This is a multicenter, prospective, single cohort study designed to describe the natural history of DMD in Chinese male patients. A total of approximately 330 subjects will be enrolled with the target number of subjects in each group as below: * Group 1, Ambulatory subjects aged \<6 years, approximately 100 subjects; * Group 2, Ambulatory subjects aged \>=6 years, approximately 180 subjects; * Group 3, Non-ambulatory subjects, approximately 50 subjects. Subjects will visit sites every 6 months. Each subject will be observed for at least 24 months. All subjects will remain enrolled until the study completion date, such that some will have data collected after Month 24. Subjects, who complete Visit 5/Month 24 at least 6 months prior to study completion, will be asked to complete an additional visit at Month 30.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
312
All subjects need to visit sites more frequently than in routine clinical practice.
Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University
Chongqing, Chongqing Municipality, China
Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (Liangjiang Branch)
Chongqing, Chongqing Municipality, China
The First Affiliated Hospital Of Fujian Medical University
Fuzhou, Fujian, China
Peking University First Hospital
Beijing, China
Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University
Beijing, China
Huashan Hospital, Fudan University
Shanghai, China
Affiliated children's hospital of fudan university
Shanghai, China
Children's Hospital of Fudan University
Shanghai, China
Age of Participants When They Failed to Walk
Participant's age at life-altering clinical milestones- failure to walk was calculated based on the birthdate and the date of failure to walk as reported by caregiver during 30 months of this study. Participants who were not reported being failure to walk by their caregivers were censored on the day of their last visit. Kaplan-Meier method was used for analysis.
Time frame: Up to Month 30
Age of Participants When They Failed to Stand
Participant's age at life-altering clinical milestones- failure to stand was calculated based on the birthdate and the date of failure to stand as reported by caregiver during 30 months of this study. Participants who were not reported being failure to stand by their caregivers were censored on the day of their last visit. Kaplan-Meier method was used for analysis.
Time frame: Up to Month 30
Age of Participants When They Failed to Self-feed
Participant's age at life-altering clinical milestones- failure to self-feed during 30 months of this study was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Age was summarized in years.
Time frame: Up to Month 30
Change From Baseline in Northstar Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) Total Score at Month 6: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
NSAA is a 17-item test that grades performance of various functional skills using the following scale: 0 (unable to achieve goal independently), 1 (modified method but achieves goal with no physical assistance), or 2 ("normal"- no obvious modification of activity). The scale assesses activities required to remain functionally ambulant (e.g. rise from the floor), activities that can be difficult even early in the disease (example \[e.g.\] standing on heels) and activities that are known to progressively deteriorate over time (stand from a chair, walk). NSAA total score was calculated by adding the responses of all 17 items and ranged from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating better function. NSAA was only performed in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in NSAA Total Score at Month 12: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
NSAA is a 17-item test that grades performance of various functional skills using the following scale: 0 (unable to achieve goal independently), 1 (modified method but achieves goal with no physical assistance), or 2 ("normal"- no obvious modification of activity). The scale assesses activities required to remain functionally ambulant (e.g. rise from the floor), activities that can be difficult even early in the disease (e.g. standing on heels) and activities that are known to progressively deteriorate over time (stand from a chair, walk). NSAA total score was calculated by adding the responses of all 17 items and ranged from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating better function. NSAA was only performed in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in NSAA Total Score at Month 18: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
NSAA is a 17-item test that grades performance of various functional skills using the following scale: 0 (unable to achieve goal independently), 1 (modified method but achieves goal with no physical assistance), or 2 ("normal"- no obvious modification of activity). The scale assesses activities required to remain functionally ambulant (e.g. rise from the floor), activities that can be difficult even early in the disease (e.g. standing on heels) and activities that are known to progressively deteriorate over time (stand from a chair, walk). NSAA total score was calculated by adding the responses of all 17 items and ranged from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating better function. NSAA was only performed in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in NSAA Total Score at Month 24: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
NSAA is a 17-item test that grades performance of various functional skills using the following scale: 0 (unable to achieve goal independently), 1 (modified method but achieves goal with no physical assistance), or 2 ("normal"- no obvious modification of activity). The scale assesses activities required to remain functionally ambulant (e.g. rise from the floor), activities that can be difficult even early in the disease (e.g. standing on heels) and activities that are known to progressively deteriorate over time (stand from a chair, walk). NSAA total score was calculated by adding the responses of all 17 items and ranged from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating better function. NSAA was only performed in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in NSAA Total Score at Month 30: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
NSAA is a 17-item test that grades performance of various functional skills using the following scale: 0 (unable to achieve goal independently), 1 (modified method but achieves goal with no physical assistance), or 2 ("normal"- no obvious modification of activity). The scale assesses activities required to remain functionally ambulant (e.g. rise from the floor), activities that can be difficult even early in the disease (e.g. standing on heels) and activities that are known to progressively deteriorate over time (stand from a chair, walk). NSAA total score was calculated by adding the responses of all 17 items and ranged from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating better function. NSAA was only performed in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Performance of Upper Limb (PUL) 2.0 Total Score at Month 6: Participants Aged >=10 Years
