Voustianiouk Andrei, Seidel Gregory, Panchal Janki, Sivak Mark, Czaplinski Adam, Yen Albert, Appel Stanley H, Lange Dale J
Department of Neurology and the MDA/ALS Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1052, New York, New York 10029, USA.
Muscle Nerve. 2008 May;37(5):668-72. doi: 10.1002/mus.20977.
Progression of disease and effectiveness of therapy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) are determined by both questionnaire- and examination-based measures. To determine whether both types of measurement tools are equally predictive at all stages of disease, we compared questionnaire-based ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS) scores to the examination-based Appel ALS (AALS) scores at different stages of disease. Same-day scores were obtained during 174 visits in 62 patients with definite or probable ALS. Using normalized scores, correlation between the scales and predictability were best in mildly affected patients. Predictions of ALSFRS based on AALS scores were less than half as precise in the later stages of disease. Both scales showed significant change with disease progression, but ALSFRS consistently underestimated disease severity defined by AALS (P < 0.001). Questionnaire-based measurements should be compared against objective scales at all stages of disease severity before they are accepted as primary endpoint measures.
肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)患者的疾病进展和治疗效果由基于问卷和检查的测量方法共同决定。为了确定这两种测量工具在疾病的所有阶段是否具有同等的预测性,我们比较了疾病不同阶段基于问卷的ALS功能评定量表(ALSFRS)评分与基于检查的阿佩尔ALS(AALS)评分。在62例确诊或疑似ALS患者的174次就诊中获取了同日评分。使用标准化评分,量表之间的相关性和可预测性在轻度受累患者中最佳。在疾病后期,基于AALS评分对ALSFRS的预测精确性不到一半。两种量表均随疾病进展显示出显著变化,但ALSFRS始终低估了由AALS定义的疾病严重程度(P < 0.001)。在基于问卷的测量方法被接受为主要终点测量方法之前,应在疾病严重程度的所有阶段将其与客观量表进行比较。