Introduction Sensory and motor evoked potentials (SEP; MEP) can be used to measure quantitatively the extent of delayed signal conduction in multiple sclerosis (MS). They may be useful to monitor disease course and even serve as biomarkers in clinical trials (Hardmeier et al., 2017). Here we estimate the detectable differences in group means and in longitudinal group changes for different sample sizes accounting for physiological and rater-related variability. Methods 15 healthy subjects were evaluated twice within 30 days with median and tibial SEP and upper (UL) and lower limb (LL) MEP in three centers 1-3 according to a common standardized protocol in keeping with IFCN recommendations. Four neurophysiologists (FJ, MH, PA, PF) independently marked all curves blinded to their previous ratings using a web-based tool (EPMark; HB, MH, PF). N20, P40, shortest and mean cortico-muscular-latencies (CML) were analyzed; central (motor) conduction times were omitted due to lower test-retest-reliability. In addition, the sum of the z-transformed results from each test was divided by number of tests to yield a quantitative EP-score (qEPS). Mixed effect models using results of time-points 1 and 2 as combined outcomes were employed to calculate the standard error (SE) of a group mean of cross-sectional measurements or longitudinal changes. The respective SE formulas were used to calculate the difference d detectable with a power of 90% [d = (1.96 + 1.28) ∗ sqrt( SE 1 2 + SE 2 2 ) -2CoV] as a function of group size assuming a central reading center. Covariance between group means by common influence of raters on both groups was ignored for a more conservative estimate. Results For a sample size of n = 60, cross-sectional group mean difference (d1) is estimated to range from 0.6 to 2.1 ms (N20: 0.6, P40: 1.5; CML-UL [shortest/ mean]: 1.4/1.2; CML-LL: 1.7/2.1), and longitudinal mean group difference (d2) from 0.4 to 2.7 ms (N20: 0.4, P40: 1.0; CML-UL: 1.1/0.8; CML-LL: 1.6/2.7). For a sample size of n = 100, d1 ranged from 0.5 to 2.0 ms (N20: 0.5, P40: 1.2; CML-UL: 1.1/1.0; CML-LL: 1.4/2.0), and d2 from 0.4 to 2.6 ms (N20: 0.4, P40: 0.8; CML-UL: 0.9/0.7; CML-LL: 1.5/2.6). For qEPS [including shortest or mean CML], d1 was 0.5/0.4 ms for n = 60, and 0.4/0.3 ms for n = 100; d2 was 0.3/0.2 ms for n = 60 and 0.2/0.2 for n = 100. Conclusion Quantitative evaluation of combined SEP and MEP is possible in a multicenter setting with an independent reading center and allows reliable detection of significant differences in small groups of subjects. When evaluating an intervention, significant changes of EP results at an individual level help to identify responders, while significant changes at a group level may help to determine the biological effectiveness of an intervention. However, variability may be higher in patients and thus, consecutively, estimates of sample size. Supported by an unconditional research grant from Biogen Inc. MA, USA, which had no influence in planning the study or data analysis.
Read full abstract