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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hardmeier, Martin, Jacques, François, Albrecht, Philipp, Bousleiman, Habib, Schindler, Christian, Leocani, Letizia, Fuhr, Peter
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