Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2022-11
Risk Factors for High Symptom Burden Three Months after Traumatic Brain Injury and Implications for Clinical Trial Design: A Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study
More than 75% of patients presenting to level I trauma centers in the United States with suspicion of TBI sufficient to require a clinical computed tomography scan report injury-related symptoms 3 months later. There are currently no approved treatments, and few clinical trials have evaluated possible treatments. Efficient trials will require subject inclusion and exclusion criteria that balance cost-effective recruitment with enrolling individuals with a higher chance of benefiting from the interventions. Using data from the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study, we examined the relationship of 3-month symptoms to pre-injury, demographic, and acute characteristics as well as 2-week symptoms and blood-based biomarkers to identify and evaluate factors that may be used for sample enrichment for clinical trials. Many of the risk factors for TBI symptoms reported in the literature were supported, but the effect sizes of each were small or moderate (< 0.5). The only factors with large effect sizes when predicting 3-month symptom burden were TBI-related (i.e., post-concussive) and post-traumatic stress symptom levels at 2 weeks (respective effect sizes 1.13 and 1.34). TBI severity was not significantly associated with 3-month symptom burden (p = 0.37). Using simulated data to evaluate the effect of enrichment, we showed that including only people with high symptom burden at 2 weeks would permit trials to reduce the sample size by half, with minimal increase in screening, as compared with enrolling an unenriched sample. Clinical trials aimed at reducing symptoms after TBI can be efficiently conducted by enriching the included sample with people reporting a high early symptom burden.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MachamerJ, TemkinN, DikmenS, et al.Symptom frequency and persistence in the first year after traumatic brain injury: a TRACK-TBI study. J Neurotrauma, 2022; 39(5–6):358–370; doi:10.1089/neu.2021.0348.
2.
PolinderS, CnossenMC, RealRGL, et al.A multidimensional approach to post-concussion symptoms in mild traumatic brain injury. Front Neurol, 2018; 9:1113; doi:10.3389/fneur.2018.01113.
3.
ShepherdD, LandonJ, KalloorM, et al.The association between health-related quality of life and noise or light sensitivity in survivors of a mild traumatic brain injury. Qual Life Res, 2020; 29(3):665–672; doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02346-y.
4.
VoormolenDC, PolinderS, von SteinbuechelN, et al.The association between post-concussion symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with mild traumatic brain injury. Injury, 2019; 50(5):1068–1074; doi:10.1016/j.injury.2018.12.002.
5.
KingNS, KirwilliamS. Permanent post-concussion symptoms after mild head injury. Brain Inj, 2011; 25(5):462–470; doi:10.3109/02699052.2011.558042.
6.
LangeRT, LippaSM, FrenchLM, et al.Long-term neurobehavioural symptom reporting following mild, moderate, severe, and penetrating traumatic brain injury in U.S. military service members. Neuropsychol Rehabil, 2020; 30(9):1762–1785; doi:10.1080/09602011.2019.1604385.
7.
StalnackeBM. Community integration, social support and life satisfaction in relation to symptoms 3 years after mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj, 2007; 21(9):933–942; doi:10.1080/02699050701553189.
8.
WilliamsMW, RapportLJ, MillisSR, et al.Psychosocial outcomes after traumatic brain injury: life satisfaction, community integration, and distress. Rehabil Psychol, 2014; 59(3):298–305; doi:10.1037/a0037164.
9.
AsselstineJ, KristmanV, ArmstrongJ, et al.The Rivermead Post-Concussion Questionnaire score is associated with disability and self-reported recovery six month after mild traumatic brain injury in older adults. Brain Inj, 2020; 34(2):195–202; doi:10.1080/02699052.2019.1682670.
10.
CooksleyR, MaguireE, LanninNA, et al.Persistent symptoms and activity changes three months after mild traumatic brain injury. Aust Occup Ther J, 2018; 65(3):168–175;doi:10.1111/1440-1630.12457.
11.
TheadomA, Barker-ColloS, JonesK, et al.Work limitations 4 years after mild traumatic brain injury: a cohort study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2017; 98(8):1560–1566;doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2017.01.010.
12.
VenkatesanUM, LancasterK, LengenfelderJ, et al. Independent contributions of social cognition and depression to functional status after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2020:1–17;doi:10.1080/09602011.2020.1749675.
13.
