Cargando…
Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials
BACKGROUND: Motor and sensory evoked potentials (EP) are potential candidate biomarkers for clinical trials in multiple sclerosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine test -retest reliability of motor EP (MEP) and sensory EP (SEP) and associated EP-scores in patients with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: In three c...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6495443/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31069107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2055217319844796 |
_version_ | 1783415355551514624 |
---|---|
author | Hardmeier, Martin Jacques, François Albrecht, Philipp Bousleiman, Habib Schindler, Christian Leocani, Letizia Fuhr, Peter |
author_facet | Hardmeier, Martin Jacques, François Albrecht, Philipp Bousleiman, Habib Schindler, Christian Leocani, Letizia Fuhr, Peter |
author_sort | Hardmeier, Martin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Motor and sensory evoked potentials (EP) are potential candidate biomarkers for clinical trials in multiple sclerosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine test -retest reliability of motor EP (MEP) and sensory EP (SEP) and associated EP-scores in patients with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: In three centres, 16 relapsing and five progressive multiple sclerosis patients had MEPs and SEPs 1–29 days apart. Five neurophysiologists independently marked latencies by central reading. By variance component analysis, we estimated the critical difference (absolute reliability) for cross-sectional group comparison, comparison of longitudinal group changes, within-subject minimal detectable change and defined within-subject improvement. RESULTS: Cortical SEP responses and cortico-muscular MEP latencies were more reliable than central conduction times. For comparison of 20 subjects per arm, cross-sectional group difference ranged from 0.7 to 3.9 ms and 1.1 to 1.7, group difference in longitudinal changes from 0.4 to 1.8 ms and 0.36 to 0.62, within-subject minimal detectable change from 1.2 to 5.8 ms and 1.2 to 2.0, within-subject improvement from 0.8 to 3.8ms and 0.8 to 1.3, for single EP modalities and EP scores, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Multicentre EP assessment with central EP reading is feasible and reliable. The critical difference is reasonably low to detect significant group changes and to define responders. The results support the concept of using EP and EP-scores as candidate response biomarkers for quantification of disease progression and for studying remyelination in multiple sclerosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6495443 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64954432019-05-08 Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials Hardmeier, Martin Jacques, François Albrecht, Philipp Bousleiman, Habib Schindler, Christian Leocani, Letizia Fuhr, Peter Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin Original Research Paper BACKGROUND: Motor and sensory evoked potentials (EP) are potential candidate biomarkers for clinical trials in multiple sclerosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine test -retest reliability of motor EP (MEP) and sensory EP (SEP) and associated EP-scores in patients with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: In three centres, 16 relapsing and five progressive multiple sclerosis patients had MEPs and SEPs 1–29 days apart. Five neurophysiologists independently marked latencies by central reading. By variance component analysis, we estimated the critical difference (absolute reliability) for cross-sectional group comparison, comparison of longitudinal group changes, within-subject minimal detectable change and defined within-subject improvement. RESULTS: Cortical SEP responses and cortico-muscular MEP latencies were more reliable than central conduction times. For comparison of 20 subjects per arm, cross-sectional group difference ranged from 0.7 to 3.9 ms and 1.1 to 1.7, group difference in longitudinal changes from 0.4 to 1.8 ms and 0.36 to 0.62, within-subject minimal detectable change from 1.2 to 5.8 ms and 1.2 to 2.0, within-subject improvement from 0.8 to 3.8ms and 0.8 to 1.3, for single EP modalities and EP scores, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Multicentre EP assessment with central EP reading is feasible and reliable. The critical difference is reasonably low to detect significant group changes and to define responders. The results support the concept of using EP and EP-scores as candidate response biomarkers for quantification of disease progression and for studying remyelination in multiple sclerosis. SAGE Publications 2019-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6495443/ /pubmed/31069107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2055217319844796 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Paper Hardmeier, Martin Jacques, François Albrecht, Philipp Bousleiman, Habib Schindler, Christian Leocani, Letizia Fuhr, Peter Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
title | Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
title_full | Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
title_fullStr | Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
title_short | Multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
title_sort | multicentre assessment of motor and sensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: reliability and implications for clinical trials |
topic | Original Research Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6495443/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31069107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2055217319844796 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hardmeiermartin multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials AT jacquesfrancois multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials AT albrechtphilipp multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials AT bousleimanhabib multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials AT schindlerchristian multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials AT leocaniletizia multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials AT fuhrpeter multicentreassessmentofmotorandsensoryevokedpotentialsinmultiplesclerosisreliabilityandimplicationsforclinicaltrials |