Retrospective assessment of clinical global impression of severity and change in GM1 gangliosidosis: a tool to score natural history data in rare disease cohorts.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases Pub Date : 2025-03-14 DOI:10.1186/s13023-025-03614-6
Connor J Lewis, Jean M Johnston, Silvia Zaragoza Domingo, Gilbert Vezina, Precilla D'Souza, William A Gahl, David A Adams, Cynthia J Tifft, Maria T Acosta
{"title":"Retrospective assessment of clinical global impression of severity and change in GM1 gangliosidosis: a tool to score natural history data in rare disease cohorts.","authors":"Connor J Lewis, Jean M Johnston, Silvia Zaragoza Domingo, Gilbert Vezina, Precilla D'Souza, William A Gahl, David A Adams, Cynthia J Tifft, Maria T Acosta","doi":"10.1186/s13023-025-03614-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical trials for rare diseases pose unique challenges warranting alternative approaches in demonstrating treatment efficacy. Such trials face challenges including small patient populations, variable onset of symptoms and rate of disease progression, and ethical considerations, particularly in neurodegenerative diseases. In this study, we present the retrospective clinical global impression (RCGI) severity and change (RCGI-S/C) scale on 27 patients with GM1 gangliosidosis, a post hoc clinician-rated outcome measure to evaluate natural history study participants as historical controls for comparisons with treated patients in a clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic chart review of 27 GM1 gangliosidosis natural history participants across 95 total visits. RCGI-S was assessed at the first visit and rated 1 (normal) to 7 (among the most extremely ill). Each subsequent follow-up was rated on the RCGI-C scale from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). We demonstrate scoring guidelines of both scales with examples and justifications for this pilot in GM1 gangliosidosis natural history participants. The convergent validity of the RCGI scales was explored through correlations with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found strong association between the RCGI-S scores with gray matter volume (r(14) = -0.81; 95% CI [-0.93, -0.51], p < 0.001), and RCGI-C scores significantly correlated with increases in ventricular volume (χ<sup>2</sup>(1) = 18.6, p < 0.001). Baseline RCGI-S scores also strongly correlated with Vineland adaptive behavioral composite scores taken at the same visit (r(14) = -0.72; 95% CI [-0.93, -0.17], p = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RCGI-S/C scales, which use the clinical evaluation to assess the severity of disease of each patient visit over time, were consolidated into a single quantitative metric in this study. Longitudinal RCGI-C scores allowed us to quantify disease progression in our late-infantile and juvenile GM1 patients. We suggest that the retrospective CGI may be an important tool in evaluating historical data for comparison with changes in disease progression/mitigation following therapeutic interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":19651,"journal":{"name":"Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases","volume":"20 1","pages":"125"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11909993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-025-03614-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical trials for rare diseases pose unique challenges warranting alternative approaches in demonstrating treatment efficacy. Such trials face challenges including small patient populations, variable onset of symptoms and rate of disease progression, and ethical considerations, particularly in neurodegenerative diseases. In this study, we present the retrospective clinical global impression (RCGI) severity and change (RCGI-S/C) scale on 27 patients with GM1 gangliosidosis, a post hoc clinician-rated outcome measure to evaluate natural history study participants as historical controls for comparisons with treated patients in a clinical trial.

Methods: We conducted a systematic chart review of 27 GM1 gangliosidosis natural history participants across 95 total visits. RCGI-S was assessed at the first visit and rated 1 (normal) to 7 (among the most extremely ill). Each subsequent follow-up was rated on the RCGI-C scale from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). We demonstrate scoring guidelines of both scales with examples and justifications for this pilot in GM1 gangliosidosis natural history participants. The convergent validity of the RCGI scales was explored through correlations with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales.

Results: We found strong association between the RCGI-S scores with gray matter volume (r(14) = -0.81; 95% CI [-0.93, -0.51], p < 0.001), and RCGI-C scores significantly correlated with increases in ventricular volume (χ2(1) = 18.6, p < 0.001). Baseline RCGI-S scores also strongly correlated with Vineland adaptive behavioral composite scores taken at the same visit (r(14) = -0.72; 95% CI [-0.93, -0.17], p = 0.02).

Conclusion: RCGI-S/C scales, which use the clinical evaluation to assess the severity of disease of each patient visit over time, were consolidated into a single quantitative metric in this study. Longitudinal RCGI-C scores allowed us to quantify disease progression in our late-infantile and juvenile GM1 patients. We suggest that the retrospective CGI may be an important tool in evaluating historical data for comparison with changes in disease progression/mitigation following therapeutic interventions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
GM1神经节脂质病的严重程度和变化的临床总体印象的回顾性评估:罕见疾病队列中自然病史数据评分的工具。
背景:罕见病的临床试验提出了独特的挑战,要求采用替代方法来证明治疗效果。此类试验面临的挑战包括患者群体小、症状发作和疾病进展速度多变,以及伦理考虑,特别是在神经退行性疾病中。在这项研究中,我们对27例GM1神经节脂质沉积症患者进行了回顾性临床总体印象(RCGI)严重程度和变化(RCGI- s /C)评分,这是一种事后临床评价的结果测量方法,用于评估自然史研究参与者作为历史对照,与临床试验中接受治疗的患者进行比较。方法:我们对95次总就诊的27名GM1神经节脂质病自然病史参与者进行了系统的图表回顾。首次就诊时进行RCGI-S评估,评分为1(正常)至7(病情最严重)。每次后续随访的rgi - c评分从1(非常改善)到7(非常差)。我们展示了两个尺度的评分准则,并举例说明了该试点在GM1神经节脂质病自然史参与者中的合理性。通过与磁共振成像(MRI)和Vineland适应行为量表的相关性,探讨RCGI量表的收敛效度。结果:我们发现RCGI-S评分与灰质体积有很强的相关性(r(14) = -0.81;结论:RCGI-S/C量表使用临床评价来评估每次患者就诊的疾病严重程度,在本研究中被合并为单一的定量指标。纵向RCGI-C评分使我们能够量化婴儿晚期和青少年GM1患者的疾病进展。我们认为回顾性CGI可能是评估历史数据的重要工具,用于比较治疗干预后疾病进展/缓解的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.10%
发文量
418
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that encompasses all aspects of rare diseases and orphan drugs. The journal publishes high-quality reviews on specific rare diseases. In addition, the journal may consider articles on clinical trial outcome reports, either positive or negative, and articles on public health issues in the field of rare diseases and orphan drugs. The journal does not accept case reports.
期刊最新文献
Genetic and non-genetic factors influencing phenotypic variability in neurofibromatosis type 1. European Reference Networks - a flagship activity of the EU in the field of rare and complex diseases: from 2017 to 2025. The mutational burden in os odontoideum patients. Clinical characteristics and long-term prognosis of anti-MDA5-positive dermatomyositis: a comparative study across age groups. Increasing access to CAR-T therapy: a case study of an academic hospital's alternative innovation model.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1