Survival is a complex outcome measure in patients with progressive motor neuron disease. The complexity and unavoidable confounding factors make the measure an inappropriate one to be used as a primary outcome. Many factors ineuence a patient’s mortality, including nutrition, respiratory assistance, attitude and caregiver support. Due to the interaction between these confounding variables, it is impossible to isolate survival as a single outcome, affected by a single treatment effect. As we devise improved adjunctive and symptomatic therapies, their impact on survival is even greater, confounding the measure even more. Current treatment options affect survival with a magnitude greater than the effect size we have often been seeking in recent clinical trials. Using the available diagnostic criteria for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) shows a vast heterogeneity among the clinical presentations considered under this single unifying diagnosis. Issues which affect survival, such as bulbar involvement, hypersialorrhea, rate of progression and pre-existing pulmonary and cardiac disease, are difecult to control, yet they are likely synergistic in their ultimate effect on a quantitative measure of survival. The relative risk of death in patients presenting with aggressive bulbar symptoms versus limb involvement only can be greater than eight times. 1 When included in the same trial, the range in survival, given the variability in natural history of disparate presentations, is often greater than the change in survival we desire to achieve with the proposed treatment. The impact on survival of symptomatic and adjunctive therapy is signiecant and dependent upon the patient’s predominant disability (bulbar vs. limb). Controlling for such therapeutic interventions is not adequate, as their potential confounding effects are not uniform across all ALS patients (Figure 1). The presence and extent of bulbar pathology, particularly respiratory compromise, may be the strongest predictor of survival. 2,3 Our current pattern of enrollment in ALS clinical trials is to include patients with a variable degree of respiratory impairment, often within a certain range, enabling us to predict the mortality during the study period. The assumption that these patients (with a similar range of forced ventricular capacity (FVC) values) will progress at a similar and predictable rate is unsubstantiated.
Read full abstract