PUL 2.0 scale is a 22-item scale used to assess the change that occurs in motor performance of the upper limb overtime from when a participant is still ambulant to the time participant loses all arm function when non-ambulant. PUL 2.0 includes an entry item to define broad starting functional level and 22 items subdivided into shoulder level (six items), mid-level (nine items), and distal level (seven items). Each dimension (shoulder, mid, distal) can be scored separately. There is maximum score of 12 for shoulder level, 17 for mid-level, and 13 for distal level. The total score was calculated by adding three level scores and ranged from 0-42. Higher score indicates better upper limb function. PUL 2.0 total score was assessed in participants aged \>=10 years only as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in PUL 2.0 Total Score at Month 12: Participants Aged >=10 Years
PUL 2.0 scale is a 22-item scale used to assess the change that occurs in motor performance of the upper limb overtime from when a participant is still ambulant to the time participant loses all arm function when non-ambulant. PUL 2.0 includes an entry item to define broad starting functional level and 22 items subdivided into shoulder level (six items), mid-level (nine items), and distal level (seven items). Each dimension (shoulder, mid, distal) can be scored separately. There is maximum score of 12 for shoulder level, 17 for mid-level, and 13 for distal level. The total score was calculated by adding three level scores and ranged from 0-42. Higher score indicates better upper limb function. PUL 2.0 total score was assessed in participants aged \>=10 years only as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in PUL 2.0 Total Score at Month 18: Participants Aged >=10 Years
PUL 2.0 scale is a 22-item scale used to assess the change that occurs in motor performance of the upper limb overtime from when a participant is still ambulant to the time participant loses all arm function when non-ambulant. PUL 2.0 includes an entry item to define broad starting functional level and 22 items subdivided into shoulder level (six items), mid-level (nine items), and distal level (seven items). Each dimension (shoulder, mid, distal) can be scored separately. There is maximum score of 12 for shoulder level, 17 for mid-level, and 13 for distal level. The total score was calculated by adding three level scores and ranged from 0-42. Higher score indicates better upper limb function. PUL 2.0 total score was assessed in participants aged \>=10 years only as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in PUL 2.0 Total Score at Month 24: Participants Aged >=10 Years
PUL 2.0 scale is a 22-item scale used to assess the change that occurs in motor performance of the upper limb overtime from when a participant is still ambulant to the time participant loses all arm function when non-ambulant. PUL 2.0 includes an entry item to define broad starting functional level and 22 items subdivided into shoulder level (six items), mid-level (nine items), and distal level (seven items). Each dimension (shoulder, mid, distal) can be scored separately. There is maximum score of 12 for shoulder level, 17 for mid-level, and 13 for distal level. The total score was calculated by adding three level scores and ranged from 0-42. Higher score indicates better upper limb function. PUL 2.0 total score was assessed in participants aged \>=10 years only as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in PUL 2.0 Total Score at Month 30: Participants Aged >=10 Years
PUL 2.0 scale is a 22-item scale used to assess the change that occurs in motor performance of the upper limb overtime from when a participant is still ambulant to the time participant loses all arm function when non-ambulant. PUL 2.0 includes an entry item to define broad starting functional level and 22 items subdivided into shoulder level (six items), mid-level (nine items), and distal level (seven items). Each dimension (shoulder, mid, distal) can be scored separately. There is maximum score of 12 for shoulder level, 17 for mid-level, and 13 for distal level. The total score was calculated by adding three level scores and ranged from 0-42. Higher score indicates better upper limb function. PUL 2.0 total score was assessed in participants aged \>=10 years only as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Rise From Floor Velocity at Month 6: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years Only
The rise from floor velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to rise from floor. The rise from floor test was performed only in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in Rise From Floor Velocity at Month 12: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years Only
The rise from floor velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to rise from floor. The rise from floor test was performed only in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Rise From Floor Velocity at Month 18: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years Only
The rise from floor velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to rise from floor. The rise from floor test was performed only in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in Rise From Floor Velocity at Month 24: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years Only
The rise from floor velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to rise from floor. The rise from floor test was performed only in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Rise From Floor Velocity at Month 30: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years Only
The rise from floor velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to rise from floor. The rise from floor test was performed only in ambulatory participants aged \>=3 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in 10 Meter Walk or Run Velocity at Month 6: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
The 10 meter walk or run test was performed as part of NSAA. The 10 meter walk or run velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to complete the 10 meter run or walk test. The 10 meter walk or run test was performed in ambulatory children \>=3 years old only as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in 10 Meter Walk or Run Velocity at Month 12: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
The 10 meter walk or run test was performed as part of NSAA. The 10 meter walk or run velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to complete the 10 meter run or walk test. The 10 meter walk or run test was performed in ambulatory children \>=3 years old only as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in 10 Meter Walk or Run Velocity at Month 18: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
The 10 meter walk or run test was performed as part of NSAA. The 10 meter walk or run velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to complete the 10 meter run or walk test. The 10 meter walk or run test was performed in ambulatory children \>=3 years old only as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in 10 Meter Walk or Run Velocity at Month 24: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
