Inflammatory Neuropathy Clinic, Department of Neurology, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Aston Medical School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
Muscle Nerve. 2021 Jul;64(1):37-42. doi: 10.1002/mus.27250. Epub 2021 Apr 20.
INTRODUCTION/AIM: The use of outcome measures is recommended for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). Implications of minimal important differences (MID) to ascertain responder status are unknown. The reliability of patient-reported treatment-response in relation to clinically relevant change is also unknown.
We retrospectively studied 72 subjects with "definite" or "probable" CIDP evaluated at pre-specified time-intervals pre- and post-treatment. We derived MID and the minimum detectable change with 95% confidence intervals (MDC ) for four scales. Scale sensitivities were determined with applicable MID-defined cutoffs (aMIDc), to detect subjects with self-identifying treatment response through a single question.
The use of MID was not valid for the Medical Research Council Sum Score, as MDC > MID. The aMIDc for the Overall Neuropathy Limitation Score (ONLS) was 1 (sensitivity: 84.7%). The aMIDc for the centile Inflammatory Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale (cI-RODS) was 8 (sensitivity: 62.3%). The aMIDc for grip strength was 4 kg (sensitivity: 79.1%). MID-defined amelioration of any one scale among ONLS, cI-RODS, or grip strength, significantly improved sensitivity to detect treatment-responders compared with the ONLS alone (McNemar test: P = .008, odds ratio: 3.36 [95% confidence interval: 1.44-7.86]). Patient-reported improvement was highly reliable in relation to MID-defined amelioration on any one scale.
In subjects with CIDP, MID-defined amelioration of any one of three commonly used outcome measures offers optimum relevance and sensitivity to detect self-identifying treatment-responders. Patient reliability to single-question ascertainment of response is high in relation to MID-defined clinical relevance. These findings support use of multiple outcome measures in CIDP monitoring and justify enhanced patient involvement in the process.
简介/目的:推荐使用结局测量来评估慢性炎症性脱髓鞘性多发性神经病(CIDP)。最小有意义差异(MID)来确定应答者状态的影响尚不清楚。与临床相关变化相关的患者报告治疗反应的可靠性也未知。
我们回顾性研究了 72 名在治疗前后预先指定时间间隔接受“明确”或“可能”CIDP 评估的受试者。我们为四个量表推导了 MID 和 95%置信区间(MDC)的最小可检测变化。应用适用的 MID 定义的截断值(aMIDc)确定量表敏感性,以通过单个问题检测自我识别的治疗反应。
MID 不适用于医学研究委员会总和评分,因为 MDC > MID。总体神经病变限制评分(ONLS)的 aMIDc 为 1(敏感性:84.7%)。百分炎症 Rasch 构建总体残疾量表(cI-RODS)的 aMIDc 为 8(敏感性:62.3%)。握力的 aMIDc 为 4 公斤(敏感性:79.1%)。与单独的 ONLS 相比,ONLS、cI-RODS 或握力中任何一个量表的 MID 定义的改善都显著提高了检测治疗应答者的敏感性(McNemar 检验:P=0.008,优势比:3.36[95%置信区间:1.44-7.86])。与任何一个量表的 MID 定义的改善相关的患者报告的改善具有高度可靠性。
在 CIDP 患者中,三个常用结局测量中的任何一个的 MID 定义的改善提供了最佳的相关性和敏感性,以检测自我识别的治疗应答者。与 MID 定义的临床相关性相关,患者对单一问题确定反应的可靠性很高。这些发现支持在 CIDP 监测中使用多种结局测量,并证明了增强患者参与该过程的合理性。