This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kragt, J J Articles by Polman, C H Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kragt, J J Articles by Polman, C H Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

How similar are commonly combined criteria for EDSS progression in multiple sclerosis?

Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, jj.kragt{at}vumc.nl

J M Nielsen

Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

F AH van der Linden

Department of Neurology, Department of Medical Psychology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

B MJ Uitdehaag

Department of Neurology, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

C H Polman

Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Introduction Measuring disease progression is an important aspect of multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials. Commonly applied disability endpoints include time to clinically meaningful Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) change, or the number of patients in whom such a change has occurred. Typically, clinically meaningful EDSS change has been defined as a change of 1.0 point on Kurtzke’s EDSS in patients with an entry EDSS score of 5.5 or lower, or 0.5 point in patients with a higher EDSS score. Our goal was to evaluate whether these changes can be considered as similar. Therefore, we compared EDSS changes to corresponding changes in the Guy’s Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS), which is a measure of patient perceived disability, and the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC), which is an examination-based quantitative scoring of neurological impairment.

Methods From a large longitudinal database, we selected two groups of patients with a clinically meaningful change in EDSS score according to the usual criteria: patients with EDSS change]/1.0 for baseline EDSS 5/5.5 and patients with EDSS change]/0.5 for baseline EDSS]/6.0. We compared changes in GNDS sum score and in MSFC score between both groups.

Results In the group with baseline EDSS]/6.0, GNDS and MSFC changes were higher than in patients with baseline EDSS 5/5.5. The difference in change was 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI): ^/ 0.35 to 2.36) for the GNDS and 0.412 (95% CI: 0.300-0.525) for the MSFC.

Conclusion Our results indicate that a 0.5 point EDSS change in patients with baseline EDSS ^/ 6.0 cannot be considered equal to a 1.0 point change in patients with baseline EDSS 5/5.5.

Key Words: clinical scale • EDSS • GNDS • MSFC • multiple sclerosis

References

• Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS) . Neurology 1983; 33: 1444-1452 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Rudick R, Antel J, Confavreux C, Cutter G, Ellison G, Fischer Jet al. Clinical outcomes assessment in multiple sclerosis . Ann Neurol 1996; 40: 469-479 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Wingerchuk DM, Noseworthy JH, Weinshenker BG. Clinical outcome measures and rating scales in multiple sclerosis trials . Mayo Clin Proc 1997; 72: 1070-1079 .[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Weinshenker BG, Issa M, Baskerville J. Meta-analysis of the placebo-treated groups in clinical trials of progressive MS . Neurology 1996; 46: 1613-1619 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• European Study Group on interferon beta-1b in secondary progressive MS. Placebo-controlled multi-centre randomised trial of interferon beta-1b in treatment of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis . Lancet 1998; 352: 1491-1497 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Randomized controlled trial of interferon-beta-1a in secondary progressive MS: clinical results . Neurology 2001; 56: 1496-1504 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Goodkin DE. EDSS reliability . Neurology 1991; 41: 332-332 .[ISI]
• Weinshenker BG, Rice GP, 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 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• 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 .[Abstract]
• Francis DA, Bain P, Swan AV, Hughes RA. An assessment of disability rating scales used in multiple sclerosis . Arch Neurol 1991; 48: 299-301 .[Abstract]
• Goodkin DE, Cookfair D, Wende K, Bourdette D, Pullicino P, Scherokman Bet al. Inter-and intrarater scoring agreement using grades 1.0 to 3.5 of the Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group . Neurology 1992; 42: 859-863 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Noseworthy JH, Vandervoort MK, Wong CJ, Ebers GC. Interrater variability with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Functional Systems (FS) in a multiple sclerosis clinical trial. The Canadian Cooperation MS Study Group . Neurology 1990; 40: 971-975 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Sharrack B, Hughes RA. The Guy’s Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS): a new disability measure for multiple sclerosis . Mult Scler 1999; 5: 223-233 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Cutter GR, Baier ML, Rudick RA, Cookfair DL, Fischer JS, Petkau Jet al. Development of a multiple sclerosis functional composite as a clinical trial outcome measure . Brain 1999; 122: 871-882 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, McDonald WI, Davis FA, Ebers GCet al. New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols . Ann Neurol 1983; 13: 227-231 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Hoogervorst EL, van Winsen LM, Eikelenboom MJ, Kalkers NF, Uitdehaag BM, Polman CH. Comparisons of patient self-report, neurologic examination, and functional impairment in MS . Neurology 2001; 56: 934-937 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Kalkers NF, De Groof V, Lazeron RH, Killestein J, Ader HJ, Barkhof Fet al. MS functional composite: relation to disease phenotype and disability strata . Neurology 2000; 54: 1233-1239 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Fischer JS, Jak AJ, Kniker JE, Rudick RA, Cutter G. Administration and scoring manual for the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC). New York , 2001.
• Hoogervorst EL, Kalkers NF, Cutter GR, Uitdehaag BM, Polman CH. The patient’s perception of a (reliable) change in the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite . Mult Scler 2004; 10: 55-60 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• 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 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kragt, J J Articles by Polman, C H Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kragt, J J Articles by Polman, C H Social Bookmarking                   What's this?