The 10 meter walk or run test was performed as part of NSAA. The 10 meter walk or run velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to complete the 10 meter run or walk test. The 10 meter walk or run test was performed in ambulatory children \>=3 years old only as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in 10 Meter Walk or Run Velocity at Month 30: Ambulatory Participants Aged >=3 Years
The 10 meter walk or run test was performed as part of NSAA. The 10 meter walk or run velocity was defined as the reciprocal of the time (in seconds) to complete the 10 meter run or walk test. The 10 meter walk or run test was performed in ambulatory children \>=3 years old only as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Knee Extension of Muscle Strength at Month 6: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right knee extension was analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in Knee Extension of Muscle Strength at Month 12: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right knee extension was analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Knee Extension of Muscle Strength at Month 18: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right knee extension was analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in Knee Extension of Muscle Strength at Month 24: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right knee extension was analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Knee Extension of Muscle Strength at Month 30: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right knee extension was analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Elbow Flexion of Muscle Strength at Month 6: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow flexion were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in Elbow Flexion of Muscle Strength at Month 12: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow flexion were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Elbow Flexion of Muscle Strength at Month 18: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow flexion were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in Elbow Flexion of Muscle Strength at Month 24: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow flexion were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Elbow Flexion of Muscle Strength at Month 30: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow flexion were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Elbow Extension of Muscle Strength at Month 6: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow extension were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in Elbow Extension Muscle Strength at Month 12: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow extension were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Elbow Extension Muscle Strength at Month 18: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow extension were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in Elbow Extension Muscle Strength at Month 24: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow extension were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Elbow Extension Muscle Strength at Month 30: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right elbow extension were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Shoulder Abduction of Muscle Strength at Month 6: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right shoulder abduction were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in Shoulder Abduction of Muscle Strength at Month 12: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right shoulder abduction were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Shoulder Abduction of Muscle Strength at Month 18: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right shoulder abduction were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in Shoulder Abduction of Muscle Strength at Month 24: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right shoulder abduction were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Shoulder Abduction of Muscle Strength at Month 30: Participants Aged >=5 Years
Muscle strength was recorded by handheld myometry. Left and right shoulder abduction were analyzed. The muscle strength test was only performed in participants \>=5 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Range of Motion (ROM) at Bilateral Ankles at Month 6
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of ankle contractures. The ROM at left and right ankles were measured in degrees of passive dorsiflexion.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Ankles at Month 12
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of ankle contractures. The ROM at left and right ankles were measured in degrees of passive dorsiflexion.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Ankles at Month 18
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of ankle contractures. The ROM at left and right ankles were measured in degrees of passive dorsiflexion.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Ankles at Month 24
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of ankle contractures. The ROM at left and right ankles were measured in degrees of passive dorsiflexion.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Ankles at Month 30
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of ankle contractures. The ROM at left and right ankles were measured in degrees of passive dorsiflexion.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Elbows at Month 6
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of elbow contractures. The ROM at left and right elbows were measured in degrees of passive extension.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 6
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Elbows at Month 12
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of elbow contractures. The ROM at left and right elbows were measured in degrees of passive extension.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Elbows at Month 18
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of elbow contractures. The ROM at left and right elbows were measured in degrees of passive extension.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 18
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Elbows at Month 24
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of elbow contractures. The ROM at left and right elbows were measured in degrees of passive extension.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in ROM at Bilateral Elbows at Month 30
Range of motion was evaluated by using goniometry to record any occurrences of elbow contractures. The ROM at left and right elbows were measured in degrees of passive extension.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Vital Capacity (%pFVC) at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years
Forced vital capacity (FVC) is the volume of air that can be maximally forcefully exhaled after taking the deepest breath possible and was measured using spirometry. The percent predicted FVC was calculated from FVC (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed in participants aged \>=6 years as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in %pFVC at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years
FVC is the volume of air that can be maximally forcefully exhaled after taking the deepest breath possible and was measured using spirometry. The percent predicted FVC was calculated from FVC (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed in participants aged \>=6 years as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in %pFVC at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years
