Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Non-invasive Ventilation Exchange (ANEX)

July 7, 2023 updated by: University Hospital, Montpellier

Contribution of a Multimodal Digital Platform in the Management and Follow-up of Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Treated With Non-invasive Ventilation: Randomized Controlled Study

The median survival of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is 3 to 5 years and mortality is mainly related to respiratory failure. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and multidisciplinary management improve the quality of life and survival of patients. However, patients have mobility difficulties related to the progressive worsening of functional disabilities. The research team hypothesize that the use of a multimodal digital platform, including in particular telemonitoring of NIV and teleconsultation, will slow down the evolution of the disabilities of patients with ALS and improve their quality of life.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with a median life expectancy of 3 to 5 years. Respiratory failure due to alveolar hypoventilation is the main cause of mortality and respiratory impairment leads to a significant deterioration in quality of life.

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) improves patient quality of life, improves gas exchange and improves patient survival. NIV should be initiated early, based on symptomatology and lung function, and monitored closely to adjust device parameters. NIV is a complex intervention that must be individualized for each patient.

In addition, multidisciplinary management involving different healthcare professionals, keeping the patient and caregivers at the center of the network, also allows for an improvement in the quality of life and survival of these patients.

However, patients with ALS have difficulty moving around and access to care becomes more complicated as the disease progresses. This phenomenon was increased during the COVID- 19 pandemic with a more rapid functional decline.

The development of new technologies should make it possible to rethink patient management, in particular through remote monitoring of NIV devices, teleconsultation, administration of questionnaires and better interprofessional organization. Several studies have confirmed the feasibility and acceptance of telemedicine solutions in this population.

In this project, The research team hypothesize that the use of a multimodal digital platform will slow the progression of disability in ALS patients and improve their quality of life, in particular by improving the quality of NIV and optimizing the coordination of a multidisciplinary team.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

58

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

      • Montpellier, France, 34295
      • Montpellier, France, 34960

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients between 30 and 85 years old
  • Diagnosis of ALS
  • Indication and acceptance of non-invasive ventilation
  • Patient equipped with suitable equipment (tablet, computer, telephone, etc.) with an internet connection at home
  • Patient able to read and understand the procedure, and able to express consent for the study protocol

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Treatment with non-invasive ventilation in the previous three months
  • Refusal/inability to use a smart phone or digital device
  • Patient currently participating or having participated in the month preceding inclusion in another clinical interventional research that could impact the study, this impact is left to the discretion of the investigator.
  • Subject under guardianship or curators
  • Subject not affiliated to a social security scheme, or not a beneficiary of such a scheme.
  • Subject deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision
  • Pregnant, parturient, breastfeeding women
  • Refusal to give consent

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Experimental

A group of 29 patients with ALS will be formed to the multimodal digital platform associated with Non Invasive Ventilation (NIV) and usual management

Patients will be treated with NIV equipment from the manufacturer LOWENSTEIN and will benefit from the usual follow-up carried out at the reference center of Montpellier University Hospital.

Patients in the experimental group will have access to a multimodal digital platform (m-Rehab®). The solution includes a website and an application available on smart phones for the patient and caregivers. Patients and caregivers will have access to educational content about the condition and its treatments, NIV compliance data, digital group educational workshops, secure messaging and video conferencing.

All the professionals forming the patient's circle of care will be able to have access to the solution, after the patient's authorization. The circle of care, in a non-exhaustive way, includes specialist doctors, the general practitioner, the staff of the reference center of the Montpellier University Hospital, the physiotherapist, the speech therapist, the dietician and the psychologist.

Usual management including NIV.
Active Comparator: Control Comparator

A group of 29 patients with ALS will be formed : control group following usual management including NIV.

Patients will be treated with NIV equipment from the manufacturer LOWENSTEIN and will benefit from the usual follow-up carried out at the reference center of Montpellier University Hospital.

