Usefulness of the Gold Coast criteria in diagnosing fast-progressing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

The Gold Coast criteria are reportedly more sensitive for diagnosing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) than the previously used criteria; however, the sensitivity of these sets of criteria among groups classified according to their prognosis has not been compared. In this study, we examined the difference in the sensitivity for ALS diagnosis among these criteria, especially in patients with fast-progression ALS. We enrolled 95 patients diagnosed with ALS and retrospectively classified them into three groups based on the interval between disease onset and death or tracheostomy. We retrospectively examined the number of patients meeting the Gold Coast, Awaji, or revised El Escorial criteria (rEEC) (definite/probable/possible) at initial clinical examination and electromyography and compared the rates of diagnosis according to each set of criteria among the three groups. The sensitivity of the Gold Coast criteria was significantly higher than that of the Awaji and rEEC criteria (sensitivity, 92.6 % vs. 71.8 % vs. 71.7 %, p < 0.001). The sensitivity of the Gold Coast criteria in patients with fast progression (n = 30) was significantly higher than that of the Awaji and rEEC criteria (sensitivity, 100 % vs. 73.3 % vs. 73.3 %, p = 0.001). Most patients diagnosed only based on the Gold Coast criteria had lower motor signs. Hence, the Gold Coast criteria are particularly useful for diagnosing fast-progression ALS.