4.7 Review

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

Journal

LANCET NEUROLOGY
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages 467-476

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70059-5

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Biogen Idec
  2. Elan
  3. Eli Lilly
  4. Novartis
  5. Teva
  6. Vaccinex
  7. US Department of Defense
  8. National Institutes of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
  9. Barofold
  10. Bayer Healthcare
  11. BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc
  12. Cleveland Clinic Foundation
  13. Coronado Biosciences Inc
  14. Eli Lilly Company
  15. Merck Serono
  16. European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis
  17. Genentech
  18. F Hoffmann-La Roche
  19. INC Research
  20. Ironwood Pharmaceutical Company
  21. Isis Pharmaceuticals Inc
  22. MediciNova Inc
  23. National Multiple Sclerosis Society
  24. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
  25. Sanofi-Aventis
  26. SK Biopharmaceuticals
  27. Synthon Pharmaceuticals Inc.
  28. Actelion
  29. Bayer Schering
  30. GlaxoSmithKline
  31. UCB
  32. Roche
  33. US National MS Society
  34. European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS)
  35. Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis
  36. Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
  37. Multiple Sclerosis International Federation
  38. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals
  39. Genzyme Corporatioon
  40. Novartis Corporation
  41. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many of the available disability outcome measures used in clinical trials of multiple sclerosis are insensitive to change over time, inadequately validated, or insensitive to patient-perceived health status or quality of life. Increasing focus on therapies that slow or reverse disability progression makes it essential to refine existing measures or to develop new tools. Major changes to the expanded disability status scale should be avoided to prevent the loss of acceptance by regulators as a measure for primary outcomes in trials that provide substantial evidence of effectiveness. Rather, we recommend practical refinements. Conversely, although substantial data support the multiple sclerosis functional composite as an alternative measure, changes to its component tests and scoring method are needed. Novel approaches, including the use of composite endpoints, patient-reported outcomes, and measurement of biomarkers, show promise as adjuncts to the current disability measures, but are insufficiently validated to serve as substitutes. A collaborative approach that involves academic experts, regulators, industry representitives, and funding agencies is needed to most effectively develop disability outcome measures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available