Usual management including NIV.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Difference in change in functional abilities between the experimental and control groups over 6 months of follow-up.
Time Frame: Between baseline and 6 months

Difference in variation of the functional capabilities assessed by the Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional rating scale (ALSFRS) score at Baseline (D0) and 6 months between the experimental group and the control group.

A scale to determine different aspects of functionality in patients with ALS, minimum 0 points, maximum 48 points, derived from a questionnaire with 12 questions, each of which can yield up to 4 points, higher score indicates better functionality

Between baseline and 6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Difference in change in functional abilities between the experimental and control groups during 3 months of follow-up (Between 3 months and 6 months).
Time Frame: Between 3 months and 6 months

Difference in variation of the functional capabilities assessed by the Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional rating scale (ALSFRS) score at 3 month and 6 month between the experimental group and the control group.

A scale to determine different aspects of functionality in patients with ALS, minimum 0 points, maximum 48 points, derived from a questionnaire with 12 questions, each of which can yield up to 4 points, higher score indicates better functionality

Between 3 months and 6 months
Difference in change in functional abilities between the experimental and control groups during 3 months of follow-up (Between Baseline and 3 months).
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months

Difference in variation of the functional capabilities assessed by the ALSFRS score at Baseline (D0) and 3 month between the experimental group and the control group.

A scale to determine different aspects of functionality in patients with ALS, minimum 0 points, maximum 48 points, derived from a questionnaire with 12 questions, each of which can yield up to 4 points, higher score indicates better functionality

Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of dyspnea between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months
Dyspnea assessed by modified Borg scale. Minimum is 0 (best). Maximum is 10 (worse).
Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of dyspnea between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
Dyspnea assessed by modified Borg scale. Minimum is 0 (best). Maximum is 10 (worse).
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evolution of Quality of life between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months
Quality of life assessed by the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ5D) scale. The descriptive system has five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression), each described by five levels of intensity ("no problems", "slight problems", "moderate problems", "severe problems" and "extreme problems or complete inability"). This decision results in a 1-digit number that expresses the level selected for that dimension. The digits for the five dimensions can be combined into a 5-digit number that describes the patient's health state.
Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of Quality of life between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
Quality of life assessed by the EQ5D scale. The descriptive system has five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression), each described by five levels of intensity ("no problems", "slight problems", "moderate problems", "severe problems" and "extreme problems or complete inability"). This decision results in a 1-digit number that expresses the level selected for that dimension. The digits for the five dimensions can be combined into a 5-digit number that describes the patient's health state.
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evolution of evaluation of Anxiety and depression between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months

Anxiety and depression assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale.

The HAD results in a score ranging from 0 (low anxiety or depression) to 21 (strong anxiety or depression).

Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of evaluation of Anxiety and depression between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
Anxiety and depression assessed by the HAD scale. The HAD results in a score ranging from 0 (low anxiety or depression) to 21 (strong anxiety or depression).
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evolution of Patient satisfaction between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months
Patient satisfaction assessed by the CSQ-8 (Consumer satisfaction questionnaire) Minimal score is 8 and maximal score is 32. The best score is 32, that mean that patient is satisfied.
Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of Caregivers satisfaction between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months
Caregivers satisfaction assessed by the CSQ-8. Minimal score is 8 and maximal score is 32. The best score is 32, that mean that patient is satisfied.
Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of Patient satisfaction between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
Patient satisfaction assessed by the CSQ-8. Minimal score is 8 and maximal score is 32. The best score is 32, that mean that patient is satisfied.
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evolution of Caregivers satisfaction between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
Caregivers satisfaction assessed by the CSQ-8. Minimal score is 8 and maximal score is 32. The best score is 32, that mean that patient is satisfied.
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evolution of Anthropometric criteria between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months (Weight measurements)
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months
Weight measurements
Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of Anthropometric criteria between the 2 groups between baseline and 3 months (BMI)
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 3 months
BMI
Between Baseline and 3 months
Evolution of Anthropometric criteria between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months (weight measurements)
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
weight measurements
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evolution of Anthropometric criteria between the 2 groups between baseline and 6 months (BMI)
Time Frame: Between Baseline and 6 months
BMI
Between Baseline and 6 months
Evaluation of the quality and tolerance of NIV between the 2 groups at 3 months
Time Frame: At 3 months
The quality and tolerance of NIV assessed by the S3-NIV score. Score 0 to 10, lower units represent worse outcome.
At 3 months
Evaluation of the quality and tolerance of NIV between the 2 groups at 6 months
Time Frame: At 6 months
The quality and tolerance of NIV assessed by the S3-NIV score. Score 0 to 10, lower units represent worse outcome.
At 6 months
Evaluation of the effectiveness of NIV between the 2 groups at 3 months assessed by nocturnal oximetry
Time Frame: At 3 months
The effectiveness of NIV assessed by nocturnal oximetry
At 3 months
Evaluation of the effectiveness of NIV between the 2 groups at 6 months assessed by nocturnal oximetry
Time Frame: At 6 months
The effectiveness of NIV assessed by nocturnal oximetry
At 6 months
Evaluation of the effectiveness of NIV between the 2 groups at 3 months assessed by nocturnal capnography
Time Frame: At 3 months
The effectiveness of NIV assessed by nocturnal capnography
At 3 months
Evaluation of the effectiveness of NIV between the 2 groups at 6 months assessed by nocturnal capnography
Time Frame: At 6 months
The effectiveness of NIV assessed by nocturnal capnography
At 6 months
Evaluation of the NIV parameters between the 2 groups at 3 months
Time Frame: At 3 months
NIV parameters obtained using data from the machine report
At 3 months
Evaluation of the NIV parameters between the 2 groups at 6 months
Time Frame: At 6 months
NIV parameters obtained using data from the machine report
At 6 months
Evaluation of survival between the 2 groups at 3 months
Time Frame: At 3 months
Evaluation of survival between the 2 groups at 3 months
At 3 months
Evaluation of survival between the 2 groups at 6 months
Time Frame: At 6 months
Evaluation of survival between the 2 groups at 6 months
At 6 months
Evaluation of time to first hospitalization between the 2 groups at 3 months
Time Frame: At 3 months
recovery of hospitalization data
At 3 months
Evaluation of time to first hospitalization between the 2 groups at 6 months
Time Frame: At 6 months
recovery of hospitalization data
At 6 months
Evaluation at 3 months in the experimental group of the Satisfaction of professionals with the digital solution
Time Frame: At 3 months
Satisfaction of professionals with the digital solution by a VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of satisfaction
At 3 months
Evaluation at 6 months in the experimental group of the Satisfaction of professionals with the digital solution
Time Frame: At 6 months
Satisfaction of professionals with the digital solution by a VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of satisfaction
At 6 months
Medico-economic evaluation: incremental cost-utility ratio
Time Frame: 6 months
Utility will be derived from the EQ5D
6 months
Evaluation at 3 months in the experimental group of the Patient satisfaction with the digital solution
Time Frame: At 3 months
Patient satisfaction with the digital solution assessed by a VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of satisfaction
At 3 months
Evaluation at 6 months in the experimental group of the Patient satisfaction with the digital solution
Time Frame: At 6 months
Patient satisfaction with the digital solution assessed by a VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of satisfaction
At 6 months
Evaluation at 3 months in the experimental group of the caregiver satisfaction with the digital solution
Time Frame: At 3 months
Caregiver satisfaction with the digital solution assessed by a VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of satisfaction
At 3 months
Evaluation at 6 months in the experimental group of the caregiver satisfaction with the digital solution
Time Frame: At 6 months
Caregiver satisfaction with the digital solution assessed by a VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of satisfaction
At 6 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Francois BUGHIN, MD, University Hospital, Montpellier

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

July 5, 2023

Primary Completion (Estimated)

November 1, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 19, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 19, 2023

First Posted (Actual)

May 1, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 11, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 7, 2023

Last Verified

April 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

Clinical Trials on Telerehabilitation solution (m-Rehab)

Subscribe