Patient-reported outcome parameters and disability worsening in progressive multiple sclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: Detection and prediction of disability progression is a significant unmet need in people with progressive multiple sclerosis (PwPMS). Government and health agencies have deemed the use of patient-reported outcomes measurements (PROMs) in clinical practice and clinical trials a major strategic priority. Nevertheless, data documenting the clinical utility of PROMs in neurological diseases is scarce. This study evaluates if assessment of PROMs could track progression in PwPMS. METHODS: Emerging blood Biomarkers in Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (EmBioProMS) investigated PROMs (Beck depression inventory-II (BDI-II), multiple sclerosis impact scale-29 (MSIS-29), fatigue scale for motor and cognition (FSMC)) in PwPMS (primary [PPMS] and secondary progressive MS [SPMS]). PROMs were evaluated longitudinally and compared between participants with disability progression (at baseline; retrospective evidence of disability progression (EDP), and during follow up (FU); prospective evidence of confirmed disability progression (CDP)) and those without progression. In an independent cohort of placebo participants of the phase III ORATORIO trial in PPMS, the diagnostic and prognostic value of another PROMs score (36-Item Short Form Survey [SF-36]) regarding CDP was evaluated. RESULTS: EmBioProMS participants with EDP in the two years prior to inclusion (n = 136/227), or who suffered from CDP during FU (number of events= 88) had worse BDI-II, MSIS-29, and FSMC scores compared to PwPMS without progression. In addition, baseline MSIS29physical above 70th, 80th, and 90th percentiles predicted future CDP/ progression independent of relapse activity in EmBioProMS PPMS participants (HR of 3.7, 6.9, 6.7, p = 0.002, <0.001, and 0.001, respectively). In the placebo arm of ORATORIO (n = 137), the physical component score (PCS) of SF-36 worsened at week 120 compared to baseline, in cases who experienced progression over the preceding trial period (P = 0.018). Worse PCS at baseline was associated with higher hazard ratios of disability accumulation over the subsequent 120 weeks (HR: 2.01 [30th-], 2.11 [20th-], and 2.8 [10th percentile], P = 0.007, 0.012 and 0.005, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PROMs could provide additional, practical, cost-efficient, and remotely accessible insight about disability progression in PMS through standardized, structured, and quantifiable patient feedback.

Gait analysis in PSP and NPH: Dual-task conditions make the difference.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether quantitative gait analysis of gait under single- and dual-task conditions can be used for a differential diagnosis of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, temporal and spatial gait parameters were analyzed in 38 patients with PSP (Neurological Disorders and Stroke and Society for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy diagnostic criteria), 27 patients with iNPH (international iNPH guidelines), and 38 healthy controls. A pressure-sensitive carpet was used to examine gait under 5 conditions: single task (preferred, slow, and maximal speed), cognitive dual task (walking with serial 7 subtractions), and motor dual task (walking while carrying a tray). RESULTS: The main results were as follows. First, both patients with PSP and those with iNPH exhibited significant gait dysfunction, which was worse in patients with iNPH with a more broad-based gait (p < 0.001). Second, stride time variability was increased in both patient groups, more pronounced in PSP (p = 0.009). Third, cognitive dual task led to a greater reduction of gait velocity in PSP (PSP 34.4% vs iNPH 16.9%, p = 0.002). Motor dual task revealed a dissociation of gait performance: patients with PSP considerably worsened, but patients with iNPH tended to improve. CONCLUSION: Patients with PSP seem to be more sensitive to dual-task perturbations than patients with iNPH. An increased step width and anisotropy of the effect of dual-task conditions (cognitive vs motor) seem to be good diagnostic tools for iNPH.

Asthma prevalence in German Olympic athletes: A comparison of winter and summer sport disciplines.

BACKGROUND: Prevalence of asthma in elite athletes shows very wide ranges. It remains unclear to what extent this is influenced by the competition season (winter vs. summer) or the ventilation rate achieved during competition. The aim of this study was to evaluate prevalence of asthma in German elite winter and summer athletes from a wide range of sport disciplines and to identify high risk groups. METHODS: In total, 265 German elite winter athletes (response 77%) and 283 German elite summer athletes (response 64%) answered validated respiratory questionnaires. Using logistic regression, the asthma risks associated with competition season and ventilation rate during competition, respectively, were investigated. A subset of winter athletes was also examined for their FENO-levels and lung function. RESULTS: With respect to all asthma outcomes, no association was found with the competition season. Regarding the ventilation rate, athletes in high ventilation sports were at increased risk of asthma, as compared to athletes in low ventilation sports (doctors' diagnosed asthma: OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.19-4.53; use of asthma medication: OR 4.46, 95% CI 1.52-13.10; current wheeze or use of asthma medication: OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.34-5.76). Athletes with doctors' diagnosed asthma were at an approximate four-fold risk of elevated FENO-values. CONCLUSIONS: The clinically relevant finding of this study is that athletes' asthma seems to be more common in sports with high ventilation during competition, whereas the summer or winter season had no impact on the frequency of the disease. Among winter athletes, elevated FENO suggested suboptimal control of asthma.

The Subjective Postural Vertical Determined in Patients with Pusher Behavior During Standing.

BACKGROUND: The subjective postural vertical (SPV), i.e., the perceived upright orientation of the body in relation to gravity, is disturbed in patients with pusher behavior. So far, the SPV has been measured only when these patients were sitting, and the results were contradictory as regards the side of the SPV deviation. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to investigate the SPV in patients with different degrees of severity of pusher behavior while standing. METHODS: Eight stroke patients with pusher behavior, ten age-matched stroke patients without pusher behavior, and ten age-matched healthy control subjects were included. The SPV (SPV error, SPV range) was assessed in the pitch and the roll planes. Pusher behavior was classified with the Burke Lateropulsion Scale (BLS). RESULTS: In the pitch plane, the SPV range was significantly larger in pusher patients than in patients without pusher behavior or healthy controls. The SPV error was similar for groups. In the roll plane, the SPV error and the SPV range were significantly larger and more ipsilesionally tilted in the pusher group than in the other two groups. There was a significant correlation between the SPV error in the roll plane and the BLS score. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed that patients with pusher behavior had an ipsilesional SPV tilt that decreased with decreasing severity of the behavior. The large uncertainty in verticality estimation in both planes indicates that their sensitivity for the perception of verticality in space is generally disturbed. These findings emphasize the importance of specific rehabilitation approaches to recalibrate the impaired inner model of verticality.