Prognostic Model for Predicting Outcome After Moderate to Severe Paediatric Traumatic Brain Injury (PROMPT)
Prediction Model in Paediatric Moderate to Severe TBI
Due to ethical and logistical challenges related to paediatric research, there is limited age-appropriate evidence for managing paediatric traumatic brain injury (pTBI). The prognostic models used for adult TBI research (IMPACT, CRASH), have been derived and validated from analysis of large international datasets which have undergone further validation in multiple prospective studies; the wide use of these prognostic models across neurotrauma research highlights the relative simplicity and the variables used for prediction making them applicable to both low and high resource set-ups. This has facilitated international collaborative research in adult TBI. At present, no such models exist for pTBI with most paediatric research continuing to use adult prognostic models.
Though the variables used for these models show association with outcome in pTBI as well, there are multiple issues with this approach with the key difficulty being that younger age is expected to be associated with better outcome in these models; however, the balance between neuroplasticity and neurodevelopmental trajectory in children is difficult to predict with evidence suggesting worse neuro-developmental outcomes after TBI in younger children. Hence the adult models can either over- or under-predict neurological outcomes in pTBI and have never been validated in pTBI datasets.
Given that the amount of data required to create pTBI predictive model is difficult to collect and reasonable validity of adult prognostic models in pTBI, investigators propose to create paediatric modification to the adult models and identify a robust pTBI predictive model for improved classification of injury severity to predict disease trajectory and outcome as well as stratification of patients for interventional research and benchmarking in pTBI to help with appropriate resource allocation for neuro-interventions towards improved outcomes. This will help identify age-appropriate benchmarks for pTBI research studies as well as complement an individual child's clinical assessment, treatment decisions, informing families and resource allocation.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Detailed Description
Background The healthcare, societal and economic impact from paediatric traumatic brain injury (pTBI) is one of the greatest unmet needs with estimates suggesting upto 2/3rd of survivors developing life-long neurological deficits. Due to ethical and logistical challenges related to paediatric research, there is limited age-appropriate evidence for children which perpetuates the funding gaps further confounding the lack of evidence. However, extrapolation of adult TBI research evidence to children is inaccurate and inappropriate given the differences in mechanisms and patterns of injury, pathophysiological responses and neurological recovery from it, in the context of developmental trajectory; hence, robust evidence is required to improve outcomes from pTBI as well as facilitate research collaborations.
The prognostic models used for adult TBI research (IMPACT, CRASH)5,6 and imaging criteria (Marshall and Rotterdam scores), have been derived and validated from analysis of large international datasets which have undergone further validation in multiple prospective studies; the wide use of these prognostic models across neurotrauma research highlights the relative simplicity and the variables used for prediction making them applicable to both low and high resource set-ups.
This has facilitated international collaborative research in adult TBI; however, no such models exist for pTBI with most pTBI research continuing to use adult prognostic models. Though the variables used for these models show association with outcome in pTBI as well, there are multiple issues with this approach with the key difficulty being the age variable. In the adult models, the younger age is expected to be associated with better outcome; for CRASH, the model is likely weighed heavily towards non-age variables as the younger patients are expected to do better with patients between 18-40 lumped as <40 years and for IMPACT, slightly better which accounts for 14 years and above.
However, the balance between neuroplasticity and neurodevelopmental trajectory in paediatric age group is difficult to predict with evidence suggesting worse neuro-developmental outcomes after TBI in younger children. Hence the adult models can either over- or under-predict neurological outcomes in pTBI and have never been validated in pTBI datasets.
- Rationale & Theoretical Framework A validated predictive model for pTBI would be the first step towards collaborative research and identifying age-appropriate benchmarks for pTBI research studies as well as to complement an individual child's clinical assessment, treatment decisions, informing families and resource allocation. Given that the amount of data required to create pTBI predictive model is difficult to collect and the reasonable validity of adult prognostic models in pTBI, albeit in small single-centre studies, investigators propose to create paediatric modification to the adult models and identify a robust pTBI predictive model for improved classification of injury severity to predict disease trajectory and outcome as well as stratification of patients for interventional research and benchmarking in pTBI to help with appropriate resource allocation for neuro-interventions towards improved outcomes.
Research Question/Aims and Objectives:
To create and validate a paediatric specific prognostic model for outcomes following moderate to severe TBI for use in both resource-limited and resource-rich environments. The study hypothesis is that the performance of the current adult TBI prognostic models in predicting outcomes following pTBI can be improved by introducing age-appropriate modifications to the existing models.
Study Design/ Methods:
The study will use combined retrospective pTBI datasets (moderate to severe TBI in children < 18 years).
