Commonalities and Challenges in the Development of Clinical Trial Measures in Neurology

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Jesse M. Cedarbaum (1)
  Diane Stephenson (2)
  Richard Rudick (3)
  Maria C. Carrillo (4)
  Glenn Stebbins (5)
  Douglas Kerr (6)
  Jill Heemskerk (7)
  Wendy R. Galpern (8)
  Petra Kaufmann (9)
  David Cella (10)
  Maria Isaac (11)
  Marc K. Walton (12)
  
  1. Neurology Early Clinical Development ; Biogen Idec ; 14 Cambridge Center ; Cambridge ; MA ; 02142 ; USA
  2. Coalition Against Major Diseases ; Critical Path Institute ; Tucson ; AZ ; USA
  3. Value Based Medicine ; Biogen Idec ; Cambridge ; MA ; USA
  4. Medical & Scientific Relations ; Alzheimer鈥檚 Association ; Chicago ; IL ; USA
  5. Department of Neurological Sciences ; Rush University Medical Center ; Chicago ; IL ; USA
  6. Clinical and Safety Sciences ; Biogen Idec ; Cambridge ; MA ; USA
  7. Division of Adult Translational Research ; National Institute of Mental Health ; National Institutes of Health ; Bethesda ; MD ; USA
  8. Office of Clinical Research ; National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke ; Bethesda ; MD ; USA
  9. Division of Clinical Innovation ; National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences ; National Institutes of Health ; Bethesda ; MD ; USA
  10. Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine ; Chicago ; IL ; USA
  11. European Medicines Agency ; London ; UK
  12. Office of Translational Sciences Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Food and Drug Administration ; Silver Spring ; MD ; USA
  
