Comparative evaluations of neuroperformance and clinical outcome assessments in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis: I. reliability,validity and sensitivity to disease progression

Abstract

There remains controversy regarding the most sensitive and valid outcome assessments to use in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials. A double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group multicenter clinical trial to evaluate the clinical efficacy of cyclosporine A in chronic progressive MS incorporated several major clinical and performance outcome assessment modalities and a large sample size, both of which provide a unique opportunity to explore the relationship among MS disease status and the various outcome measures over time. The measures included a structured neurological examination, the Kurtzke Functional System scales and Expanded Disability Status Score, and the Incapacity Status Scale from the MS Minimal Record of Disability, die Harvard Ambulation Index, and neuroperformance testing. A test-retest reliability index, principal component analyses and a signal-to-noise ratio metric were used to comparatively evaluate the reliability, validity and sensitivity to disease progression of the various outcome assessments. The goal was to provide a rational basis for selection of behavioral outcome assessments in future MS clinical trials by identifying the primary dimensions of MS measured by the candidate outcome assessments and providing an objective basis for selecting tests that are most sensitive to MS disease and its progression over a two year trial period. We conclude that the components of the major clinical and performance measures show excellent reliability and cross validation. Principal component analyses of all outcome assessments yielded six primary underlying factors for describing disease status in chronic progressive MS that included lower extremity/pyramidal dysfunction, cerebellar/brainstem and upper extremity dysfunction, somatosensory dysfunction, visual dysfunction, mental or intellectual dysfunction and bowel/bladder problems. Signal-to-noise ratios indicated that upper and lower extremity composites of neuroperformance test kerns provided the most sensitive indicators of MS disease progression in the placebo group over the 2 year trial period.

Keywords

neuroperformance multiple sclerosis clinical trial outcome assessment statistical analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1 Andres PL et al. (1988) Use of composite scores (mega-scores) to measure deficit in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurology 38: 405–408.

2 Barbeito R , Simpsom TL . (1991) Should level of measurement considerations affect the choice of statistic? Optometry Vis Sci 68: 236–242.

3 Behbehani K , Kondraske GV , Richmond JR . (1988) Investigation of upper extremity visuomotor control performance measures IEEE Trans Biomed Engin 35: 518–525.

4 Dixon WJ , Kuzma JW . (1994) Data reduction in large clinical trials. Comm Stat 3: 301–324.

5 Ellison GW et al. (1994) Design strategies in multiple sclerosis clinical trials. The cyclosporine Multiple Sclerosis Study Group. Ann Neurol 36 Suppl: S108–S112.

6 Ellison GW et al. (1989) A placebo-controlled, randomized, double-masked, variable dosage, clinical trial of azathioprine with and without methylprednisolone in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 39: 1018–1026.

7 Fischer JS . (in press) Use of neuropsychological outcome measures in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: Current status and strategies for improving MS clinical trial design. In: Goodkin D , Rudick R , ed. Treatment of multiple sclerosis: Advances in trial design, results, and future perspectives. London: Springer.

8 Gorsuch RL . (1983) Factor Analysis. (2nd ed.), Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

9 Gracon SI , Gamzu ER , Mancini ADJ . (1991) Multicenter clinical trials: design considerations, standardization and implementation. In: Mohr E , Brouwers P , ed. Handbook of clinical trials: The neurobehavioral approach. Berwyn PA: Swets & Zeitlinger Inc. pp 275–291.

10.

10 Hauser SL et al. (1983) Intensive immunosuppression in progressive multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 308: 173–80.

11.

11 Henderson WG , Fisher SG , Cohen N , Waltzman S , Weber L , VA Cooperative Study Group on Cochlear Implantation . (1990) Use of principal components analysis to develop a composite score as a primary outcome variable in a clinical trial. Control Clin Trials 11: 199–214.

12.

12 Henderson WG , Tourtellotte WW , Potvin AR , Rose AS . (1978) Methodology for analyzing clinical neurological data: ACTH in multiple sclerosis. Clin Pharmacol Ther 24: 146–153.

13.

13 International Federation of Multiple Sclerosis Societies . (1984) Symposium on a Minimal Record of Disability for Multiple Sclerosis. Vancouver, Canada, September 11, 12, 1983. Acta Neurol Scand 101 (Suppl.): 1–217.

14.

14 Kondraske GV . (1989) Issues in quantification. In: Davis R , Kondraske GV , Tourtellotte WW , Syndulko K , ed. Quantifying Neurologic Performance. Philadelphia: Hanley and Belfus, Inc. pp 1–8.

15.

15 Kurtzke JF . (1955) A new scale for evaluating disability in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 5: 580–583.

16.

16 Kurtzke JF . (1961) On the evaluation of disability in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 11: 686–694.

17.

17 Kurtzke JF . (1965) Further notes on disability evaluation in multiple sclerosis, with scale modifications. Neurology 15: 654–661.

18.

18 Kurtzke JF . (1970) Neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis and the disability status scale. Acta Neurolog Scand 46: 493–512.

19.

19 Kurtzke JF . (1983) Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: An expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 33: 1444–1452.

20.

20 Kurtzke JF . (1989) The disability status scale for multiple sclerosis: Apologia pro DSS sua. Neurology 39: 291–302.

21.