FVC is the volume of air that can be maximally forcefully exhaled after taking the deepest breath possible and was measured using spirometry. The percent predicted FVC was calculated from FVC (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed in participants aged \>=6 years as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in %pFVC at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
FVC is the volume of air that can be maximally forcefully exhaled after taking the deepest breath possible and was measured using spirometry. The percent predicted FVC was calculated from FVC (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed in participants aged \>=6 years as pre-specified in the protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in %pFVC at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
FVC is the volume of air that can be maximally forcefully exhaled after taking the deepest breath possible and was measured using spirometry. The percent predicted FVC was calculated from FVC (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed in participants aged \>=6 years as pre-specified in the protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in %pFVC at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
FVC is the volume of air that can be maximally forcefully exhaled after taking the deepest breath possible and was measured using spirometry. The percent predicted FVC was calculated from FVC (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed in participants aged \>=6 years as pre-specified in the protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (%pFEV1) at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years
Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second and was measured using spirometry. The %pFEV1 was calculated from FEV1 (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for Spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in %pFEV1 at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years
FEV1 is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second and was measured using spirometry. The %pFEV1 was calculated from FEV1 (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for Spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in %pFEV1 at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years
FEV1 is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second and was measured using spirometry. The %pFEV1 was calculated from FEV1 (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for Spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in %pFEV1 at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
FEV1 is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second and was measured using spirometry. The %pFEV1 was calculated from FEV1 (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for Spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in %pFEV1 at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
FEV1 is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second and was measured using spirometry. The %pFEV1 was calculated from FEV1 (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for Spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in %pFEV1 at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
FEV1 is the volume of air forcefully exhaled in 1 second and was measured using spirometry. The %pFEV1 was calculated from FEV1 (measured in liter) according to age, height (estimated height as derived from the ulna length for non-ambulatory participants), ethnicity, and gender using multi-ethnic reference values for Spirometry. The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Maximum Inspiratory Pressure at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Maximum Inspiratory Pressure at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Maximum Inspiratory Pressure at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Maximum Expiratory Pressure at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in SAP.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Maximum Expiratory Pressure at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in SAP.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Maximum Expiratory Pressure at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in SAP.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Peak Cough Flow at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
The pulmonary function assessments were performed only in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years
LVEF was the percentage of blood that was ejected out of left ventricle with each contraction, estimated by echocardiography. The LVEF was only performed in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in LVEF at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years
LVEF was the percentage of blood that was ejected out of left ventricle with each contraction, estimated by echocardiography. The LVEF was only performed in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in LVEF at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years
LVEF was the percentage of blood that was ejected out of left ventricle with each contraction, estimated by echocardiography. The LVEF was only performed in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in LVEF at Month 12: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
LVEF was the percentage of blood that was ejected out of left ventricle with each contraction, estimated by echocardiography. The LVEF was only performed in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in LVEF at Month 24: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
LVEF was the percentage of blood that was ejected out of left ventricle with each contraction, estimated by echocardiography. The LVEF was only performed in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in LVEF at Month 30: Participants Aged >=6 Years (Unplanned Analysis)
LVEF was the percentage of blood that was ejected out of left ventricle with each contraction, estimated by echocardiography. The LVEF was only performed in participants \>=6 years old as pre-specified in protocol. Incorrect data were addressed by unplanned analysis.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC)-IV Score at Month 24: Ambulatory Participants >= 6 to <=16 Years
WISC-IV is an individually administered intelligence test for children between the ages of 6 and 16. The WISC-IV Composites are: Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Reasoning, Working Memory, and Processing Speed. Scores from the Composites constitute the WISC-IV Full Scale IQ score which ranges from 40 (Exceptionally Low) to 160 (Exceptionally Superior), higher scores indicated more intelligence. The WISC was only performed in ambulatory participants \>= 6 to \<=16 years old as pre-specified in the protocol.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Number of Participants With Type of DMD Mutation
Number of participants as per type of mutation: exon deletion, exon duplication, point mutation, small insertion, small deletion and others is presented in this outcome measure. One participant could have more than 1 mutation type.
Time frame: Up to Month 30
Number of Participants With Each Affected Exon by Mutation Types
Number of participants with each affected exon by mutation types is presented in this outcome measure. Only those categories with non-zero values have been reported.
Time frame: Up to Month 30
Number of Participants With DMD Mutations Affecting Any Exon Between Exon 9 and Exon 13 or Deletion That Affects Both Exon 29 and Exon 30
Number of participants with DMD mutations affecting any exon between exon 9 and exon 13 or deletion that affects both exon 29 and exon 30 is presented in this outcome measure.
Time frame: Up to Month 30
Change From Baseline in Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) Global Functioning Scale and Each Core Scale Score (Pediatric Parent Report) at Months 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30
The PODCI is a participant-reported assessment of musculoskeletal health intended for use in children and adolescents. The pediatric version was intended for completion by parents or caregivers of children \<=10 years old. It included a Global Function Scale along with core scales: Upper Extremity and Physical Function Core Scale (8 items); Transfer and Basic Mobility Core Scale (11 items); Sports and Physical Functioning Core Scale (21 items); Pain/Comfort Core Scale (3 items); Happiness Core Scale (5 items). The scores of each PODCI global functioning scale and core scales are averaged over the number of items answered (omitted no entry items). Mean of the rescaled values is multiplied by a constant so that each global functioning scale and core scales has a final range of values between 0-100. The higher scores represent less disability and better functioning.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30
Change From Baseline in PODCI Global Functioning Scale and Each Core Scale Score (Adolescent Parent Report) at Months 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
The PODCI is a participant-reported assessment of musculoskeletal health intended for use in children and adolescents. The pediatric version was intended for completion by parents or caregivers of children \<=10 years old. It included a Global Function Scale along with core scales: Upper Extremity and Physical Function Core Scale (8 items); Transfer and Basic Mobility Core Scale (11 items); Sports and Physical Functioning Core Scale (21 items); Pain/Comfort Core Scale (3 items); Happiness Core Scale (5 items). The scores of each PODCI global functioning scale and core scales are averaged over the number of items answered (omitted no entry items). Mean of the rescaled values is multiplied by a constant so that each global functioning scale and core scales has a final range of values between 0-100. The higher scores represent less disability and better functioning.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30
Change From Baseline in PODCI Global Functioning Scale and Each Core Scale Score (Adolescent Self Report) at Months 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30
The PODCI is a participant-reported assessment of musculoskeletal health intended for use in children and adolescents. The pediatric version was intended for completion by parents or caregivers of children \<=10 years old. It included a Global Function Scale along with core scales: Upper Extremity and Physical Function Core Scale (8 items); Transfer and Basic Mobility Core Scale (11 items); Sports and Physical Functioning Core Scale (21 items); Pain/Comfort Core Scale (3 items); Happiness Core Scale (5 items). The scores of each PODCI global functioning scale and core scales are averaged over the number of items answered (omitted no entry items). Mean of the rescaled values is multiplied by a constant so that each global functioning scale and core scales has a final range of values between 0-100. The higher scores represent less disability and better functioning.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30
Number of Participants According to Response to Each European Quality of Life (EuroQoL) 5 Dimension 3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) 5 Dimensions at Month 12
EQ-5D-3L is a participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The responses record three levels of severity (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems) within a particular EQ-5D dimension. EQ-5D-3L assessment was only performed in participants \>= 16 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Months 12
Number of Participants According to Response to Each EQ-5D-3L 5 Dimensions at Month 24
EQ-5D-3L is a participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The responses record three levels of severity (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems) within a particular EQ-5D dimension. EQ-5D-3L assessment was only performed in participants \>= 16 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Month 24
Number of Participants According to Response to Each EQ-5D-3L 5 Dimensions at Month 30
EQ-5D-3L is a participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The responses record three levels of severity (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems) within a particular EQ-5D dimension. EQ-5D-3L assessment was only performed in participants \>= 16 years old as pre-specified in protocol.
