. Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, et al. New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: Guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol. 1983 ; 13: 227-231
7. Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 Revisions to the 'McDonald Criteria'. Ann Neurol. 2005 ; 58: 840-846
8. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: An Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology. 1983 ; 33: 1444-1452
9. 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
10. Hoogervorst EL, Zwemmer JN, Jelles B, et al. Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): relation to established measures of impairment and disability. Mult Scler. 2004 ; 10: 569-574
11. Kalkers NF, De Groot V, Lazeron RH, et al. MS functional composite: Relation to disease phenotype and disability strata. Neurology. 2000 ; 54: 1233-1239
12. Sharrack B, Hughes RA. The Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS): A new disability measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 1999 ; 5: 223-233
13. Hobart JC, Riazi A, Lamping DL, et al. Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: Development of a patient-based measure of outcome. Health Technol Assess. 2004 ; 8: 1-48
14. Mokkink L, Knol D, Uitdehaag B. Factor structure of Guy's Neurological Disability Scale in a sample of Dutch patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2011 ; 17: 1498-1503
15. Goodkin DE. EDSS reliability. Neurology. 1991 ; 41: 332
16. Schwid SR, Goodman AD, McDermott MP, et al. Quantitative functional measures in MS: What is a reliable change?. Neurology. 2002 ; 58: 1294-1296
17. Hoogervorst EL, Kalkers NF, Cutter GR, et al. The patient's perception of a (reliable) change in the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite. Mult Scler. 2004 ; 10: 55-60
18. Kragt JJ, Van der Linden FA, Nielsen JM, et al. Clinical impact of 20% worsening on Timed 25-Foot Walk and 9-Hole Peg Test in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2006 ; 12: 594-598
19. Bosma LV, Kragt JJ, Brieva L, et al. Progression on the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite in multiple sclerosis: What is the optimal cut-off for the three components?. Mult Scler. 2010 ; 16: 862-867
20. Hoogervorst EL, Kalkers NF, Van Winsen LML, et al. Differential treatment effect on measures of neurologic exam, functional impairment and patient self-report in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2001 ; 7: 335-339
21. Hoogervorst EL, Eikelenboom MJ, Uitdehaag BM, et al. One year changes in disability in multiple sclerosis: Neurological examination compared with patient self-report. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2003 ; 74: 439-442
22. Heesen C, Bohm J, Reich C, et al. Patient perception of bodily functions in multiple sclerosis: Gait and visual function are the most valuable. Mult Scler. 2008 ; 14: 988-991
23. Bosma LV, Kragt JJ, Polman CH, et al. Walking speed, rather than EDSS, relates to long-term patient-reported impact in progressive MS. Mult Scler. 2013 ; 19: 326-333