AUTHOR=Sun Zhaonan , Ware Jennifer , Dey Sanjoy , Eyigoz Elif , Sathe Swati , Sampaio Cristina , Hu Jianying TITLE=Large-scale screening of clinical assessments to distinguish between states in the Integrated HD Progression Model (IHDPM) JOURNAL=Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience VOLUME=16 YEAR=2024 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1320755 DOI=10.3389/fnagi.2024.1320755 ISSN=1663-4365 ABSTRACT=Background

Understanding the sensitivity and utility of clinical assessments across different HD stages is important for study/trial endpoint selection and clinical assessment development. The Integrated HD Progression Model (IHDPM) characterizes the complex symptom progression of HD and separates the disease into nine ordered disease states.

Objective

To generate a temporal map of discriminatory clinical measures across the IHDPM states.

Methods

We applied the IHDPM to all HD individuals in an integrated longitudinal HD dataset derived from four observational studies, obtaining disease state assignment for each study visit. Using large-scale screening, we estimated Cohen’s effect sizes to rank the discriminative power of 2,472 clinical measures for separating observations in disease state pairs. Individual trajectories through IHDPM states were examined. Discriminative analyses were limited to individuals with observations in both states of the pairs compared (N = 3,790).

Results

Discriminative clinical measures were heterogeneous across the HD life course. UHDRS items were frequently identified as the best state pair discriminators, with UHDRS Motor items – most notably TMS – showing the highest discriminatory power between the early-disease states and early post-transition period states. UHDRS functional items emerged as strong discriminators from the transition period and on. Cognitive assessments showed good discriminative power between all state pairs examined, excepting state 1 vs. 2. Several non-UHDRS assessments were also flagged as excellent state discriminators for specific disease phases (e.g., SF-12). For certain state pairs, single assessment items other than total/summary scores were highlighted as having excellent discriminative power.

Conclusion

By providing ranked quantitative scores indicating discriminatory ability of thousands of clinical measures between specific pairs of IHDPM states, our results will aid clinical trial designers select the most effective outcome measures tailored to their study cohort. Our observations may also assist in the development of end points targeting specific phases in the disease life course, through providing specific conceptual foci.