Outcome measures in Angelman syndrome

被引:1
|
作者
Hagenaar, Doesjka A. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Bindels-de Heus, Karen G. C. B. [1 ,3 ]
van Gils, Maud M. [4 ]
van den Berg, Louise [1 ,2 ]
ten Hoopen, Leontine W. [1 ,2 ]
Affourtit, Philine [1 ,5 ]
Pel, Johan J. M. [4 ]
Joosten, Koen F. M. [6 ]
Hillegers, Manon H. J. [2 ]
Moll, Henriette A. [1 ,3 ]
de Wit, Marie-Claire Y. [1 ,7 ]
Dieleman, Gwen C. [1 ,2 ]
Mous, Sabine E. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus MC, ENCORE Expertise Ctr Neurodev Disorders, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Erasmus MC, Dept Child & Adolescent Psychiat Psychol, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Erasmus MC, Dept Paediat, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[4] Erasmus MC, Dept Neurosci, Vestibular & Oculomotor Res Grp, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[5] Erasmus MC, Dept Dietet, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[6] Erasmus MC, Dept Neonatal & Pediat ICU, Div Pediat ICU, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[7] Erasmus MC, Dept Neurol & Paediat Neurol, Rotterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Angelman syndrome; Outcome measures; Eye-tracking; Functional near-Infrared Spectroscopy; Indirect calorimetry; Bio-impedance analysis; BOD POD; CHILDREN; BEHAVIOR; SPECIALIZATION; ATTENTION; PATTERNS; AUTISM;
D O I
10.1186/s11689-024-09516-1
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundAngelman syndrome (AS) is a rare neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by severe intellectual disability, little to no expressive speech, visual and motor problems, emotional/behavioral challenges, and a tendency towards hyperphagia and weight gain. The characteristics of AS make it difficult to measure these children's functioning with standard clinical tests. Feasible outcome measures are needed to measure current functioning and change over time, in clinical practice and clinical trials.AimOur first aim is to assess the feasibility of several functional tests. We target domains of neurocognitive functioning and physical growth using the following measurement methods: eye-tracking, functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS), indirect calorimetry, bio-impedance analysis (BIA), and BOD POD (air-displacement plethysmography). Our second aim is to explore the results of the above measures, in order to better understand the AS phenotype.MethodsThe study sample consisted of 28 children with AS aged 2-18 years. We defined an outcome measure as feasible when (1) at least 70% of participants successfully finished the measurement and (2) at least 60% of those participants had acceptable data quality. Adaptations to the test procedure and reasons for early termination were noted. Parents rated acceptability and importance and were invited to make recommendations to increase feasibility. The results of the measures were explored.ResultsOutcome measures obtained with eye-tracking and BOD POD met the definition of feasibility, while fNIRS, indirect calorimetry, and BIA did not. The most important reasons for early termination of measurements were showing signs of protest, inability to sit still and poor/no calibration (eye-tracking specific). Post-calibration was often applied to obtain valid eye-tracking results. Parents rated the BOD POD als most acceptable and fNIRS as least acceptable for their child. All outcome measures were rated to be important. Exploratory results indicated longer reaction times to high salient visual stimuli (eye-tracking) as well as high body fat percentage (BOD POD).ConclusionsEye-tracking and BOD POD are feasible measurement methods for children with AS. Eye-tracking was successfully used to assess visual orienting functions in the current study and (with some practical adaptations) can potentially be used to assess other outcomes as well. BOD POD was successfully used to examine body composition.Trial registrationRegistered d.d. 23-04-2020 under number 'NL8550' in the Dutch Trial Register: https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/23075
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Outcome measures in Angelman syndrome
    Doesjka A. Hagenaar
    Karen G. C. B. Bindels-de Heus
    Maud M. van Gils
    Louise van den Berg
    Leontine W. ten Hoopen
    Philine Affourtit
    Johan J. M. Pel
    Koen F. M. Joosten
    Manon H. J. Hillegers
    Henriëtte A. Moll
    Marie-Claire Y. de Wit
    Gwen C. Dieleman
    Sabine E. Mous
    Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 16
  • [2] Angelman Syndrome in Adulthood
    Larson, Anna M.
    Shinnick, Julianna E.
    Shaaya, Elias A.
    Thiele, Elizabeth A.
    Thibert, Ronald L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS PART A, 2015, 167 (02) : 331 - 344
  • [3] Gait as a quantitative translational outcome measure in Angelman syndrome
    Petkova, Stela P.
    Adhikari, Anna
    Berg, Elizabeth L.
    Fenton, Timothy A.
    Duis, Jessica
    Silverman, Jill L.
    AUTISM RESEARCH, 2022, 15 (05) : 821 - 833
  • [4] Quantitative measures of motor development in Angelman syndrome
    Duis, Jessica
    Skinner, Austin
    Carson, Robert
    Gouelle, Arnaud
    Annoussamy, Melanie
    Silverman, Jill L.
    Apkon, Susan
    Servais, Laurent
    Carollo, James
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS PART A, 2023, 191 (07) : 1711 - 1721
  • [5] Eye gaze and pupillary response in Angelman syndrome
    Hong, Michael P.
    Guilfoyle, Janna L.
    Mooney, Lindsey N.
    Wink, Logan K.
    Pedapati, Ernest V.
    Shaffer, Rebecca C.
    Sweeney, John A.
    Erickson, Craig A.
    RESEARCH IN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, 2017, 68 : 88 - 94
  • [6] Current and emerging treatment options for Angelman syndrome
    Keary, Christopher J.
    McDougle, Christopher J.
    EXPERT REVIEW OF NEUROTHERAPEUTICS, 2023, : 835 - 844
  • [7] Neurodevelopmental outcome in Angelman syndrome: Genotype-phenotype correlations
    Mertz, Line Granild Bie
    Thaulov, Per
    Trillingsgaard, Anegen
    Christensen, Rikke
    Vogel, Ida
    Hertz, Jens Michael
    Ostergaard, John R.
    RESEARCH IN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, 2014, 35 (07) : 1742 - 1747
  • [8] Incontinence in persons with Angelman syndrome
    Wagner, C.
    Niemczyk, J.
    Equit, M.
    Curfs, L.
    von Gontard, A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2017, 176 (02) : 225 - 232
  • [9] Spoken language comprehension in children and adults with Angelman Syndrome
    Key, Alexandra P.
    Roth, Sydney
    Venker, Courtney
    JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS, 2022, 100
  • [10] Angelman Syndrome
    Margolis, Seth S.
    Sell, Gabrielle L.
    Zbinden, Mark A.
    Bird, Lynne M.
    NEUROTHERAPEUTICS, 2015, 12 (03) : 641 - 650