Dataset Information

Disease severity and minimal clinically important differences in clinical outcome assessments for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This study estimated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for Mini Mental State Examination, Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes, and Functional Activities Questionnaire across the Alzheimer's disease (AD) spectrum.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (9/2005-9/2016) and MCID for clinical outcomes were estimated using anchor-based (clinician's assessment of meaningful decline) and distribution-based (1/2 baseline standard deviation) approaches, stratified by severity of cognitive impairment.

Results

On average, a 1-3 point decrease in Mini Mental State Examination, 1-2 point increase in Clinical Dementia Scale sum of boxes, and 3-5 point increase in Functional Activities Questionnaire were indicative of a meaningful decline. The MCID values generally increased by disease severity; the effect size and standardized response mean for those with meaningful decline were consistently in the acceptable ranges for MCID.

Discussion

These findings can inform design and interpretation of future clinical trials.

SUBMITTER: Andrews JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6690415 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Disease severity and minimal clinically important differences in clinical outcome assessments for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.

Andrews J Scott JS Desai Urvi U Kirson Noam Y NY Zichlin Miriam L ML Ball Daniel E DE Matthews Brandy R BR

Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 20190802

<h4>Introduction</h4>This study estimated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for Mini Mental State Examination, Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes, and Functional Activities Questionnaire across the Alzheimer's disease (AD) spectrum.<h4>Methods</h4>Retrospective analysis of the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (9/2005-9/2016) and MCID for clinical outcomes were estimated using anchor-based (clinician's assessment of meaningful decline) and distri ...[more]

PMID: 31417957

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) allow clinicians and researchers to assess health-related information from a patient's perspective. These measures have been used more frequently over the last several decades, but an associated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is needed to optimize their utility. This narrative review identified the top 100 most-cited otolaryngology-related PROM development and validation publications and assessed the presence and characteristics of the PROMs' associated MCID.ObservationsIn this narrative review, a literature search in Scopus and Web of Science was conducted on June 29, 2022, using keywords related to PROM development and validation studies in otolaryngology and reference lists. Studies that met the definition of a PROM and assessed an otolaryngologic disorder or study population were included for full-text review. After full-text review of 188 articles, the top 100 most-cited PROM development and validation publications, resulting in 106 total PROMs, were chosen for review. A total of 39 (37%) of the identified PROMs had an associated MCID. Of those reporting an MCID, 14 (35.9%) used an anchor-based method, 12 (30.8%) used a distribution-based method, 10 (25.6%) used both, and 3 (7.7%) did not specify or used neither method. Rhinology had the greatest number of PROMs with an associated MCID (16 of 24, 66%), and pediatrics had the fewest (1 of 13, 7.7%). The median number of citations of PROMs with an MCID was higher than those without an MCID.Conclusions and relevanceThe majority of the most-cited PROMs in otolaryngology lack an associated MCID. These data indicated that there are a multitude of PROMs that have been cited hundreds of times and used for decades without the ability to identify whether a particular change in score on the instrument is clinically meaningful. There is a need to determine and validate MCIDs for commonly used PROMs to aid clinical research and trial interpretation.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding minimum clinically important differences (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes is essential in interpreting the magnitude of changes in these measures. No MCID from patients' perspectives has ever been published for peripheral artery disease-specific health status assessment tools. The Peripheral Artery Questionnaire (PAQ) is a commonly used, validated peripheral artery disease-specific health status instrument for which we sought to prospectively establish its MCID from patients' perspectives.Methods and resultsPatients presenting to vascular clinics with new or worsened claudication in the US cohort of the PORTRAIT (Patient-Centered Outcomes Related to Treatment Practices in Peripheral Arterial Disease: Investigating Trajectories) registry who completed baseline and follow-up PAQ assessments along with the Global Assessment of Functioning scale were included. Mean change in PAQ summary scores from 3- to 6-month follow-up was calculated according to Global Assessment of Functioning category. MCID was defined as the mean difference in scores between those with small improvement or deterioration and those with no change. Multivariable linear regression was used to provide an MCID estimate after adjusting for patients' 3-month PAQ score. Of the 483 patients who completed the Global Assessment of Functioning score at 6 months and who had available 3- and 6-month PAQ assessments, the mean age was 69 years, 42% were female, and 71% were White. The MCIDs for PAQ summary scale improvement and worsening were 8.7 (2.9-14.5) and -11.0 (-18.6 to -3.3), respectively. After multivariable adjustment, these were 8.9 (3.0-14.8) and -11.2 (-18.2 to -4.2), respectively. There was no significant interaction between treatment (invasive versus noninvasive) and Global Assessment of Functioning response (P=0.75).ConclusionsIn patients with new or worsened claudication, a 10-point change in PAQ summary score represents an MCID. This estimate needs external validation and may inform the interpretation of PAQ scores when used as outcomes in clinical trials or in routine clinical care. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01419080.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to identify fit-for-purpose clinical outcome assessments (COAs) to evaluate physical function, as well as social and emotional well-being in clinical trials enrolling a pediatric population with achondroplasia. Qualitative interviews lasting up to 90 min were conducted in the US with children/adolescents with achondroplasia and/or their caregivers. Interviews utilized concept elicitation methodology to explore experiences and priorities for treatment outcomes. Cognitive debriefing methodology explored relevance and understanding of selected COAs.ResultsInterviews (N = 36) were conducted with caregivers of children age 0-2 years (n = 8) and 3-7 years (n = 7) and child/caregiver dyads with children age 8-11 years (n = 15) and 12-17 years (n = 6). Children/caregivers identified pain, short stature, impacts on physical functioning, and impacts on well-being (e.g. negative attention/comments) as key bothersome aspects of achondroplasia. Caregivers considered an increase in height (n = 9/14, 64%) and an improvement in limb proportion (n = 11/14, 71%) as successful treatment outcomes. The Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ) and Quality of Life in Short Stature Youth (QoLISSY-Brief) were cognitively debriefed. CHAQ items evaluating activities, reaching, and hygiene were most relevant. QoLISSY-Brief items evaluating reaching, height bother, being treated differently, and height preventing doing things others could were most relevant. The CHAQ and QoLISSY-Brief instructions, item wording, response scales/options and recall period were well understood by caregivers and adolescents age 12-17. Some children aged 8-11 had difficulty reading, understanding, or required caregiver input. Feedback informed minor amendments to the CHAQ and the addition of a 7-day recall period to the QoLISSY-Brief. These amendments were subsequently reviewed and confirmed in N = 12 interviews with caregivers of children age 0-11 (n = 9) and adolescents age 12-17 (n = 3).ConclusionsAchondroplasia impacts physical functioning and emotional/social well-being. An increase in height and improvement in limb proportion are considered to be important treatment outcomes, but children/adolescents and their caregivers expect that a successful treatment should also improve important functional outcomes such as reach. The CHAQ (adapted for achondroplasia) and QoLISSY-Brief are relevant and appropriate measures of physical function and emotional/social well-being for pediatric achondroplasia trials; patient-report is recommended for age 12-17 years and caregiver-report is recommended for age 0-11 years.

Dataset Information

Disease severity and minimal clinically important differences in clinical outcome assessments for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Disease severity and minimal clinically important differences in clinical outcome assessments for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets