4.7 Article

Surrogate endpoints for EDSS worsening in multiple sclerosis A meta-analytic approach

Journal

NEUROLOGY
Volume 75, Issue 4, Pages 302-309

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181ea15aa

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Merck Serono
  2. Biogen Idec
  3. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
  4. Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
  5. Merck-Serono
  6. Eidetica

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate whether the effects on potential surrogate endpoints, such as MRI markers and relapses, observed in trials of experimental treatments are able to predict the effects of these treatments on disability progression as defined in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) trials. Methods: We used a pooled analysis of all the published randomized controlled clinical trials in RRMS reporting data on Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) worsening and relapses or MRI lesions or both. We extracted data on relapses, MRI lesions, and the proportion of progressing patients. A regression analysis weighted on trial size and duration was performed to study the relationship between the treatment effect observed in each trial on relapses and MRI lesions and the observed treatment effect on EDSS worsening. Results: A set of 19 randomized double-blind controlled trials in RRMS were identified, for a total of 44 arms, 25 contrasts, and 10,009 patients. A significant correlation was found between the effect of treatments on relapses and the effect of treatments on EDSS worsening: the adjusted R(2) value of the weighted regression was 0.71. The correlation between the treatment effect on MRI lesions and EDSS worsening was slightly weaker (R(2) = 0.57) but significant. Conclusions: These findings support the use of commonly used surrogate markers of EDSS worsening as endpoints in multiple sclerosis clinical trials. Further research is warranted to validate surrogate endpoints at the individual level rather than at the trial level, to draw important conclusions in the management of the individual patient. Neurology (R) 2010;75:302-309

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