» Articles » PMID: 27634384

Application of Item Response Theory to Modeling of Expanded Disability Status Scale in Multiple Sclerosis

Overview
Journal AAPS J
Specialty Pharmacology
Date 2016 Sep 17
PMID 27634384
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In this study, we report the development of the first item response theory (IRT) model within a pharmacometrics framework to characterize the disease progression in multiple sclerosis (MS), as measured by Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS). Data were collected quarterly from a 96-week phase III clinical study by a blinder rater, involving 104,206 item-level observations from 1319 patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), treated with placebo or cladribine. Observed scores for each EDSS item were modeled describing the probability of a given score as a function of patients' (unobserved) disability using a logistic model. Longitudinal data from placebo arms were used to describe the disease progression over time, and the model was then extended to cladribine arms to characterize the drug effect. Sensitivity with respect to patient disability was calculated as Fisher information for each EDSS item, which were ranked according to the amount of information they contained. The IRT model was able to describe baseline and longitudinal EDSS data on item and total level. The final model suggested that cladribine treatment significantly slows disease-progression rate, with a 20% decrease in disease-progression rate compared to placebo, irrespective of exposure, and effects an additional exposure-dependent reduction in disability progression. Four out of eight items contained 80% of information for the given range of disabilities. This study has illustrated that IRT modeling is specifically suitable for accurate quantification of disease status and description and prediction of disease progression in phase 3 studies on RRMS, by integrating EDSS item-level data in a meaningful manner.

Citing Articles

Sparse item testing of clinical scales in neurology trials to alleviate burden to patients.

Chen C, Novakovic A, Jamsen K, Vong C, Arshad U J Neurol. 2024; 271(10):6847-6855.

PMID: 39212742 PMC: 11446946. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-024-12650-4.


Quantitative Comparisons of Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Rating Scale Versions Using Item Response Theory.

Gewily M, Plan E, Yousefi E, Konig F, Posch M, Hopfner F Mov Disord. 2024; 39(12):2181-2189.

PMID: 39206961 PMC: 11657017. DOI: 10.1002/mds.30001.


Item performance of the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia in rare and ultra-rare genetic ataxias.

Hamdan A, Hooker A, Chen X, Traschutz A, Schule R, Synofzik M CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2024; 13(8):1327-1340.

PMID: 38769902 PMC: 11330187. DOI: 10.1002/psp4.13162.


Prediction of Individual Disease Progression Including Parameter Uncertainty in Rare Neurodegenerative Diseases: The Example of Autosomal-Recessive Spastic Ataxia Charlevoix Saguenay (ARSACS).

Hendrickx N, Mentre F, Traschutz A, Gagnon C, Schule R, Synofzik M AAPS J. 2024; 26(3):57.

PMID: 38689016 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-024-00925-7.


Comparison of Two Methods for Determining Item Characteristic Functions and Latent Variable Time-Course for Pharmacometric Item Response Models.

Arrington L, Karlsson M AAPS J. 2024; 26(1):21.

PMID: 38273096 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-023-00883-6.


References
1.
Healy B, Chitnis T, Engler D . Improving power to detect disease progression in multiple sclerosis through alternative analysis strategies. J Neurol. 2011; 258(10):1812-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-011-6021-1. View

2.
Ueckert S, Plan E, Ito K, Karlsson M, Corrigan B, Hooker A . Improved utilization of ADAS-cog assessment data through item response theory based pharmacometric modeling. Pharm Res. 2014; 31(8):2152-65. PMC: 4153970. DOI: 10.1007/s11095-014-1315-5. View

3.
Balsis S, Unger A, Benge J, Geraci L, Doody R . Gaining precision on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive: a comparison of item response theory-based scores and total scores. Alzheimers Dement. 2012; 8(4):288-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.05.2409. View

4.
Healy B, Engler D, Glanz B, Musallam A, Chitnis T . Assessment of definitions of sustained disease progression in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Int. 2013; 2013:189624. PMC: 3608311. DOI: 10.1155/2013/189624. View

5.
McDonald W, Compston A, Edan G, Goodkin D, Hartung H, Lublin F . Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 2001; 50(1):121-7. DOI: 10.1002/ana.1032. View