The EDSS-Plus,an improved endpoint for disability progression in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Abstract

Background:

The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) has wide scientific and regulatory precedent but limited ability to detect clinically relevant disability progression in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) patients, partly due to a lack of meaningful measurement of short-distance ambulatory and upper-extremity function.

Objective:

To present a rationale for a composite endpoint adding the timed 25-foot walk (T25FW) and 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT) to EDSS for SPMS disability progression assessment.

Methods:

Using the International Multiple Sclerosis Secondary Progressive Avonex Clinical Trial (IMPACT) placebo arm (n = 215) data, we analyzed disability progression using a novel progression endpoint, “EDSS-Plus,” defined as progression on ⩾1 of 3 components (EDSS, T25FW, and/or 9HPT) confirmed ⩾24 weeks apart and with a ⩾20% minimum threshold change for T25FW and 9HPT.

Results:

Over 2 years, subjects classified as T25FW, 9HPT (dominant hand), or 9HPT (non-dominant hand) progressors worsened on average by 103.4%, 69.0%, and 59.2%, respectively, while non-progressors’ times remained largely unchanged. Using EDSS-Plus, 59.5% of the patients had 24-week confirmed disability progression versus 24.7% (EDSS), 41.9% (T25FW), and 34.4% (9HPT (either hand)) on each component alone.

Conclusion:

The 24-week confirmed minimum worsening of ⩾20% for T25FW and 9HPT clearly separates SPMS progressors from non-progressors. We propose that EDSS-Plus may represent an improved endpoint to identify SPMS disability progression.

Keywords

Disability evaluation disease progression endpoint determination secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lublin

Reingold

Cohen

. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: The 2013 revisions. Neurology 2014; 83: 278–286.

European Study Group on Interferon β-1b in Secondary Progressive MS. Placebo-controlled multicentre randomised trial of interferon beta-1b in treatment of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Lancet 1998; 352: 1491–1497.

Freedman

Bar-Or

Oger

. MAESTRO-01 Investigators. A phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of MBP8298 in secondary progressive MS. Neurology 2011; 77: 1551–1560.

Panitch

Miller

Paty

. North American Study Group on Interferon beta-1b in Secondary Progressive MS. Interferon beta-1b in secondary progressive MS: Results from a 3-year controlled study. Neurology 2004; 63: 1788–1795.

Secondary Progressive Efficacy Clinical Trial of Recombinant Interferon-Beta-1a in MS (SPECTRIMS) Study Group. Randomized controlled trial of interferon-beta-1a in secondary progressive MS: Clinical results. Neurology 2001; 56: 1496–1504.

Kurtzke

JF.

Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444–1452.

Cohen

Reingold

Polman

Wolinsky

; International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in Multiple S. Disability outcome measures in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: current status and future prospects. Lancet Neurol 2012; 11: 467–476.

Meyer-Moock

Feng

Maeurer

Dippel

Kohlmann

Systematic literature review and validity evaluation of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) in patients with multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol 2014; 14: 58.

Cadavid

Tang

O’Neill

. Responsiveness of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) to disease progression and therapeutic intervention in progressive forms of multiple sclerosis. Rev Neurol 2010; 51: 321–329.

10.

Hyland

Rudick

RA.

Challenges to clinical trials in multiple sclerosis: outcome measures in the era of disease-modifying drugs. Curr Opin Neurol 2011; 24: 255–261.

11.

Rudick

Polman

Cohen

. Assessing disability progression with the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite. Mult Scler 2009; 15: 984–997.

12.

Balabanov

Haas

Elferink

Bakchine

Broich

Addressing the regulatory and scientific challenges in multiple sclerosis—a statement from the EU regulators. Mult Scler 2014; 20: 1282–1287.

13.

Cadavid

Jurgensen

Lee

Impact of natalizumab on ambulatory improvement in secondary progressive and disabled relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. PLoS One 2013; 8: e53297.

14.

Cohen

Cutter

Fischer

. IMPACT Investigators. Benefit of interferon beta-1a on MSFC progression in secondary progressive MS. Neurology 2002; 59: 679–687.

15.

Rudick

Cutter

Reingold

The Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite: a new clinical outcome measure for multiple sderosis trials. Mult Scler 2002; 8: 359–365.

16.

Orbach

Zhao

Wang

O’Neill

Cadavid

Comparison of disease activity in SPMS and PPMS in the context of multicenter clinical trials. PLoS One 2012; 7: e45409.

17.

Bosma

Kragt

Brieva

. The search for responsive clinical endpoints in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2009; 15: 715–720.

