Multiple sclerosis is a highly heterogeneous disease; the quantitative assessment of disease progression is problematic for many reasons, including the lack of objective methods to measure disability and the long follow-up times needed to detect relevant and stable changes. For these reasons, the importance of prognostic markers, markers of response to treatments and of surrogate endpoints, is crucial in multiple sclerosis research. Aim of this report is to clarify some basic definitions and methodological issues about baseline factors to be considered prognostic markers or markers of response to treatment; to define the dynamic role that variables must have to be considered surrogate markers in relation to specific treatments.

Prognostic factors versus markers of response to treatment versus surrogate endpoints: Three different concepts

SORMANI, MARIA PIA
2017-01-01

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis is a highly heterogeneous disease; the quantitative assessment of disease progression is problematic for many reasons, including the lack of objective methods to measure disability and the long follow-up times needed to detect relevant and stable changes. For these reasons, the importance of prognostic markers, markers of response to treatments and of surrogate endpoints, is crucial in multiple sclerosis research. Aim of this report is to clarify some basic definitions and methodological issues about baseline factors to be considered prognostic markers or markers of response to treatment; to define the dynamic role that variables must have to be considered surrogate markers in relation to specific treatments.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
sormani2017.pdf

accesso chiuso

Tipologia: Documento in versione editoriale
Dimensione 906.16 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
906.16 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11567/860346
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 3
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact