Correspondence: When an article is eligible for submission of
Correspondence, a link to the response form is available within the full-text
article. You must be a
current subscriber who has activated the online portion of your subscription
in order to send a Correspondence. Any reader can read published
Correspondence.
Correspondence to:
ARTICLES:
A. Chiò, G. Mora, M. Leone, L. Mazzini, D. Cocito, M. T. Giordana, E. Bottacchi, and R. Mutani
Early symptom progression rate is related to ALS outcome: A prospective population-based study
Neurology 2002; 59: 99-103
[Abstract][Full text][PDF]
We thank Drs. Turner and Al-Chalaby for their interest in our study.
[1] The question raised, concerning the importance of prognostic studies
in planning clinical trials in ALS, is of great importance. The simply
matching for age and site of onset does not prevent from an unbalance of
prognostic factors in the random allocations of patients, as observed in
several ALS trials, [2, 3] although the use of multivariate analysis can
partly overcome this problem.
Studies suggested that referral delay could be a surrogate marker of
survival in ALS. [4] However, in our study referral delay did not result
an independent prognostic factors and was not retained in the final Cox's
model. We think that a further obstacle in considering referral delay for
stratification in clinical trials is the difficulty to ascertain it with a
reasonable confidence, since it is obtained retrospectively questioning
the patient and other relevant informants. We agree with Turner and Al-
Chalaby about the necessity of further assessments of rate of changes in
ALS. However, some studies suggested that the motor function in ALS
declines linearly, with a rate specific for each patient and unmodified
during the course of the disease. [5] Once well established, the
individual rate of progression could be considered both for determining of
the outcome of the single patient and for designing future clinical
trials.
References
1. Chiņ A, Mora G, Leone M, Mazzini L, Cocito D, Giordana MT,
Bottacchi E, Mutani R, for the Piemonte and Valle D'Aosta Register for ALS
(PARALS). Early symptom progression rate is related to ALS outcome. A
prospective population-based study. Neurology 2002;59:99-103.
2. Borasio GD, Robberecht W, Leigh PN, Emile J, Guiloff RJ, Jerusalem
F, et al. A placebo-controlled trial of insulin-like growth factor-I in
amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. European ALS/IGF-I Study Group. Neurology
1998;51:583-586.
3. Italian ALS Study Group. Branched-chain amino acids and
amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a treatment failure? Neurology 1993;43:2466
-2470.
4. Iwasaki Y, Ikeda K, Ichikawa Y, Igarashi O, Kinoshita M. The
diagnostic interval amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg
2002;104:87-89.
5. Munsat TL, Andres PL, Finison L, et al. The natural history of
motor neuron loss in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurology 1988;38:409-
413.
Early symptom progression rate is related to ALS outcome: A prospective population-based study
11 September 2002
Martin Turner King's MND Care & Research Clinic London UK, Ammar Al-Chalabi
We read with interest the findings of Chiņ et al. in their
prospective database of 221 ALS patients. [1] Though a previous study did
not find the El Escorial classification at presentation to be of
prognostic value [2], we agree with Chiņ et al. and found this measure to
have clear prognostic significance in our published series of 841 ALS
patients seen over a ten-year period. [3] Furthermore, their assessment of
riluzole therapy on survival also concurs with our study.
The authors note in passing the time delay between symptom onset and
diagnosis, quoting a mean value of 11.1 months. Referral delay is a well-
recognized, highly significant and potentially confounding surrogate
marker of survival in itself. [4] More severely affected patients may
present earlier and be more easily diagnosed with ALS. The specific
inclusion of this measure should therefore be considered in any subsequent
multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model, despite
the inclusion of a rate for symptom progression.
This research, as in another recent database study [5], also raises
the importance of accurately matching patients when using survival as a
primary endpoint in clinical trials. A more rigorous approach to this than
simply matching age and site of onset, is the calculation of a prognostic
score for an individual based on relative risk and mean values for each
covariate within the Cox proportional hazards model. [3} Additional
covariates such as referral delay and El Escorial category, have the
advantage of allowing stratification of patients at their first clinic
visit (or enrollment in the context of a clinical trial), whereas measures
reliant on rate of change require one further assessment at the very
least.
References:
1. Chio A, Mora G, Leone M, et al. Early symptom progression rate is
related to ALS outcome: a prospective population-based study. Neurology
2002;59:99-103.
2. Traynor BJ, Codd MB, Corr B, Forde C, Frost E, Hardiman OM.
Clinical features of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis according to the El
Escorial and Airlie House diagnostic criteria: A population-based study.
Arch Neurol 2000;57:1171-1176.
3. Turner MR, Bakker M, Sham P, Shaw CE, Leigh PN, Al-Chalabi A.
Prognostic modeling of therapeutic interventions in amyotrophic lateral
sclerosis. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Other Motor Neuron Disord 2002;3:15-21.
4. Iwasaki Y, Ikeda K, Ichikawa Y, Igarashi O, Kinoshita M. The
diagnostic interval in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin Neurol
Neurosurg 2002;104:87-89.
5. Magnus T, Beck M, Giess R, Puls I, Naumann M, Toyka KV. Disease
progression in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: predictors of survival.
Muscle Nerve 2002;25:709-714.