Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recording neurological impairment in clinical trials of glioma

  • Published:
Journal of Neuro-Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The criteria for clinical response to treatment in cerebral glioma remain poorly defined, but could be made more objective if simple measures of neurological impairments were included in the definitions. We assessed the utility of simple fast previously validated tests of limb impairment (Timed nine hole peg test and 10 meter walk), memory (Williams delayed recall test) and language (Boston Aphasia Severity Rating Scale) in fifty patients with primary brain tumours to see if they could act as a surrogate for neurological impairment. The tests were compared with established measures of physical disability (Barthel Disability Index [BDI]) and handicap.

Timed tests of hand function and gait were sensitive to minor impairments and were abnormal in patients with physical disability on BDI. Timed tests correlated well with handicap (rank correlation 0.734). Short term memory was impaired more commonly with tumours involving the left hemisphere (p < 0.01). Dysphasia limited testing of memory in 8%. Depression was associated with problems in limb function (p < 0.01), memory (p < 0.001), language (p < 0.001), BDI (p < 0.001) and handicap (p < 0.001). The number of abnormal fast tests also correlated with the severity of handicap (rank correlation 0.786) indicating that memory impairment and aphasia contribute to handicap and should be assessed. Median time to complete all assessments was 7 minutes 20 seconds.

Utilization of these simple tests will add sensitivity and objectivity to evaluation of neurological response in clinical trials and can be performed quickly by non medical staff.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organisation. The International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps. World Health Organisation 1980; Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mckeran RO, Thomas DGT: The clinical study of gliomas. In: Thomas DGT, Graham DI (eds) Brain Tumours: Scientific Basis, Clinical Investigation and Current Therapy 1980: 194–230

  3. Bigger T, Szirony K, Rogers L, Magdinec M, Bauer L: Evaluation of Performance Status Measures in Brain Tumor Patients. Neurology 1991; 41 (Suppl 1): p 412

    Google Scholar 

  4. Vecht CJ, Hovestadt A, Verbeist HBC, van Putten WLJ: Quality of life scales and neurological dysfunction in brain tumor patients. Neurology 1991; 41 (Suppl 1): p 382

    Google Scholar 

  5. Amato MP, Groppi C, Siracuss GF, Fratiglioni L: Inter and intra-observer reliability in the employment of Kurtzke scoring system in multiple sclerosis. Ital J Neurol Sci 1987; 2 (Suppl 6): 129–131

    Google Scholar 

  6. Amato MP, Fratiglioni L, Groppi C, Siracuss G, Amaducci L: Inter-rater reliability in assessing functional systems and disability on the Kurtzke scale in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1988; 45: 746–748

    Google Scholar 

  7. Willoughby EW, Paty DW: Scales for rating impairment in multiple sclerosis: a critique. Neurology 1988; 38: 1793–1798

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kurtzke JF: Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983;33: 1444–1452

    Google Scholar 

  9. Goldstein LB, Bertels C, Davis JN: Inter-rater reliability of the NIH Stroke Scale. Arch Neurol 1989; 46: 660–662

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zubrod CG, Schneiderman M, Frei Ret al.: Appraisal of methods of study of chemotherapy in cancer in man: Comparative therapeutic trial of nitrogen mustard and triethylene triophosphoramide. J Chronic Dis 1960; 11: 7–33

    Google Scholar 

  11. Karnofsky D, Burchenal JH: Clinical evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer. In: Macleod CM (ed) Evaluation of Chemotherapy Agents, 1989. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW: Functional Evaluation: The Barthel Index. Rehabilitation 1965; 14: 61–65

    Google Scholar 

  13. Walker MD, Green SB, Byar DPet al.: Randomized comparisons of radiotherapy and nitrosoureas for the treatment of malignant glioma after surgery. N Engl J Med 1980; 303: 1323–1329

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cohadon F, Aouad N, Rougier A, Vital C, Rivel J, Dartigues JF: Histologic and non-histologic factors correlated with survival time in supratentorial astrocytic tumors. J Neurooncol 1985; 3: 105–111

    Google Scholar 

  15. MacKenzie CR, Charleson ME: Standards for the use of ordinal scales in clinical trials. Brit Med J 1989; 292: 40–43

    Google Scholar 

  16. Green SB, Byar DP, Walker MDet al.: Comparisons of carmustine, procarbazine and high dose methylprednisolone as additions to surgery and radiotherapy for the treatment of malignant glioma. Cancer Treat Rep 1983; 67: 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  17. Shapiro WR, Green SB, Burger PCet al: Randomized trial of three chemotherapy regimes and two radiotherapy regimes in postoperative treatment of malignant glioma. Brain Tumor Co-operative Group Trial 8001. J Neurosurg 1989; 71: 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gregor A, Rampling R, Aapro Met al.: Phase 11 Study of Tauromustine in Malignant Glioma. Eur J Cancer 1992; 28 (12): 1959–1962