LewisFD, HornGJ. Depression following traumatic brain injury: Impact on post-hospital residential rehabilitation outcomes. NeuroRehabilitation, 2017; 40(3):401–410;doi:10.3233/NRE-161427.
14.
O'DonnellM, VarkerT, HolmesA, et al.Disability after injury: the cumulative burden of physical and mental health. J Clin Psychiatry, 2013; 74(2):e137–143
15.
GrauwmeijerE, Heijenbrok-KalMH, HaitsmaIK, et al.A prospective study on employment outcome 3 years after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2012; 93(6):993–999;doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2012.01.018.
16.
StaceyA, LucasS, DikmenS, et al.Natural history of headache five years after traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma, 2017; 34(8):1558–1564;doi:10.1089/neu.2016.4721.
17.
TheadomA, StarkeyN, Barker-ColloS, et al.Population-based cohort study of the impacts of mild traumatic brain injury in adults four years post-injury. PLoS One, 2018; 13(1):e0191655;doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191655.
18.
ErlerKS, KewCL, JuengstSB. Participation differences by age and depression 5 years after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury. Int Rev Psychiatry, 2020; 32(1):12–21;doi:10.1080/09540261.2019.1656175.
19.
SilverbergND, GardnerAJ, BrubacherJR, et al.Systematic review of multivariable prognostic models for mild traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma, 2015; 32(8):517–526;doi:10.1089/neu.2014.3600.
20.
MikolicA, PolinderS, SteyerbergEW, et al.Prediction of global functional outcome and post-concussive symptoms after mild traumatic brain injury: external validation of prognostic models in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. J Neurotrauma, 2021; 38(2):196–209;doi:10.1089/neu.2020.7074.
21.
van der NaaltJ, TimmermanME, de KoningME, et al.Early predictors of outcome after mild traumatic brain injury (UPFRONT): an observational cohort study. Lancet Neurol, 2017; 16(7):532–540;doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30117-5.
22.
JacobsB, BeemsT, StulemeijerM, et al.Outcome prediction in mild traumatic brain injury: age and clinical variables are stronger predictors than CT abnormalities. J Neurotrauma, 2010; 27(4):655–668;doi:10.1089/neu.2009.1059.
23.
KingNS, CrawfordS, WendenFJ, et al.The Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability. J Neurol, 1995; 242(9):587–592; doi:10.1007/BF00868811.
KingEG, KretzmerTS, VanderploegRD, et al.Pilot of a novel intervention for postconcussive symptoms in active duty, veterans, and civilians. Rehabil Psychol, 2013; 58(3):272–279; doi:10.1037/a0033116.
26.
KurowskiBG, WadeSL, DexheimerJW, et al.Feasibility and potential benefits of a web-based intervention delivered acutely after mild traumatic brain injury in adolescents: a pilot study. Head Trauma Rehabil, 2016; 31(6):369–378; doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000180.
27.
WolfGK, StromTQ, KehleSM, et al.A preliminary examination of prolonged exposure therapy with Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder and mild to moderate traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2012; 27(1):26–32; doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e31823cd01f.
28.
TwamleyEW, ThomasKR, GregoryAM, et al.CogSMART Compensatory Cognitive Training for Traumatic Brain Injury: effects over 1 year. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2015; 30(6):391–401; doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000076.
29.
ChurchD, Palmer-HoffmanJ. TBI symptoms improve after PTSD remediation with emotional freedom techniques. Traumatology, 2014; 20(3):172–181; doi:10.1037/h0099831.
30.
BomyeaJ, LangAJ, SchnurrPP. TBI and treatment response in a randomized trial of acceptance and commitment therapy. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2017; 32(5):E35–E43; doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000278.
31.
BelangerHG, BarwickF, SilvaMA, et al.Web-based psychoeducational intervention for postconcussion symptoms: a randomized trial. Mil Med, 2015; 180(2):192–200; doi:10.7205/MILMED-D-14-00388.
32.
McCreaMA, GiacinoJT, BarberJ, et al.Functional outcomes over the first year after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury in the prospective, longitudinal TRACK-TBI study. JAMA Neurol, 2021; 78:982–992; doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.2043.
33.
CorriganJD, BognerJ. Initial reliability and validity of the Ohio State University TBI Identification Method. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2007; 22(6):318–329; doi:10.1097/01.HTR.0000300227.67748.77.
34.
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Abbreviated Injury Scale. Chicago: AAAM, 2016.
35.
