ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2017
NESSCA Validation and Responsiveness of Several Rating Scales in Spinocerebellar Ataxia Type 2.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Local Dynamic Stability of Trunk During Gait is Responsive to Rehabilitation in Subjects with Primary Degenerative Cerebellar Ataxia.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Article
- Rehabilitation in patients with cerebellar ataxias.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2022Article
- Rating scales and biomarkers for CAG-repeat spinocerebellar ataxias: Implications for therapy development.Journal of the neurological sciences · 2021Review
- Information and Diagnosis Networks - tools to improve diagnosis and treatment for patients with rare genetic diseases.Genetics and molecular biology · 2019Article
- Spinocerebellar ataxias: prospects and challenges for therapy development.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2018Review
- The progression rate of spinocerebellar ataxia type 2 changes with stage of disease.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinocerebellar ataxia type 2 (SCA2), caused by a CAG expansion (CAGexp) at ATXN2, has a complex clinical picture. While validated ataxia scales are available, comprehensive instruments to measure all SCA2 neurological manifestations are required. This study aims to validate the Neurological Examination Score for the assessment of Spinocerebellar Ataxias (NESSCA) to be used in SCA2 and to compare its responsiveness to those obtained with other instruments. NESSCA, SARA, SCAFI, and CCFS scales were applied in symptomatic SCA2 patients. Correlations were done with age at onset, disease duration, CAGexp, and between scales. Responsiveness was estimated by comparing deltas of stable to worse patients after 12 months, according to Patient Global Impression of change, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the Receiver Operating Characteristics curve of scores range. Eighty-eight evaluations (49 patients) were obtained. NESSCA had an even distribution and correlated with disease duration (r = 0.55), SARA (r = 0.63), and CAGexp (rho = 0.32): both explained 44% of NESSCA variance. Deltas (95% CI) after 1 year in stable and worse patients were only significantly different for SARA. NESSCA, SARA, SCAFI, and CCFS AUC were 0.63, 0.81, 0.49, and 0.48, respectively. NESSCA is valid to be used in SCA2. However, the only instrument that presented good responsiveness to change in 1 year was SARA. We suggest that NESSCA can be used as a secondary outcome in future trials in SCA2 due to the burden of neurological disabilities related to disease progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.