    Google Scholar 

  19. Imperato JP, Paleologos NA, Vick NA: Effects of treatment on long term survivors with malignant astrocytomas. Ann Neurol 1990; 28(6): 818–822

    Google Scholar 

  20. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC Jr, Cairncross JG: Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Onc 1990; 8(7): 1277–1280

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rubenstein LV, Calkins DR, Young RTet al.: Improving patient function: a randomized trial of functional disability screening. Ann Intern Med 1989; 111: 836–842

    Google Scholar 

  22. McGinnis GE, Seward BA, DeJong G, Osberg JS: Program Evaluation of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Departments Using Self-Report Barthel. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1986; 67: 123–125

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67: 361–370

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rankin J: Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60: II Prognosis. Scot Med J 1957; 2: 200–215

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bamford JM, Sandercock PAG, Warlow CP, Slattery J: Inter-observer agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke 1989; 20: 208

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wade DT: Measurement in Neurological Rehabilitation. Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford University Press. 1992; Chap 15

  27. Williams M: The measurement of memory in clinical practice. Brit J Clin Psychol 1968; 7: 19–34

    Google Scholar 

  28. Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination Booklet: Les and Febiger, 600 South Washington Square, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106, USA. In: Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional Evaluation: The Barthel Index. Rehabilitation 1965; 14: 61–65

  29. Hutchinson TA, Boyd NF, Feinstein AR: Scientific problems in clinical scales as demonstrated by the Karnofsky index of performance status. J Chronic Dis 1979; 32: 661–666

    Google Scholar 

  30. Yates JW, Chalmers B, McKegney P: Evaluation of patients with advanced cancer using the Karnofsky Performance Scale. Cancer 1980; 45: 2220–2224

    Google Scholar 

  31. Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, Sunderland A, Langten Hewer R, Ward E: Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery after the first three months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiat 1987; 50: 714–719

    Google Scholar 

  32. Parker VM, Wade DT, Langton Hewer R: Loss of arm function after stroke: measurement, frequency and recovery. Int Rehabil Med 1986; 8: 69–73

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley L, Langton Hewer R: Arm function after stroke: An evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiat 1989; 52(11): 1267–1272

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kellor M, Frost J, Silberberg N, Iversen I, Cummings R: Hand strength and dexterity. Am J Occ Ther 1971; 25: 77–83

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Kashman N, Volland G: Adult norms for the nine hole peg test of finger dexterity. Occ Ther J Res 1985; 5: 24–38

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wade DT, Langton Hewer R: Functional abilities after stroke: measurement, natural history and prognosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiat 1987; 50: 177–182

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bendall MJ, Bassey EJ, Pearson MB: Factors affecting walking speed in the elderly. Age and Ageing 1989; 18: 327–332

    Google Scholar 

  38. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR: ‘Mini-Mental State’: a practical method of grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189–198

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kokmen E, Smith GE, Petersen RC, Tangalos E, Ivnik RC: The Short Test of Mental Status: Correlations with standardized psychometric testing. 1991; 48: 725–728

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jacobs JW, Bernhard MR, Delgado A, Strain JJ: Screening for organic mental syndromes in the medically ill. Ann Intern Med 1977; 86: 40–46

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kiernan RJ, Mueller J, Langston JW, Van Dyke C: The Neurobehavioural Cognitive Status Examination: A brief but differentiated approach to cognitive assessment. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107: 481–485

    Google Scholar 

  42. Schwamm LH, Van Dyke C, Kiernan RJ, Merrin EL, Mueller J: The Neurobehavioural Cognitive Status Examination: Comparison with the Cognitive Capacity Screening Examination and the Mini-Mental State Examination in a neurosurgical population. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107: 486–491

    Google Scholar 

  43. Nelson A, Fogel BS, Faust D: Bedside cognitive screening instruments. J Nerve Ment Dis 1986; 174: 73–83

    Google Scholar 

  44. Feher EP, Mahurin RK, Doody RS, Cooke S, Sims J, Pirozzolo FJ: Establishing the limits of the Mini-Mental State: Examination of ‘subtests’. Arch Neurol 1992; 49: 87–92

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

    Robert Grant, James Slattery & Ian R. Whittle

  2. Department of Clinical Oncology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

    Anna Gregor

Authors
  1. Robert Grant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Slattery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anna Gregor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ian R. Whittle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grant, R., Slattery, J., Gregor, A. et al. Recording neurological impairment in clinical trials of glioma. J Neuro-Oncol 19, 37–49 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01051047

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01051047

Key words

Search

Navigation