• 关键词：Clinical trials ; Clinical outcome assessments
• 刊名：Neurotherapeutics
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：January 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：12
• 期：1
• 页码：151-169
• 全文大小：1,608 KB
• 参考文献：1. Cuthbert BN. The RDoC framework: facilitating transition from ICD/DSM to dimensional approaches that integrate neuroscience and psychopathology. World Psychiatry 2014;13:28-35 CrossRef
  2. Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 2009
  3. Concept paper on need for revision of the guideline on medicinal products for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias EMA/CHMP/617734/2013.
  4. Isaac M, Vamvakas S, Abadie E, Jonsson B, Gispen C, Pani L. Qualification opinion of novel methodologies in the predementia stage of Alzheimer's disease: cerebro-spinal-fluid relat-ed biomarkers for drugs affecting amyloid burden鈥攔egulatory considerations by European Medicines Agency focusing in improving benefit/risk in regulatory trials. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;21:781-788. 3" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  5. Stephenson DT, Avilas A, Bain LJ, et al. Coalition Against Major Diseases: Precompetitive collaborations and regulatory paths to accelerating drug development for neurodegenerative diseases. Ther Innov Regulat Sci 2013;47:632-638.
  6. Raghavan N, Samtani MN, Farnum M, et al.; Alzheimer鈥檚 Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. The ADAS-Cog revisited: Novel composite scales based on ADAS-Cog to improve efficiency in MCI and early AD trials. Alzheimers Dement 2013;9(1 Suppl.):S21-S31. CrossRef
  7. Ropacki M, Hannesdottir K, Hendrix S, et al., on behalf of the Critical Path Institute鈥檚 Coalition Against Major Diseases and the Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium. Consortia driven approach to addressing clinical meaningfulness in early AD. AAIC, Copenhagen, July 2014.
  8. McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer鈥檚 disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer鈥檚 Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer鈥檚 disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011;7:263-269 3.005" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  9. Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer鈥檚 Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer鈥檚 disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011;7:270-279 3.008" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  10. Sperling RA, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, et al. Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer鈥檚 Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011;7:280-292. 3.003" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  11. The Movement Disorder Society Task Force on Ratings Scales for Parkinson鈥檚 Disease. The Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS): status and recommendations. Mov Disord 2003;18:738-750. 3" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  12. Fahn S, Elton RL, UPDRS program members. Unified Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale. In: Fahn S, Marsden CD, Goldstein M, Calne DB (eds) Recent developments in Parkinsons disease, vol 2. Macmillan Healthcare Information, Florham Park, NJ, 1987, pp. 153-163.
  13. Tilley BT, La Pelle NR, Goetz CG, Stebbins GT. Using cognitive pretesting in scale development for Parkinson's disease: the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) example. J Parkinsons Dis 2014;1:395-404.
  14. Goetz CG, Tilley BC, Shaftman SR, et al., Movement Disorder Society UPDRS Revision Task Force. Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS): scale presentation and clinimetric testing results. Mov Disord 2008;23:2129-2170. 340" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  15. Goetz CG, Stebbins GT, Chmura TA, Fahn S, Poewe W, Tanner CM. Teaching program for the Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale: (MDS-UPDRS). Mov Disord 2010;25:1190-1194. 3096" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  16. Martinez-Martin P, Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Alvarez-Sanchez M, et al. Expanded and independent validation of the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). J Neurol 2013;260:228-236. CrossRef
  17. Gallagher DA, Goetz CG, Stebbins GT, Lees AJ, Schrag A. Validation of the MDS-UPDRS Part I for nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson鈥檚 disease. Mov Disord 2012;27:79-83. 3939" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  18. Martinez-Martin P, Chaudhuri KR, Roho-Abuin JM, et al. Assessing the non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease: MDS-UPDRS and MNS Scale. Eur J Neurol 2013 Apr 22 [Epub ahead of print].
  19. Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Rojo-Abuin JM, Alvarez-Sanchez M, et al. The MDS-UPDRS Part II (Motor Experiences of Daily Living) resulted useful for assessment of disability in Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2013;19:889-893. 3.05.017" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  20. Stebbins GT, Goetz CG, Burn DJ, Jankovic J, Khoo TK, Tilley BC. How to identify Tremor Dominant and Postural Instability Gait Difficulty groups with the MDS-UPDRS: comparison with the UPDRS. Mov Disord 2013;28:668-670. 383" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  21. Goetz CG, Stebbins GT, Tilley BC. Calibration of Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale scores to Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson鈥檚 Disease Rating Scale scores. Mov Disord 2012;27:1239-1242. CrossRef
  22. Cedarbaum JM, Stambler N, Malta E, Fuller C, Hilt D, Thurmond B, Nakanishi A, BDNF ALS Study Group (Phase III). The ALSFRS-R: a revised ALS functional rating scale that incorporates assessments of respiratory function. J Neurol Sci 1999;169:13-21. CrossRef
  23. Franchignoni, Mora, Giordano et al. Evidence of multidimensionality in the ALSFRS-R Scale: a critical appraisal on its measurement properties using Rasch analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2013;84:1340-1345. 36/jnnp-2012-304701" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  24. Berry JD, Miller R, Moore DH, et al. The Combined Assessment of Function and Survival (CAFS): a new endpoint for ALS clinical trials. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener 2013:162-168
  25. Cudkowicz ME, van den Berg LH, Shefner JM, et al; EMPOWER investigators. Dexpramipexole versus placebo for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (EMPOWER): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol 2013:1059-1067.
  26. Cudkowicz M, Bozik ME, Ingersoll EW, et al. The effects of dexpramipexole (KNS-760704) in individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Nat Med 2011;17:1652-1656. 38/nm.2579" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  
• 刊物主题：Neurosciences; Neurology; Neurosurgery; Neurobiology;
• 出版者：Springer US
• ISSN：1878-7479

文摘

As neurologists and neuroscientists, we are trained to evaluate disorders of the nervous system by thinking systematically. Clinically, we think in terms of cognition, behavior, motor function, sensation, balance and co-ordination, and autonomic system function. But when we assess symptoms of neurological disorders for the purpose of drug development, we tend to create disease-specific outcome measures, often using a variety of methods to assess the same types of dysfunction in overlapping, related disorders. To begin to explore the potential to simplify and harmonize the assessment of dysfunction across neurological disorders, a symposium, entitled, "Commonalities in the Development of Outcome Measures in Neurology" was held at the 16th annual meeting of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics (ASENT), in February 2014. This paper summarizes the presentations at the symposium. The authors hope that readers will begin to view Clinical Outcome Assessment (COA) development in a new light. We hope that in presenting this material, we will stimulate discussions and collaborations across disease areas to develop common concepts of neurological COA development and construction.