Abstract

BackgroundIn our companion paper, random intercept models (RIMs) investigated response-shift effects in a clinical trial comparing Eculizumab to Placebo for people with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). RIMs predicted Global Health using the EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale item (VAS) to encompass broad criteria that people might consider. The SF36™v2 mental and physical component scores (MCS and PCS) helped us detect response shift in VAS. Here, we sought to “back-translate” the VAS into the MCS/PCS scores that would have been observed if response shift had not been present.MethodsThis secondary analysis utilized NMOSD clinical trial data evaluating the impact of Eculizumab in preventing relapses (n = 143). Analyses began by equating raw scores from the VAS, MCS, and PCS, and computing scores that removed response-shift effects. Correlation analysis and descriptive displays provided a more comprehensive examination of response-shift effects.ResultsMCS and PCS crosswalks with VAS equated the scores that include and exclude response-shift effects. These two sets of scores had low shared variance for MCS for both groups, suggesting that corresponding mental health constructs were substantially different. The shared variance contrast for physical health was distinct only for the Placebo group. The larger MCS response-shift effects were found at end of study for Placebo only and were more prominent at extremes of the MCS score distribution.ConclusionsOur results reveal notable treatment group differences in MCS but not PCS response shifts, which can explain null results detected in previous work. The method introduced herein provides a way to provide further information about response-shift effects in clinical trial data.

Highlights

  • Our results reveal notable treatment group differences in mental component score (MCS) but not physical component score (PCS) response shifts, which can explain null results detected in previous work

  • Most clinicians recognize that patients adapt and show remarkable resilience to health-state changes [1], but work documenting such response-shift effects has largely focused on observational studies rather than clinical trials [2,3,4]

  • The pivotal trial documented remarkable effects of Eculizumab in preventing relapse [8], but subsequent analyses showed no such benefit on the SF-36TM mental component score (MCS) despite benefit on the SF-36TM physical component score (PCS) [9]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Most clinicians recognize that patients adapt and show remarkable resilience to health-state changes [1], but work documenting such response-shift effects has largely focused on observational studies rather than clinical trials [2,3,4]. The pivotal trial documented remarkable effects of Eculizumab in preventing relapse [8], but subsequent analyses showed no such benefit on the SF-36TM mental component score (MCS) despite benefit on the SF-36TM physical component score (PCS) [9] This lack of benefit on this evaluative outcome led us to hypothesize that response-shift effects were obfuscating treatment arm differences in mental health. Random intercept models (RIMs) investigated response-shift effects in a clinical trial comparing Eculizumab to Placebo for people with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). Results MCS and PCS crosswalks with VAS equated the scores that include and exclude response-shift effects These two sets of scores had low shared variance for MCS for both groups, suggesting that corresponding mental health constructs were substantially different. The method introduced provides a way to provide further information about response-shift effects in clinical trial data

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call