ThompsonC, DaviesP, HerrmannL, et al.Approaches to establishing validated cut-off scores on the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ). Brain Inj, 2016; 30(5–6):770; doi:10.3109/02699052.2016.1162060.
36.
BovinMJ, MarxBP, WeathersFW, et al.Psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Fifth Edition (PCL–5) in veterans. Psychol Assess, 2016; 28(11):1379–1391; doi:10.1037/pas0000254.
37.
SteinMB, JainS, GiacinoJT, et al.Risk of posttraumatic stress disorder and major depression in civilian patients after mild traumatic brain injury: a TRACK-TBI study. JAMA Psychiatry, 2019; 76(3):249–258; doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.4288.
38.
McMahonPJ, PanczykowskiDM, YueJK, et al.Measurement of the glial fibrillary acidic protein and its breakdown products GFAP-BDP biomarker for the detection of traumatic brain injury compared to computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurotrauma, 2015; 32(8):527–533; doi:10.1089/neu.2014.3635.
39.
Diaz-ArrastiaR, WangKK, PapaL, et al.Acute biomarkers of traumatic brain injury: relationship between plasma levels of ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 and glial fibrillary acidic protein. J Neurotrauma, 2014; 31(1):19–25; doi:10.1089/neu.2013.3040.
40.
OkonkwoDO, PufferRC, PuccioAM, et al.Point-of-care platform blood biomarker testing of glial fibrillary acidic protein versus S100 calcium-binding protein B for prediction of traumatic brain injuries: a Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study. J Neurotrauma, 2020; 37(23):2460–2466; doi:10.1089/neu.2020.7140.
41.
ToroC, JainS, SunS, et al. Association of brain injury biomarkers and circulatory shock following moderate-severe traumatic brain injury: a TRACK-TBI study. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2021;10; doi:10.1097/ANA.0000000000000828.
42.
PeacockWFt, Van MeterTE, MirshahiN, et al.Derivation of a three biomarker panel to improve diagnosis in patients with mild traumatic brain injury. Front Neurol, 2017; 8:641; doi:10.3389/fneur.2017.00641.
43.
MozaffariK, DejamD, DuongC, et al.Systematic review of serum biomarkers in traumatic brain injury. Cureus, 2021; 13(8):e17056; doi:10.7759/cureus.17056.
44.
XuLB, YueJK, KorleyF, et al.High-sensitivity C-reactive protein is a prognostic biomarker of six-month disability after traumatic brain injury: results from the TRACK-TBI study. J Neurotrauma, 2021; 38(7):918–927; doi:10.1089/neu.2020.7177.
45.
KorleyFK, DatwylerSA, JainS, et al.Comparison of GFAP and UCH-L1 measurements from two prototype assays: the Abbott i-STAT and ARCHITECT assays. Neurotrauma Rep, 2021; 2(1):193–199; doi:10.1089/neur.2020.0037.
46.
FritzCO, MorrisPE, RichlerJJ. Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. J Exp Psychol Gen, 2012; 141(1):2–18;doi:10.1037/a0024338.
47.
CohenJ. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillside, NJ; 1988.
48.
LenthRV. JAVA applets for power and sample size [computer software]. 2006. Available from: http://www.stat.uiowa.edu/∼rlenth/Power [Last accessed:5/12/2020].
49.
WangKK, YangZ, ZhuT, et al.An update on diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for traumatic brain injury. Expert Rev Mol Diagn, 2018; 18(2):165–180; doi:10.1080/14737159.2018.1428089.
50.
LewisJM, DhawanS, ObiriezeAC, et al.Plasma biomarker for post-concussive syndrome: a pilot study using an alternating current electro-kinetic platform. Front Neurol, 2020; 11:685; doi:10.3389/fneur.2020.00685.
51.
KelmendiFM, MorinaAA, MekajAY, et al. Ability of S100B to predict post-concussion syndrome in paediatric patients who present to the emergency department with mild traumatic brain injury. Br J Neurosurg 2021:1–6; doi:10.1080/02688697.2021.1878487.
52.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Surveillance Report of Traumatic Brain Injury-Related Hospitalizations and Deaths by Age Group, Sex and Mechanism of Injury–United States, 2016 and 2017. United States Department of Health and Human Services: Washington, DC; 2021.
53.
StallardN, HamborgT, ParsonsN, et al.Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials with subgroup selection. J Biopharm Stat, 2014; 24(1):168–187; doi:10.1080/10543406.2013.857238
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
