4.5 Article

Clinical trials in multiple sclerosis: methodological issues

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROLOGY
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 245-252

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.wco.0000169740.91416.a2

关键词

clinical measures; clinical trials; disability; magnetic resonance imaging; multiple sclerosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review The availability of partially effective immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) opens important ethical, methodological and practical issues in the design and conduct of new clinical trials in these patients. Recent findings The recommendation of the National Health Authorities to prioritize phase III clinical trials using placebo arm raises ethical questions. In addition, patients are reluctant to be involved in such trials. Alternative clinical trial designs will be discussed. Relapses and active lesions are accepted measures of disease activity; new/enlarging T2 lesions and/ or enhancing lesions are accepted surrogate markers of disease activity in phase II clinical trials. On the contrary, there are no accepted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surrogate markers of disease progression and also the clinical measures to monitor the degenerative aspects of the disease are not without important limitations. New scales of impairment, disability and quality of life will be reviewed extensively. We will also focus on the value of modern and quantitative MRI techniques, which hold substantial promise as tools to estimate the extent of MS-related irreversible tissue loss. Summary The use of an active comparator in a superior clinical-trial design is becoming an attractive option for testing the efficacy of new drugs in relapsing MS. At present there are no fully reliable and sensitive clinical markers of the accumulation of irreversible tissue damage in MS. Although additional extensive application in longitudinal studies is needed, modern MRI techniques are promising tools to monitor the neurodegenerative aspects of MS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据