- Sample & Statistical Methods:
There is no defined sample size for the study. Investigators aim to collect datasets which contain the variables defining injury severity from children with moderate to severe TBI upto the age of 18 years. There are no exclusion criteria for the study. All the datasets will either be from a prospective study (ethics approved with valid consent) and/or datasets created for audit/institutional purposes with appropriate approvals from local/national research committees and contain anonymised non-identifiable information.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Cambridgeshire
-
Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom, CB2 2QQ
- Hospital
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
- Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients admitted to hospital with moderate to severe TBI
Exclusion Criteria:
- None
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Number of groups / cohorts
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / CohortGroup / Cohort |
|---|
|
ADAPT
International Paediatric severe traumatic brain injury prospective study- 1000 patients
|
|
STARSHIP
Prospective multicentre researchdatabase of Paediatric moderate to severe TBI of 135 patients
|
|
CENTER-TBI
Prospective research database of traumatic brain injury, 227 patients <18 years of age.
|
|
Cambridge
Database of Paediatric TBI admissions to CUH, 350 patients
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Glasgow Outcome Score.
Time Frame: 6 months
|
The scale ranges from 1 to 5 with increasing scores suggesting improving outcome (1-death, 5-normal).
The score will be dichotomised to favourable (4-5) and unfavourable (1-3).
|
6 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Maas AI, Hukkelhoven CW, Marshall LF, Steyerberg EW. Prediction of outcome in traumatic brain injury with computed tomographic characteristics: a comparison between the computed tomographic classification and combinations of computed tomographic predictors. Neurosurgery. 2005 Dec;57(6):1173-82; discussion 1173-82. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000186013.63046.6b.
- Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE Jr. Prediction models need appropriate internal, internal-external, and external validation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jan;69:245-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.04.005. Epub 2015 Apr 18. No abstract available.
- Huth SF, Slater A, Waak M, Barlow K, Raman S. Predicting Neurological Recovery after Traumatic Brain Injury in Children: A Systematic Review of Prognostic Models. J Neurotrauma. 2020 Oct 15;37(20):2141-2149. doi: 10.1089/neu.2020.7158. Epub 2020 Jul 20.
- Young AM, Guilfoyle MR, Fernandes H, Garnett MR, Agrawal S, Hutchinson PJ. The application of adult traumatic brain injury models in a pediatric cohort. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2016 Nov;18(5):558-564. doi: 10.3171/2016.5.PEDS15427. Epub 2016 Aug 26.
- Yue JK, Lee YM, Sun X, van Essen TA, Elguindy MM, Belton PJ, Pisica D, Mikolic A, Deng H, Kanter JH, McCrea MA, Bodien YG, Satris GG, Wong JC, Ambati VS, Grandhi R, Puccio AM, Mukherjee P, Valadka AB, Tarapore PE, Huang MC, DiGiorgio AM, Markowitz AJ, Yuh EL, Okonkwo DO, Steyerberg EW, Lingsma HF, Menon DK, Maas AIR, Jain S, Manley GT; The TRACK-TBI Investigators. Performance of the IMPACT and CRASH prognostic models for traumatic brain injury in a contemporary multicenter cohort: a TRACK-TBI study. J Neurosurg. 2024 Mar 15;141(2):417-429. doi: 10.3171/2023.11.JNS231425. Print 2024 Aug 1.
- Martin FP, Goronflot T, Moyer JD, Huet O, Asehnoune K, Cinotti R, Gourraud PA, Roquilly A. Predictive Models of Long-Term Outcome in Patients with Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury are Biased Toward Mortality Prediction. Neurocrit Care. 2025 Apr;42(2):573-586. doi: 10.1007/s12028-024-02082-3. Epub 2024 Aug 13.
- Sta Maria NS, Sargolzaei S, Prins ML, Dennis EL, Asarnow RF, Hovda DA, Harris NG, Giza CC. Bridging the gap: Mechanisms of plasticity and repair after pediatric TBI. Exp Neurol. 2019 Aug;318:78-91. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2019.04.016. Epub 2019 May 2.
- Speer EM, Lee LK, Bourgeois FT, Gitterman D, Hay WW Jr, Davis JM, Javier JR. The state and future of pediatric research-an introductory overview : The state and future of pediatric research series. Pediatr Res. 2023 Jan 24:1-5. doi: 10.1038/s41390-022-02439-4. Online ahead of print.
- Dewan MC, Mummareddy N, Wellons JC 3rd, Bonfield CM. Epidemiology of Global Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury: Qualitative Review. World Neurosurg. 2016 Jul;91:497-509.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.03.045. Epub 2016 Mar 25.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- A097348
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
-
NCT02030366RecruitingTraumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Patients
-
NCT01923441Completed
-
NCT01963247CompletedHealthy | Minor Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
-
NCT07326059Not yet recruitingTraumatic Brain Injury | Traumatic Brain Injury With Brief Loss of Consciousness | Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI); Concussion, Initial Encounter | Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI); Concussion, Subsequent Encounter | Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Patients | Traumatic Brain Injury With Persistent Cognitive Deficits
-
NCT01759173CompletedMinor Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
-
NCT07483528Not yet recruitingTraumatic Brain Injury | TBI | Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Patients
-
NCT06830616Not yet recruitingTraumatic Brain Injury (TBI); Concussion, Initial Encounter
-
NCT06480838RecruitingTBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) | TBI | Traumatic Brain Injury With Loss of Consciousness | Brain Injury Traumatic Severe | Brain Injury Traumatic Moderate
-
NCT06024122RecruitingTBI (Traumatic Brain Injury)
-
NCT06836856Recruiting