Time frame: Month 30
Change From Baseline in EQ-5D-3L Visual Analogue Score (VAS) Assessment at Months 12, 24 and 30
EQ-5D-3L is a participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life. EQ-VAS recorded the participant's self-rated health on a vertical scale ranging from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state), where higher scores indicated better quality of life. EQ-VAS assessment was only performed in the participants \>= 16 years old.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24 and 30
Change From Baseline in EQ-5D-3L Index Score at Months 12, 24 and 30
EQ-5D-3L index score, participants rated their current health state on 5 single-item dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression with each dimension having three levels of severity: 1=no problems, 2=some problems and 3=extreme problems. Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score was transformed and results in a total index score range of 0 to 1.00. Higher scores indicating a better quality of life. EQ-5D-3L was only performed in participants \>= 16 years old.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Number of Participants According to Response to Each EuroQoL 5 Dimension Youth (EQ-5D-Y) 5 Dimensions at Month 12
EQ-5D-Y is participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life in children and adolescents \<16 years old. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems, 2=some problems, and 3=extreme problems.
Time frame: Month 12
Number of Participants According to Response to Each EQ-5D-Y 5 Dimensions at Month 24
EQ-5D-Y is participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life in children and adolescents \<16 years old. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems, 2=some problems, and 3=extreme problems.
Time frame: Month 24
Number of Participants According to Response to EQ-5D-Y 5 Dimensions at Month 30
EQ-5D-Y is participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life in children and adolescents \<16 years old. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems, 2=some problems, and 3=extreme problems.
Time frame: Month 30
Change From Baseline in EQ-5D-Y VAS Assessment at Months 12, 24, and 30
EQ-5D-Y is participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life in children and adolescents \<16 years old. EQ-VAS recorded the participant's self-rated health on a vertical scale ranging from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Change From Baseline in EQ-5D-Y Index Score at Months 12, 24, and 30
EQ-5D-Y is participant completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life in children and adolescents \<=16 years old. It is comprised of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: 1=no problems, 2=some problems, and 3=extreme problems. Participants indicated their health state by choosing the appropriate level from each dimension. The 5 digit health states thus obtained for each dimension were then converted into a single median index value. A health state index score was calculated from individual health profiles using a USA scoring algorithm. Health state index scores generally ranged from -0.109 to 1, where, -0.109= the worst health status, 1= full health. Higher the score the better the better quality of life.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Change From Baseline in Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU) Survey Responses: Visit to Primary Care Physician, Emergency Room and Office Visits at Months 12, 24, and 30
HRU questionnaire is completed by the caregiver and had questions about healthcare resources utilization related to their child's use of healthcare professionals, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations in past 3 months. Change from baseline in mean number of visits to primary care physician, emergency room and office visits is presented in this outcome measure.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Change From Baseline in HRU Survey Responses: Number of Nights in Hospital Due to Disease/Medication for Disease at Months 12, 24, and 30
HRU questionnaire is completed by the caregiver and had questions about healthcare resources utilization related to number of nights in hospital due to disease/dedication for disease in past 3 months. Change from baseline in mean number of nights in hospital due to disease or medication for disease is presented in this outcome measure.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Change From Baseline in Out-of-Pocket Money of HRU Survey at Months 12, 24 and 30
Caregivers were asked to estimate out-of-pocket costs related to healthcare resource utilization. The number of out of pocket money was defined as the total spent of the past three months in managing child's Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Change From Baseline in Percent Activity Impairment as Per Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire Adapted for Caregiving (WPAI:CG) Caregiver Unchanged at Months 12, 24, and 30
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Change From Baseline in Percent Work Time Missed as Per WPAI: CG Caregiver Unchanged at Month 12
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 12
Change From Baseline in Percent Work Time Missed as Per WPAI: CG Caregiver Unchanged at Month 24
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 24
Change From Baseline in Percent Work Time Missed as Per WPAI: CG Caregiver Unchanged at Month 30
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Month 30
Change From Baseline in Percent Overall Work Impairment WPAI: CG Caregiver Unchanged at Months 12, 24, and 30
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) and Months 12, 24, and 30
Percent Activity Impairment Score as Per WPAI: CG at Months 12, 24, and 30
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Months 12, 24, and 30
Percent Work Time Missed Score as Per WPAI: CG at Month 12
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Month 12
Percent Work Time Missed Score as Per WPAI: CG at Month 24
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Month 24
Percent Work Time Missed Score as Per WPAI: CG at Month 30
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Month 30
Percent Overall Work Impairment Scores as Per WPAI: CG at Months 12, 24, and 30
WPAI:CG is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, was completed by caregiver, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and activity impairment. Each score was expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Time frame: Months 12, 24, and 30