Linking the clinical dementia rating scale-sum of boxes, the clinician's interview-based impression plus caregiver input, and the clinical global impression scale: Evidence based on individual participant data from five randomized clinical trials of donepezil

Myrto Samara, Stephen Z. Levine, Kazufumi Yoshida, Yair Goldberg, Andrea Cipriani, Orestis Efthimiou, Takeshi Iwatsubo, Stefan Leucht, Toshiaki A. Furakawa

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: In patients with Alzheimer's disease, global assessment scales, such as the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression Plus Caregiver Input (CIBI plus), and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) are commonly used. Objective: To clinically understand and interpret the associations between these scales, we examined the linkages for the total and change scores of CDR-SB, CIBI plus, and CGI. Methods: Individual participant data (N=2,198) from five pivotal randomized placebo-controlled trials of donepezil were included. Data were collected at baseline and scheduled visits for up to 6 months. Spearman's correlation coefficients ρ were examined between corresponding total and change scores of simultaneous CDR-SB, CIBI plus, and CGI ratings. To link between the simultaneous ratings, equipercentile linking was used. Results: We found strong evidence that the Spearman's correlation coefficients between the CDR-SB and CGI, and CDR-SB and CIBI plus total scores were at least adequately correlated (ρ=0.50 to 0.71, with p<0.01). The correlation coefficients between the change scores of CDR-SB and CGI were deemed adequate for weeks 6 to 24 (ρ=0.44 to 0.65); the remaining correlations were smaller in magnitude (ρ=0.09 to 0.35). Overall, the linkages were in-line with expectations, e.g., CDR-SB range score of 3-4 (=very mild dementia) was linked to a CGI score of 3 (=mildly ill), and an increase of CDR-SB of 1 was linked to a change of 5 (=minimal worsening) in both CGI and CIBI plus. Conclusion: The study findings can be useful for clinicians wishing to compare scores of different scales across patients. They can also help researchers understand results of studies using different scales and can facilitate meta-analyses, to increase statistical power.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1075-1084
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Alzheimer's Disease
Volume82
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2021
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 - IOS Press. All rights reserved.

Funding

Cipriani is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Cognitive Health Clinical Research Facility, by an NIHR Research Professorship (grant RP-2017-08-ST2-006), by the NIHR Oxford and Thames Valley Applied Research Collaboration and by the NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre (grant BRC-1215-20005). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the UK National Health Service, the NIHR, or the UK Department of Health. Efthimiou is supported by project grant No. 180083 from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF).

FundersFunder number
NIHR Oxford and Thames Valley
National Health Service
National Institute for Health ResearchRP-2017-08-ST2-006
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreBRC-1215-20005, 180083

    Keywords

    • Alzheimer's disease
    • clinical dementia rating-sum of boxes
    • clinical global impression
    • clinician's interview-based impression of change
    • clinician's interview-based impression of severity
    • global ratings
    • minimal clinically important difference

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Linking the clinical dementia rating scale-sum of boxes, the clinician's interview-based impression plus caregiver input, and the clinical global impression scale: Evidence based on individual participant data from five randomized clinical trials of donepezil'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this