Data Entry: Please note that the research database will be replaced by UNIverse by the end of October 2023. Please enter your data into the system Thanks

Login for users with Unibas email account...

Login for registered users without Unibas email account...

Prognostic biomarkers in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: validating and scrutinizing multimodal evoked potentials
JournalArticle (Originalarbeit in einer wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift)
ID 4651609
Author(s) Hardmeier, M.; Schlaeger, R.; Lascano, A. M.; Toffolet, L.; Schindler, C.; Gobbi, C.; Lalive, P.; Kuhle, J.; Kappos, L.; Fuhr, P.
Author(s) at UniBasel Schindler, Christian
Year 2022
Title Prognostic biomarkers in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: validating and scrutinizing multimodal evoked potentials
Journal Clinical neurophysiology
Volume 137
Pages / Article-Number 152-158
Keywords Biomarker; Clinical trial design; Evoked Potentials; Prognosis; Progressive Multiple Sclerosis; Quantitative EP Score; competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared; to influence the work reported in this paper.
Mesh terms Biomarkers; Disability Evaluation; Disease Progression; Evoked Potentials, physiology; Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive, diagnosis; Prognosis
Abstract OBJECTIVE: To validate the prognostic value of multimodal evoked potentials (mmEP) in primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS) and to determine the most predictive EP-modalities. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with PPMS (expanded disability status scale (EDSS): 2.0-6.5; mean clinical follow-up: 2.8 years) had visual (VEP), upper and lower limb somatosensory (SEP) and motor EP (MEP) at baseline. Quantitative EP-scores for single (qVEP, qSEP, qMEP) and combined modalities were correlated to EDSS and compared to previously published data of 21 PPMS patients. Predictors of EDSS-change were analyzed in pooled data by linear regression. RESULTS: Samples were comparable. Except qVEP, all EP-scores were correlated to EDSS at baseline (Rho: 0.45-0.69; p < 0.01) and follow-up (Rho: 0.59-0.80; p < 0.001). Combined EP-modalities significantly predicted EDSS-change (R(2)adj: 0.24), while EDSS and age did not. Tibial qSEP (R(2)adj: 0.22) and qMEP (R(2)adj: 0.26) were the best single modality predictors, outperformed by their combination (R(2)adj: 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative EP-scores predict up to 32% of EDSS-change over three years. Modalities representing motor and long tract function carry the main prognostic information. SIGNIFICANCE: Replication of previous results corroborates the use of mmEP as a prognostic biomarker candidate in PPMS.
ISSN/ISBN 1388-2457
Full Text on edoc Available
Digital Object Identifier DOI 10.1016/j.clinph.2022.02.019
PubMed ID
ISI-Number WOS:000791223500017
Document type (ISI) Journal Article

MCSS v5.8 PRO. 0.336 sec, queries - 0.000 sec ©Universität Basel  |  Impressum   |