Cargando…

Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: So far, clinical studies in primary progressive MS (PPMS) have failed to meet their primary efficacy endpoints. To some extent this might be attributable to the choice of assessments or to the selection of the study population. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify outcome inf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ziemssen, T., Rauer, S., Stadelmann, C., Henze, T., Koehler, J., Penner, I.-K., Lang, M., Poehlau, D., Baier-Ebert, M., Schieb, H., Meuth, S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4578855/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26393519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138243
_version_ 1782391177830465536
author Ziemssen, T.
Rauer, S.
Stadelmann, C.
Henze, T.
Koehler, J.
Penner, I.-K.
Lang, M.
Poehlau, D.
Baier-Ebert, M.
Schieb, H.
Meuth, S.
author_facet Ziemssen, T.
Rauer, S.
Stadelmann, C.
Henze, T.
Koehler, J.
Penner, I.-K.
Lang, M.
Poehlau, D.
Baier-Ebert, M.
Schieb, H.
Meuth, S.
author_sort Ziemssen, T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: So far, clinical studies in primary progressive MS (PPMS) have failed to meet their primary efficacy endpoints. To some extent this might be attributable to the choice of assessments or to the selection of the study population. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify outcome influencing factors by analyzing the design and methods of previous randomized studies in PPMS patients without restriction to intervention or comparator. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS and the COCHRANE Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to February 2015). Keywords included PPMS, primary progressive multiple sclerosis and chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Randomized, controlled trials of at least one year’s duration were selected if they included only patients with PPMS or if they reported sufficient PPMS subgroup data. No restrictions with respect to intervention or comparator were applied. Study quality was assessed by a biometrics expert. Relevant baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted and compared. RESULTS: Of 52 PPMS studies identified, four were selected. Inclusion criteria were notably different among studies with respect to both the definition of PPMS and the requirements for the presence of disability progression at enrolment. Differences between the study populations included the baseline lesion load, pretreatment status and disease duration. The rate of disease progression may also be an important factor, as all but one of the studies included a large proportion of patients with a low progression rate. In addition, the endpoints specified could not detect progression adequately. CONCLUSION: Optimal PPMS study methods involve appropriate patient selection, especially regarding the PPMS phenotype and progression rate. Functional composite endpoints might be more sensitive than single endpoints in capturing progression.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4578855
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45788552015-10-01 Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review Ziemssen, T. Rauer, S. Stadelmann, C. Henze, T. Koehler, J. Penner, I.-K. Lang, M. Poehlau, D. Baier-Ebert, M. Schieb, H. Meuth, S. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: So far, clinical studies in primary progressive MS (PPMS) have failed to meet their primary efficacy endpoints. To some extent this might be attributable to the choice of assessments or to the selection of the study population. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify outcome influencing factors by analyzing the design and methods of previous randomized studies in PPMS patients without restriction to intervention or comparator. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS and the COCHRANE Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to February 2015). Keywords included PPMS, primary progressive multiple sclerosis and chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Randomized, controlled trials of at least one year’s duration were selected if they included only patients with PPMS or if they reported sufficient PPMS subgroup data. No restrictions with respect to intervention or comparator were applied. Study quality was assessed by a biometrics expert. Relevant baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted and compared. RESULTS: Of 52 PPMS studies identified, four were selected. Inclusion criteria were notably different among studies with respect to both the definition of PPMS and the requirements for the presence of disability progression at enrolment. Differences between the study populations included the baseline lesion load, pretreatment status and disease duration. The rate of disease progression may also be an important factor, as all but one of the studies included a large proportion of patients with a low progression rate. In addition, the endpoints specified could not detect progression adequately. CONCLUSION: Optimal PPMS study methods involve appropriate patient selection, especially regarding the PPMS phenotype and progression rate. Functional composite endpoints might be more sensitive than single endpoints in capturing progression. Public Library of Science 2015-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4578855/ /pubmed/26393519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138243 Text en © 2015 Ziemssen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ziemssen, T.
Rauer, S.
Stadelmann, C.
Henze, T.
Koehler, J.
Penner, I.-K.
Lang, M.
Poehlau, D.
Baier-Ebert, M.
Schieb, H.
Meuth, S.
Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
title Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
title_full Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
title_short Evaluation of Study and Patient Characteristics of Clinical Studies in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
title_sort evaluation of study and patient characteristics of clinical studies in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4578855/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26393519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138243
work_keys_str_mv AT ziemssent evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT rauers evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT stadelmannc evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT henzet evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT koehlerj evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT pennerik evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT langm evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT poehlaud evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT baierebertm evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT schiebh evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview
AT meuths evaluationofstudyandpatientcharacteristicsofclinicalstudiesinprimaryprogressivemultiplesclerosisasystematicreview