DOI: 10.1002/mus.70317 ISSN: 0148-639X

Muscle Ultrasound Is a Sensitive Outcome Measure in ALS

Andrew M. Hannaford, Isabella E. Supnet, Nathan Pavey, Parvathi Menon, Mehdi A. J. van den Bos, Matthew C. Kiernan, Nens van Alfen, Neil G. Simon, Steve Vucic

ABSTRACT

Introduction/Aims

Muscle ultrasound is a potential outcome measure in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), although prospective, multicenter longitudinal studies are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate muscle ultrasound as an outcome in ALS and compare its sensitivity with clinical and neurophysiological metrics.

Methods

In this prospective two‐center cohort study, adults with ALS underwent baseline and follow‐up assessments at least 3 months apart. Clinical measures included the ALS Functional Rating Scale–Revised (ALSFRS‐R) and Medical Research Council sum scores. Median nerve abductor pollicis brevis and ulnar nerve first dorsal interosseous compound motor action potential (CMAP) amplitudes were recorded. Muscle ultrasound of 11 bulbar and limb muscles was performed using harmonized protocols, with offline analysis of muscle thickness and echogenicity. Longitudinal change and effect sizes were calculated.

Results

Twenty‐two patients were included (median age 59.3 years, follow‐up 9.6 months, disease duration 23.1 months). ALSFRS‐R declined by −3.0 points (−0.7% per month; effect size 0.84). Median nerve CMAP amplitude decreased by −1.6 mV (−1.2% per month; effect size 0.77). Muscle echogenicity increased by 0.8 units (+6.0% per month), yielding the largest effect size (1.09), with increases across multiple muscles. Responsiveness improved with onset‐specific muscle selection, with biceps brachii (effect size 1.12) and gastrocnemius (1.18) showing the strongest changes. Muscle thickness and fasciculation frequency did not change.

Discussion

Muscle ultrasound echogenicity is a sensitive structural biomarker of ALS progression, demonstrating greater responsiveness than ALSFRS‐R and CMAP over 3–12 months. Its accessibility and sensitivity support its utility as an outcome measure in clinical trials.

More from our Archive