Predictors of delay in the diagnosis and clinical trial entry of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients: A population-based study

University of Milan, Milano, Lombardy, Italy
Journal of the Neurological Sciences (Impact Factor: 2.26). 01/2007; 250(1-2):45-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2006.06.027
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The El Escorial and the revised Airlie House diagnostic criteria for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) were introduced to select patients for clinical trials. Heterogeneity of clinical presentation at onset and delay in diagnosis may decrease the likelihood for trial entry.
Identify risk factors for delay in the diagnosis and trial exclusion.
ALS incident cases were identified with El Escorial (EEC) and Airlie House criteria (AHC) through a population-based registry established in Puglia, Southern Italy, in the years 1998-99.
130 ALS incident cases were diagnosed with a median interval between onset of symptoms and diagnosis of 9.3 months and not different across both EEC and AHC categories. Twenty percent of cases were not eligible for clinical trials according to the AHC. About 5% of subjects in this series died with only lower motor neuron signs. Predictors for delay in the diagnosis were age between 65 and 75 years and spinal onset while fasciculations and cramps as first symptoms were predictors of exclusion from trials.
In this population-based series, diagnostic delay was longer in subjects with spinal onset and age between 65 and 75 and fasciculation as first symptoms. About 80% of incident cases were trial eligible with AHC criteria. However, a significant number of subjects with ALS, characterized by a limited spread of signs, were not trial eligible while alive.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Our objective was to identify plasma biomarkers of ALS that can aid in distinguishing patients with ALS from those with disease mimics. In this multi-center study, plasma samples were collected from 172 patients recently diagnosed with ALS, 50 healthy controls, and 73 neurological disease mimics. Samples were analyzed using metabolomics. Using all identified biochemicals detected in > 50% of all samples in the metabolomics analysis, samples were classified as ALS or mimic with 65% sensitivity and 81% specificity by LASSO analysis (AUC of 0.76). A subset panel of 32 candidate biomarkers classified these diagnosis groups with a specificity of 90%/sensitivity 58% (AUC of 0.81). Creatinine was lower in subjects with lower revised ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) scores. In conclusion, ALS can be distinguished from neurological disease mimics by global biochemical profiling of plasma samples. Our analysis identified ALS versus mimics with relatively high sensitivity. We identified a subset of 32 metabolites that identify patients with ALS with a high specificity. Interestingly, lower creatinine correlates significantly with a lower ALSFRS-R score. Finally, molecules previously reported to be important in disease pathophysiology, such as urate, are included in our metabolite panel.
    Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration 07/2014; 15(5-6):1-9. DOI:10.3109/21678421.2014.908311 · 2.59 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to characterize the diagnostic timelines and their predictors in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Patients were identified through ALS billing codes. Time from presenting symptom to first doctor visit, first doctor visit to suspected ALS diagnosis, suspected to confirmed ALS diagnosis, and presenting symptom to confirmed ALS diagnosis (total diagnostic time) were collected. Regression models were used to analyze the predictors of diagnostic delay. Three hundred and four ALS patients were included in the analysis. Median total diagnostic time was 11.5 months. Diagnostic timelines were longer in patients with age > 60 years (p < 0.001), sporadic ALS (p = 0.043), and limb onset (p = 0.010). The presence of fasciculations, slurred speech, and lower extremity weakness when symptoms were first noted were independent predictors of shorter time to ALS diagnosis (p = 0.04, p = 0.02, and p = 0.04, respectively). About half of the patients (52%) received an alternative diagnosis and each patient saw an average of three different physicians before ALS diagnosis was confirmed. In conclusion, diagnostic timelines in ALS are long, and patients see many physicians and receive multiple alternative diagnoses before the diagnosis of ALS is confirmed. Older age, sporadic disease, and limb onset can delay ALS diagnosis.
    Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration 07/2014; 15(5-6):1-4. DOI:10.3109/21678421.2014.903974 · 2.59 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We studied the limitations to early diagnosis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The diagnostic process was assessed in 120 consecutive patients, including onset, interval to diagnosis, investigations, specialist assessment and pre-diagnostic management. Times from onset to first consultation (T1), second consultation (T2) and diagnosis (TD) were considered. Predictors of diagnostic delay were determined by multivariate logistic regression, adjusted for gender, age, clinical manifestations, and specialism of the first and second consultants. There were 101 consecutive ALS patients with complete datasets (69% men; median age at diagnosis 61.5 years). The mean TD and median TD were respectively 10.1 and 9.5 months. In 55%, the first consultant was a general practitioner (GP), in 16% a neurologist and in 14% an orthopedist. The diagnosis of ALS was made by non-neurologists in 9 patients. The odds of delayed diagnosis (≥ 12 months) were higher (1.56; 0.19–12.56) in younger patients (≤ 45 years) (p < 0.05). Female gender (0.56; 0.29–1.70) and bulbar-onset (0.56; 0.29–1.70) were independently associated with earlier diagnosis (p < 0.05). Assessment by a neurologist at the first (0.32; 0.19–2.46) or second consultation (0.87; 0.21–1.21) was associated with a shorter diagnosis time (< 12 months) (p < 0.05). We conclude that diagnostic delay mainly resulted from delayed referral from non-neurologist physicians to a neurologist. Moreover, incomplete neurophysiological investigation had a relevant impact.
    Journal of the Neurological Sciences 08/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jns.2014.06.003 · 2.26 Impact Factor


Available from
Nov 26, 2014