@article{DupuisDenglerHenekaetal.2012,
  author    = {Dupuis, Luc and Dengler, Reinhard and Heneka, Michael T. and Meyer, Thomas and Zierz, Stephan and Kassubek, Jan and Fischer, Wilhelm and Steiner, Franziska and Lindauer, Eva and Otto, Markus and Dreyhaupt, Jens and Grehl, Torsten and Hermann, Andreas and Winkler, Andrea S. and Bogdahn, Ulrich and Benecke, Reiner and Schrank, Bertold and Wessig, Carsten and Grosskreutz, Julian and Ludolph, Albert C.},
  title     = {A Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Pioglitazone in Combination with Riluzole in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis},
  series = {PLoS One},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {PLoS One},
  number    = {6},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0037885},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130255},
  pages     = {e37885},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Background: Pioglitazone, an oral anti-diabetic that stimulates the PPAR-gamma transcription factor, increased survival of mice with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Methods/Principal Findings: We performed a phase II, double blind, multicentre, placebo controlled trial of pioglitazone in ALS patients under riluzole. 219 patients were randomly assigned to receive 45 mg/day of pioglitazone or placebo (one: one allocation ratio). The primary endpoint was survival. Secondary endpoints included incidence of non-invasive ventilation and tracheotomy, and slopes of ALS-FRS, slow vital capacity, and quality of life as assessed using EUROQoL EQ-5D. The study was conducted under a two-stage group sequential test, allowing to stop for futility or superiority after interim analysis. Shortly after interim analysis, 30 patients under pioglitazone and 24 patients under placebo had died. The trial was stopped for futility; the hazard ratio for primary endpoint was 1.21 (95\% CI: 0.71-2.07, p = 0.48). Secondary endpoints were not modified by pioglitazone treatment. Pioglitazone was well tolerated. Conclusion/Significance: Pioglitazone has no beneficial effects on the survival of ALS patients as add-on therapy to riluzole.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PeseschkianCordtsGuentheretal.2021,
  author    = {Peseschkian, Tara and Cordts, Isabell and G{\"u}nther, Ren{\´e} and Stolte, Benjamin and Zeller, Daniel and Schr{\"o}ter, Carsten and Weyen, Ute and Regensburger, Martin and Wolf, Joachim and Schneider, Ilka and Hermann, Andreas and Metelmann, Moritz and Kohl, Zacharias and Linker, Ralf A. and Koch, Jan Christoph and B{\"u}chner, Boriana and Weiland, Ulrike and Sch{\"o}nfelder, Erik and Heinrich, Felix and Osmanovic, Alma and Klopstock, Thomas and Dorst, Johannes and Ludolph, Albert C. and Boentert, Matthias and Hagenacker, Tim and Deschauer, Marcus and Lingor, Paul and Petri, Susanne and Schreiber-Katz, Olivia},
  title     = {A nation-wide, multi-center study on the quality of life of ALS patients in Germany},
  series = {Brain Sciences},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Brain Sciences},
  number    = {3},
  issn      = {2076-3425},
  doi       = {10.3390/brainsci11030372},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-234147},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Improving quality of life (QoL) is central to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) treatment. This Germany-wide, multicenter cross-sectional study analyses the impact of different symptom-specific treatments and ALS variants on QoL. Health-related QoL (HRQoL) in 325 ALS patients was assessed using the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Assessment Questionnaire 5 (ALSAQ-5) and EuroQol Five Dimension Five Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L), together with disease severity (captured by the revised ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R)) and the current care and therapies used by our cohort. At inclusion, the mean ALSAQ-5 total score was 56.93 (max. 100, best = 0) with a better QoL associated with a less severe disease status (β = -1.96 per increase of one point in the ALSFRS-R score, p < 0.001). "Limb-onset" ALS (lALS) was associated with a better QoL than "bulbar-onset" ALS (bALS) (mean ALSAQ-5 total score 55.46 versus 60.99, p = 0.040). Moreover, with the ALSFRS-R as a covariate, using a mobility aid (β = -7.60, p = 0.001), being tracheostomized (β = -14.80, p = 0.004) and using non-invasive ventilation (β = -5.71, p = 0.030) were associated with an improved QoL, compared to those at the same disease stage who did not use these aids. In contrast, antidepressant intake (β = 5.95, p = 0.007), and increasing age (β = 0.18, p = 0.023) were predictors of worse QoL. Our results showed that the ALSAQ-5 was better-suited for ALS patients than the EQ-5D-5L. Further, the early and symptom-specific clinical management and supply of assistive devices can significantly improve the individual HRQoL of ALS patients. Appropriate QoL questionnaires are needed to monitor the impact of treatment to provide the best possible and individualized care.},
  language  = {en}
}