18.

Contelloe

Hutchinson

Is a 20% change in MSFC components clinically meaningful?

Mult Scler 2007; 13: 1076.

19.

Cutter

Baier

Rudick

. Development of a multiple sclerosis functional composite as a clinical trial outcome measure. Brain 1999; 122: 871–882.

20.

Goldman

Motl

Scagnelli

Pula

Sosnoff

Cadavid

Clinically meaningful performance benchmarks in MS: Timed 25-Foot Walk and the real world. Neurology 2013; 81: 1856–1863.

21.

Hoogervorst

Kalkers

Cutter

Uitdehaag

Polman

CH.

The patient’s perception of a (reliable) change in the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite. Mult Scler 2004; 10: 55–60.

22.

Kaufman

Moyer

Norton

The significant change for the Timed 25-Foot Walk in the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite. Mult Scler 2000; 6: 286–290.

23.

Kragt

van der Linden

Nielsen

Uitdehaag

Polman

CH.

Clinical impact of 20% worsening on Timed 25-Foot Walk and 9-Hole Peg Test in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2006; 12: 594–598.

24.

Schwid

Goodman

McDermott

Bever

Cook

SD.

Quantitative functional measures in MS: what is a reliable change?

Neurology 2002; 58: 1294–1296.

25.

European Medicines Agency. Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. 2012. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2012/10/WC500133438.pdf (accessed 20 May 2015).

26.

Fischer

Rudick

Cutter

Reingold

SC.

The Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite Measure (MSFC): an integrated approach to MS clinical outcome assessment. National MS Society Clinical Outcomes Assessment Task Force. Mult Scler 1999; 5: 244–250.

27.

Ebers

Heigenhauser

Daumer

Lederer

Noseworthy

JH.

Disability as an outcome in MS clinical trials. Neurology 2008; 71: 624-631.

28.

Noseworthy

JH.

Clinical scoring methods for multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1994; 36 Suppl: S80

29.

Noseworthy

Vandervoort

Wong

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.

30.

Ravnborg

Blinkenberg

Sellebjerg

Ballegaard

Larsen

Sørensen

PS.

Responsiveness of the Multiple Sclerosis Impairment Scale in comparison with the Expanded Disability Status Scale. Mult Scler 2005; 11: 81–84.

31.

Albrecht

Wötzel

Erasmus

Kleinpeter

König

Pöllmann

Day-to-day variability of maximum walking distance in MS patients can mislead to relevant changes in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS): average walking speed is a more constant parameter. Mult Scler 2001; 7: 105–109.

32.

Dong

Rudick

Paes

Mikol

Belachew

Natalizumab decreases progression of disability in RRMS patients as measured by the composite EDSS-Plus in AFFIRM. Mult Scler 2014; 20: 118.

33.

Bosma

Kragt

Brieva

. 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.

34.

Zhang

Waubant

Cutter

Wolinsky

Leppert

Composite end points to assess delay of disability progression by MS treatments. Mult Scler 2014; 20: 1494–1501.

35.

Lublin

Miller

Freedman

. Oral fingolimod versus placebo in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS): results of the INFORMS phase III trial [abstract]. Neurology 2015; 85: e45.

36.

Lublin

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.

37.

Confavreux

Vukusic

Moreau

Adeleine

. Relapses and progression of disability in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1430–1438.

38.

Polman

O’Connor

Havrdova

. AFFIRM Investigators. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 899–910

39.

Goodkin

Priore

Wende

. Comparing the ability of various compositive outcomes to discriminate treatment effects in MS clinical trials. The Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group (MSCRG). Mult Scler 1998; 4: 480–486.

40.

Rudick

Larocca

Hudson

. MSOAC. Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium: Genesis and initial project plan. Mult Scler 2014; 20: 12–17.

41.

Cadavid

Edwards

Hupperts

. BIIB033, Anti-LINGO-1 antibody, for treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis: baseline data of the phase 2 SYNERGY trial. Neurology 2015; 84: P7.204.

42.

Moyé

LA.

Multiple analyses in clinical trials: fundamentals for investigators. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2003.

43.

Goldberg

Gore

Barton

Gurwitz

Individual and composite study endpoints: separating the wheat from the chaff. Am J Med 2014; 127: 379–384.

44.

ClinicalTrials.gov. A clinical study of the efficacy of natalizumab on reducing disability progression in participants with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (ASCEND in SPMS) (revised April 16, 2015). http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01416181 (accessed 20 May 2015).