A snapshot on patient-reported outcome measures of people with multiple sclerosis on first-line therapies in a real world setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (11) ◽  
pp. 3235-3241
Author(s):  
R. Lanzillo ◽  
M. Sparaco ◽  
L. Lavorgna ◽  
L. Carmisciano ◽  
E. Signoriello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Real World ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
First Line ◽  
Real World Setting ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Multidisciplinary data infrastructures in multiple sclerosis: Why they are needed and can be done!

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 500-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liesbet M Peeters ◽  
Caspar EP van Munster ◽  
Bart Van Wijmeersch ◽  
Robin Bruyndonckx ◽  
Ilse Lamers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Personalized Treatment ◽  
Multidisciplinary Data ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Longitudinal Data Collection ◽  
Patient Profiling ◽  
Data Infrastructures

Personalized treatment is highly desirable in multiple sclerosis (MS). We believe that multidisciplinary measurements including clinical, functional and patient-reported outcome measures in combination with extensive patient profiling can enhance personalized treatment and rehabilitation strategies. We elaborate on four reasons behind this statement: (1) MS disease activity and progression are complex and multidimensional concepts in nature and thereby defy a one-size-fits-all description, (2) functioning, progression, treatment, and rehabilitation effects are interdependent and should be investigated together, (3) personalized healthcare is based on the dynamics of system biology and on technology that confirms a patient’s fundamental biology and (4) inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures can facilitate patient-relevant healthcare. We discuss currently available multidisciplinary MS data initiatives and introduce joint actions to further increase the overall success. With this topical review, we hope to drive the MS community to invest in expanding towards more multidisciplinary and longitudinal data collection.

Assessment of computer adaptive testing version of the Neuro-QOL for people with multiple sclerosis

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (13) ◽  
pp. 1791-1799 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian C Healy ◽  
Jonathan Zurawski ◽  
Cindy T Gonzalez ◽  
Tanuja Chitnis ◽  
Howard L Weiner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Computerized Adaptive Testing ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Adaptive Testing ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Longitudinal Change ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: To date, the computerized adaptive testing (CAT) version of the Neuro-quality of life (QOL) has not been assessed in a large sample of people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the associations between the CAT version of Neuro-QOL and other clinical and patient-reported outcome measures. Methods: Subjects ( n = 364) enrolled in SysteMS completed the CAT version of the Neuro-QOL and the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) within 4 weeks of a clinical exam that included the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite-4 (MSFC-4). The correlations between the Neuro-QOL domains and the MSFC-4 subscores and the SF-36 scores were calculated. The changes over time in the Neuro-QOL and other measures were also examined. Results: The lower extremity functioning score of the Neuro-QOL showed the highest correlations with MSFC-4 components including Timed 25-Foot Walk, 9-Hole Peg Test, and cognitive score. The expected domains of the Neuro-QOL showed high correlations with the SF-36 subscores, and some Neuro-QOL domains were associated with many SF-36 subscores. There was limited longitudinal change on the Neuro-QOL domains over 12 months, and the change was not associated with change on other measures. Conclusion: The CAT version of the Neuro-QOL shows many of the expected associations with clinical and patient-reported outcome measures.

scholarly journals Comparison of patient-reported outcome measures in multiple sclerosis

2013 ◽  
Vol 128 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Schäffler ◽  
P. Schönberg ◽  
J. Stephan ◽  
J.-P. Stellmann ◽  
S. M. Gold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported

Commentary on ‘Disability outcome measures in multiple sclerosis clinical trials’

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (12) ◽  
pp. 1718-1720 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Gareth Noble ◽  
Lisa A Osborne ◽  
Kerina H Jones ◽  
Rod M Middleton ◽  
David V Ford
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Disability Outcome

In order to fully understand and explore the effectiveness of any intervention for the management of multiple sclerosis (MS), it is important to have robust, valid, reliable, and universally applied measures. The recent article, ‘Disability outcome measures in multiple sclerosis clinical trials’ by Cohen, Reingold, Polman and Wolinsky (2012), explores this issue in regards to the effective measurement of MS-related disability, and the utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures, whilst highlighting the need for collaboration between the academic and clinical communities. Although it is important to examine disability measures, it is also equally important to recognise that physical function is only one aspect of a person’s experience; for example, quality of life and psychological well-being are also important aspects to assess. The application of e-health technologies and patient registers could be a useful method of gaining additional information, using patient-reported outcomes. This commentary explores these issues in relation to points raised by the Cohen et al. paper.

scholarly journals Leveraging real-world data to investigate multiple sclerosis disease behavior, prognosis, and treatment

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A Cohen ◽  
Maria Trojano ◽  
Ellen M Mowry ◽  
Bernard MJ Uitdehaag ◽  
Stephen C Reingold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Real World ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Disease Behavior

Randomized controlled clinical trials and real-world observational studies provide complementary information but with different validity. Some clinical questions (disease behavior, prognosis, validation of outcome measures, comparative effectiveness, and long-term safety of therapies) are often better addressed using real-world data reflecting larger, more representative populations. Integration of disease history, clinician-reported outcomes, performance tests, and patient-reported outcome measures during patient encounters; imaging and biospecimen analyses; and data from wearable devices increase dataset utility. However, observational studies utilizing these data are susceptible to many potential sources of bias, creating barriers to acceptance by regulatory agencies and the medical community. Therefore, data standardization and validation within datasets, harmonization across datasets, and application of appropriate analysis methods are important considerations. We review approaches to improve the scope, quality, and analyses of real-world data to advance understanding of multiple sclerosis and its treatment, as an example of opportunities to better support patient care and research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document