21 Kuzma JW , Tourtellotte WW , Remington RD . (1965) Quantitative clinical neurological testing. II. Some statistical considerations of a battery of tests. J Chron Dis 18: 303–311.

22.

22 LaRocca NG . (1989) Statistical and methodological considerations in scale development. In: Munsat TL , ed. Quantification of Neurologic Deficit. Boston: Butterworths pp 49–67.

23.

23 LaRocca NG , Scheinberg LC , Slater RJ . (1984) Field testing of a minimal record of disability in multiple sclerosis: The United States and Canada. Acta Neurol Scand 70: 126–138.

24.

24 Marder K et al. (1995) Neurologic signs and symptoms in a cohort of homosexual men followed for 4.5 years. Neurology 45: 261–7.

25.

25 Noseworthy JH . (1994) Clinical scoring methods for multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 36 Suppl: S80–S85.

26.

26 O'Brien RG , Kaiser MK . (1985) MANOVA method for analyzing repeated measurements designs: An extensive primer. Psychol Bull 97: 316–333.

27.

27 Paty D , Willoughby E , Whitaker J . (1992) Assessing the outcome of experimental therapies in multiple sclerosis. In: Rudick RA , Goodkin DE , ed. Treatment of multiple sclerosis: Trial Design, Results, and Future Perspecitves London: Springer-Verlag pp 47–90.

28.

28 Peyser JM , Rao SM , LaRocca NG , Kaplan E . (1990) Guidelines for neuropsychological research in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 47: 94–97.

29.

29 Potvin AR , Tourtellotte WW . (1985) Quantitative Examination of Neurologic Function. Volume I, Scientific basis and design of instrumented tests. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Inc.

30.

30 Potvin AR , Tourtellotte WW . (1985) Quantitative Examination of Neurologic Function. Volume II. Methodology for test and patient assessments and design of a computer-automated system. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Inc.

31.

31 Richmond JR, Kondraske GV. (1986) Establishing and using normal values in a clinical database, pp 866–868.

32.

32 Rose AS et al. (1970) Cooperative study in the evaluation of therapy in multiple sclerosis: ACTH vs placebo. Final Report. Neurology 20: 1–59.

33.

33 Syndulko K , Tourtellotte WW . (1989) What is neurologically normal? In: Munsat TL , ed. Quantification of Neurologic Deficit. Boston: Buttenvorths pp 17–31.

34.

34 Syndulko K et al. (1993) Neuroperformance evaluation of multiple sclerosis disease progression in a clinical trial: Implications for neurological outcomes. J Neurol Rehab 7: 153–176.

35.

35 The Multiple Sclerosis Study Group . (1990) Efficacy and toxicity of cyclosporine in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis: A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Ann Neurol 27: 591–605.

36.

36 Tourtellotte WW et al. (1965) Quantitative clinical neurological testing. I. A study of a battery of tests designed to evaluate in part the neurologic function of patients with multiple sclerosis and its use in a therapeutic trial. Ann N Y Acad Sci 122: 480–505.

37.

37 Tourtellotte WW , Potvin AR , Potvin JH , Syndulko K . (1981) Assessment of disability in multiple sclerosis by a trained technician. Acta Neurol Scand 64 (Suppl. 87): 82–87.

38.

38 Tourtellotte WW , Syndulko K . (1989) Quantifying the neurologic examination: Principles, constraints and opportunities. In: Munsat T , ed. Quantification of Neurologic Deficit. Stoneham, MA: Butterworths Chap. 2, pp 7–16.

39.

39 Tourtellotte WW , Syndulko K . (1989) Two decades of experience using quantitative examination of neurologic functions. In: Davis R , Kondraske GV , Tourtellotte WW , Syndulko K , ed. Quantifying Performance in Neurology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: State of the Art Reviews. Philadephia: Hanley & Belfus, Inc. pp 161–167.

40.

40 Vasey MW , Thayer JF . (1987) The continuing problem offalse positives in repeated measures ANOVA in psycho-physiology: A multivariate solution. Psychophysiol 24: 479–486.

41.

41 Weinshenker BG . (In press) Clinical outcome measures for multiple sclerosis. In: Goodkin D , Rudick R , ed. Treatment of multiple sclerosis: Advances in trial design, results, and future perspectives. London: Springer.

42.

42 Weinshenker BG , Rice AGP , Noseworthy JH , Carriere W , Baskerville J , Ebers GC . (1991) The natural history of multiple sclerosis: A geographically based study. 4. Applications to planning and interpretation of clinical therapeutic trials. Brain 114: 1057–1067.

43.

43 Whitaker JN , McFarland HF , Rudge P , Reingold SC . (1995) Outcomes assessment in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: a critical analysis. Multiple Sclerosis, 1: 37–47.

44.

44 Willoughby EW , Paty DW . (1988) Scales for rating impairment in multiple sclerosis: a critique. Neurology 38: 1793–1798.

45.

45 Winer BJ . (1971) Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.

46.

46 Zimmerman DW , Zumbo BD . (1993) The relative power of parametric and nonparametric statistical methods. In: Keren G , Lewis C , ed. A Handbook for Data Analysis in the Behavioral Sciences: Methodological Issues. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates pp 481–517.