Dataset Information

One nerve suffices: A clinically guided nerve ultrasound protocol for the differentiation of multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate diagnostic accuracy of a nerve ultrasound (US) protocol that is individualized to a patient's clinical deficits for the differentiation of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with predominant lower motoneuron disease (ALS/LMND) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN).

Methods

Single-center, prospective, examiner-blinded, diagnostic study in two cohorts. Cohort I (model development): Convenience sample of subjects with ALS/LMND or MMN according to revised El-Escorial or EFNS guidelines. Cohort II (model validation): Consecutively recruited treatment-naïve subjects with suspected diagnosis of ALS/LMND or MMN. Cutoffs for 28 different US values were determined by Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) in cohort I. Area Under The Curve (AUC) of US was compared to nerve conduction studies (NCS). Diagnostic accuracy of US protocols, individualized according to clinical deficits, was compared to former rigid non-individualized protocols and to random examination site selection in cohort II.

Results

48 patients were recruited. In cohort I (28 patients), US had higher ROC AUCs than NCS, US 0.82 (0.12) (mean (standard deviation)), NCS (compound muscle action potential (CMAP) 0.60 (0.09), p < .001; two-sided t-test). US models based on the nerve innervating the clinically most affected muscles had higher correct classification rates (CCRs, 93%) in cohort II than former rigid protocols (85% and 80%), or models with random measurement site selection (66% and 80%).

Conclusions

Clinically guided US protocols for differentiation of ALS/LMND from MMN increase diagnostic accuracy when compared to clinically unguided protocols. They also require less measurements sites to achieve this accuracy.

SUBMITTER: Loewenbruck KF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7990818 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Thoughtful clinical trial design is critical for efficient therapeutic development, particularly in the field of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), where trials often aim to detect modest treatment effects among a population with heterogeneous disease progression. Appropriate outcome measure selection is necessary for trials to provide decisive and informative results. Investigators must consider the outcome measure's reliability, responsiveness to detect change when change has actually occurred, clinical relevance, and psychometric performance. ALS clinical trials can also be performed more efficiently by utilizing statistical enrichment techniques. Innovations in ALS prediction models allow for selection of participants with less heterogeneity in disease progression rates without requiring a lead-in period, or participants can be stratified according to predicted progression. Statistical enrichment can reduce the needed sample size and improve study power, but investigators must find a balance between optimizing statistical efficiency and retaining generalizability of study findings to the broader ALS population. Additional progress is still needed for biomarker development and validation to confirm target engagement in ALS treatment trials. Selection of an appropriate biofluid biomarker depends on the treatment mechanism of interest, and biomarker studies should be incorporated into early phase trials. Inclusion of patients with ALS as advisors and advocates can strengthen clinical trial design and study retention, but more engagement efforts are needed to improve diversity and equity in ALS research studies. Another challenge for ALS therapeutic development is identifying ways to respect patient autonomy and improve access to experimental treatment, something that is strongly desired by many patients with ALS and ALS advocacy organizations. Expanded access programs that run concurrently to well-designed and adequately powered randomized controlled trials may provide an opportunity to broaden access to promising therapeutics without compromising scientific integrity or rushing regulatory approval of therapies without adequate proof of efficacy.