Abstract:The ability to define thresholds for the clinical significance (clinical importance) of outcome measures in dementia drug research is critical to determining the changes on outcome measures that patients and families would consider worth the cost and worth risking the side effects of medications (i.e., clinical importance is central to informed consent when starting such medications). Thresholds for clinical significance are also required for drug trial sample size calculation (if the studies are to be powered to detect clinically important difference) and for decisions regarding whether medications should be accepted on formularies and should be funded. To better understand what measures of clinical significance have been employed in dementia drug research, a systematic review was performed of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in subjects with Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, mixed dementia, and mild cognitive impairment. Of the 57 dementia drug RCTs reviewed, only 46% discussed the clinical significance of their results. The most commonly cited measures of clinical significance were a 4-point change in the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale--Cognitive Subscale and changes on global scales. The majority of measures of clinical significance were opinion based. Only one study empirically measured patient perspective regarding thresholds for clinical significance. Despite being central to the interpretation of trial results and to decisions regarding whether to employ trial findings in clinical practice, patient- and caregiver-centered measures of clinical significance have not been adequately studied and integrated into dementia drug RCTs. It is recommended that discussions of clinical importance receive greater emphasis in research standards published by organizations such as the CONSORT group (http://www.consort-statement.org). Drug formulary review committees and licensing agencies (e.g., U.S. Food and Drug Administration, European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Health Canada) should consider requiring an assessment of clinical significance of the drugs they review. To move this field forward, funding agencies should consider initiating requests for proposals focused on the determination of the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of outcome measures employed in dementia research. Once empirical data on MCIDs are available, then these funding agencies should consider supporting a consensus conference to review and select the optimal measures of clinical importance in dementia research. A preliminary organizational framework of measures of clinical significance is presented in this article to facilitate the work of such a consensus forum.

Minimal clinically important difference in Alzheimer's disease: Rapid review

Establishing Clinically Meaningful Change on Outcome Assessments Frequently Used in Trials of Mild Cognitive Impairment Due to Alzheimer’s Disease

Challenges in applying minimal clinically important difference: a critical review

Systematic Review of Measures of Clinical Significance Employed in Randomized Controlled Trials of Drugs for Dementia

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference: A Review of Clinical Significance

Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Scales Reported in Stroke Trials: A Review

Assessing clinical progression measures in Alzheimer's disease trials: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Care partner‐informed meaningful change thresholds for the Clinical Dementia Rating‐Sum of Boxes for trials of early Alzheimer's disease

Measuring clinically relevant change in apathy symptoms in ADMET and ADMET 2

Clinical importance in Alzheimer's disease: effects of anchor agreement and disease severity

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference Changes Greatly Based on the Different Calculation Methods

Defining a clinically meaningful within-patient change threshold for the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory in Alzheimer's dementia

Simplifying Alzheimer's Disease Monitoring: A Novel Machine-Learning Approach to Estimate the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Box Changes Using the Mini-Mental State Examination and Functional Activities Questionnaire

Editorial Commentary: The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) Is Less Important Than It Sounds: Patients Seek to Achieve Substantial Clinical Benefits and Not Minimally Perceptible Improvements When They Undergo Arthroscopic Surgery

Alzheimer Disease Biomarkers as Outcome Measures for Clinical Trials in MCI.

Mild Cognitive Impairment Can Be Distinguished From Alzheimer Disease and Normal Aging for Clinical Trials

P4–066: Alzheimer's Disease Biomarkers As Outcome Measures for Clinical Trials

Calculation of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) using different methodologies: case study and practical guide

Expectations and clinical meaningfulness of randomized controlled trials

Mild behavioral impairment: measurement and clinical correlates of a novel marker of preclinical Alzheimer’s disease

Clinical Meaningfulness in Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials. A Report from the EU-US CTAD Task Force