Annual change in Friedreich's ataxia evaluated by the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) is independent of disease severity.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to evaluate the sensitivity to change of the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (score, 0-40) in Friedreich's ataxia. METHODS: This was a follow-up study in adult patients with genetically confirmed Friedreich's ataxia evaluated at least twice (minimum interval, 6 months). Participants were outpatients at the Center for Neurogenetics of the Pitie-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris. RESULTS: We included 84 patients; 60% had 3 or more evaluations. The mean score on first assessment was 22.7 ± 9, and the mean follow-up was 1.84 ± 1.10 years. The mean increase was 1.36 ± 2.3 points/year; this variation was not significantly linked to factors known to influence disease severity such as age at onset, disease duration, GAA expansion length, and wheelchair use. CONCLUSIONS: In adult Friedreich's ataxia patients the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia can detect annual changes independently of disease severity. In future therapeutic trials no patient stratification is globally required.

Quantitative assessment of the evolution of cerebellar signs in spinocerebellar ataxias.

BACKGROUND: Responsive ataxia rating scales are essential for determining outcome measures in clinical trials. METHODS: We evaluated the responsiveness over time of the composite cerebellar functional severity score, a quantitative score measuring cerebellar ataxia in 133 patients with autosomal dominant cerebellar ataxias (ADCA), which were prospectively evaluated at inclusion and after one-year of follow-up. A more responsive tool was developed, the Cerebellar Functional Severity score writing, incorporating the writing test at dominant hand to the Cerebellar Functional Severity score. RESULTS: Within the one-year follow-up period, the Cerebellar Functional Severity score and its writing version increased significantly and the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia decreased significantly reflecting increased severity of the cerebellar symptoms. The Cerebellar Functional Severity score writing responsiveness was best in genotypes SCA1, 2, and 3 compared with the other genotypes (effect size = 0.196, standardized response mean (SRM) = 0.624 versus effect size = -0.051, SRM = -0.150). The Cerebellar Functional Severity score writing used as an outcome measure would require only 163 SCA1, 2, or 3 patients per group in a two-arm interventional trial for a 50% reduction in progression and 80% of power. DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates that the Cerebellar Functional Severity score and Cerebellar Functional Severity score writing are responsive quantitative scores for evaluating sensitivity to change in ADCA patients and can be used as outcome measures in clinical trials, especially when targeting genotypes SCA1, 2 and 3.

Composite cerebellar functional severity score: validation of a quantitative score of cerebellar impairment.

Reliable and easy to perform functional scales are a prerequisite for future therapeutic trials in cerebellar ataxias. In order to assess the specificity of quantitative functional tests of cerebellar dysfunction, we investigated 123 controls, 141 patients with an autosomal dominant cerebellar ataxia (ADCA) and 53 patients with autosomal dominant spastic paraplegia (ADSP). We evaluated four different functional tests (nine-hole pegboard, click, tapping and writing tests), in correlation with the scale for the assessment and rating of cerebellar ataxia (SARA), the scale of functional disability on daily activities (part IV of the Huntington disease rating scale), depression (the Public Health Questionnaire PHQ-9) and the EQ-5D visual analogue scale for self-evaluation of health status. There was a significant correlation between each functional test and a lower limb score. The performance of controls on the functional tests was significantly correlated with age. Subsequent analyses were therefore adjusted for this factor. The performances of ADCA patients on the different tests were significantly worse than that of controls and ADSP patients; there was no difference between ADSP patients and controls. Linear regression analysis showed that only two independent tests, the nine-hole pegboard and the click test on the dominant side (P < 0.0001), accounted for the severity of the cerebellar syndrome as reflected by the SARA scores, and could be represented by a composite cerebellar functional severity (CCFS) score calculated as follows: [Formula: see text]. The CCFS score was significantly higher in ADCA patients compared to controls (1.12 +/- 0.18 versus 0.85 +/- 0.05, P(c) < 0.0001) and ADSP patients (1.12 +/- 0.18 versus 0.90 +/- 0.08, P(c) < 0.0001) and was correlated with disease duration (P < 0.0001) but independent of self-evaluated depressive mood in ADCA. Among genetically homogeneous subgroups of ADCA patients (Spinocerebellar ataxia 1, 2, 3), SCA3 patients had significantly lower (better) CCFS scores than SCA2 (P(c) < 0.04) and the same tendency was observed in SCA1. Their CCFS scores remained significantly worse than those of ADSP patients with identified SPG4 mutations (P < 0.0001). The pegboard and click tests are easy to perform and accurately reflect the severity of the disease. The CCFS is a simple and validated method for assessing cerebellar ataxia over a wide range of severity, and will be particularly useful for discriminating paucisymptomatic carriers from affected patients and for evaluating disease progression in future therapeutic trials.