300 Section - Measuring spasticity in clinical trials – which endpoints are most relevant to patients?

Wednesday, May 20, 2026

6:00 PM - 7:30 PM PT

Corresponding Author/Autor a quien dirigir la corr(s)

WC

Wendy Clarke, MS

Medical Director UK & Ireland
Merz Therapeutics UK & Ireland
Hemel Hempstead, England, United Kingdom

Co-Author/Coautor(s)

TB

Trishna Bharadia, BA(hons), MFPM(Hon)

Patient Author
Spark Global UK
London, England, United Kingdom

Presenting Author/Autor expositor(s)

ME

Malaz Elhussein, MSc

Medical Director UK & Ireland
Merz Theraputics
Hemel Hempstead, England, United Kingdom

Objectives : Functional scales available for spasticity assessments provide important clinical information but their relevance to the impact of spasticity on patients’ daily lives is unclear. Patient/caregiver advisory boards were convened to examine perspectives on relevant outcomes for future spasticity-related clinical trials.

Design: Two online advisory boards were held involving participants (patients/caregivers) affected by spasticity (one post-stroke spasticity, one multiple sclerosis [MS]). Meetings were led by a company medical director and scientific advisor, and a patient advocate experienced in patient engagement. Prior to meetings, participants had 1:1 interviews with the company representatives and patient advocate, to gain in-depth understanding of their disease experience and contextualize advisory board contributions. Participants were asked about their experience with spasticity, treatments, and goals/outcomes most important to them.

Results:

Stroke participants were young stroke survivors (n=5; experienced stroke aged 15–48 years [time since first stroke ~5–19 years]). MS participants included patients (n=5) and caregivers (n=2); patients were aged 26–50 years at MS diagnosis (time since diagnosis 9–25 years). Patient goals focus on ability to do everyday activities, independence, spending time with family/friends, and quality of life (QoL), whereas clinicians focus on specific movements. Identified factors to consider included effects of pain, fatigue, external factors, support needed. The Goal Attainment Scale (GAS) was generally considered important (4/5 stroke participants, 6/7 MS participants) to enable individual goal setting, although better communication and assessing ability regarding tasks important to patients is needed. Advantages/disadvantages of existing measures were discussed and the need for more disease-specific QoL measures highlighted.

Conclusion:

The GAS was broadly identified as the most patient-relevant measure of spasticity, but more focus is needed on individual patient needs regarding everyday abilities and QoL. Further disease-specific instruments are needed to capture the full impacts of stroke, MS, and spasticity on patients and caregivers.