PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship of myelin content, axonal density, and gliosis with the fraction of macromolecular protons (fB) and T2 relaxation of the macromolecular pool (T2B) acquired using quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT) MRI in postmortem brains of subjects with multiple sclerosis (MS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: fB and T2B were acquired in unfixed postmortem brain slices of 20 subjects with MS. The myelin content, axonal count, and severity of gliosis were all quantified histologically. t-Tests and multiple regression were used for analysis. RESULTS: MR indices obtained in unfixed postmortem MS brains were consistent with in vivo values reported in the literature. A significant correlation was detected between Tr(myelin) (inversely proportional to myelin content) and 1) fB (r = -0.80, P < 0.001) and 2) axonal count (r = -0.79, P < 0.001). fB differed between 1) normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and remyelinated WM lesions (rWMLs) (mean: fB 6.9 [SD 2] vs. 4.0 [1.8], P = 0.01), and 2) rWMLs and demyelinated WMLs (mean: 4.2 [2.2] vs. 2.5 [1.3], P = 0.016). No association was detected between T2B and any of the histological measures. CONCLUSION: fB in MS WM is dependent on myelin content and may be a tool to monitor patients with this condition. Copyright 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship of myelin content, axonal density, and gliosis with the fraction of macromolecular protons (fB) and T2 relaxation of the macromolecular pool (T2B) acquired using quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT) MRI in postmortem brains of subjects with multiple sclerosis (MS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: fB and T2B were acquired in unfixed postmortem brain slices of 20 subjects with MS. The myelin content, axonal count, and severity of gliosis were all quantified histologically. t-Tests and multiple regression were used for analysis. RESULTS: MR indices obtained in unfixed postmortem MS brains were consistent with in vivo values reported in the literature. A significant correlation was detected between Tr(myelin) (inversely proportional to myelin content) and 1) fB (r = -0.80, P < 0.001) and 2) axonal count (r = -0.79, P < 0.001). fB differed between 1) normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and remyelinated WM lesions (rWMLs) (mean: fB 6.9 [SD 2] vs. 4.0 [1.8], P = 0.01), and 2) rWMLs and demyelinated WMLs (mean: 4.2 [2.2] vs. 2.5 [1.3], P = 0.016). No association was detected between T2B and any of the histological measures. CONCLUSION: fB in MS WM is dependent on myelin content and may be a tool to monitor patients with this condition. Copyright 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: G R Moore; E Leung; A L MacKay; I M Vavasour; K P Whittall; K S Cover; D K Li; S A Hashimoto; J Oger; T J Sprinkle; D W Paty Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-11-28 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: J H van Waesberghe; W Kamphorst; C J De Groot; M A van Walderveen; J A Castelijns; R Ravid; G J Lycklama à Nijeholt; P van der Valk; C H Polman; A J Thompson; F Barkhof Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: W I McDonald; A Compston; G Edan; D Goodkin; H P Hartung; F D Lublin; H F McFarland; D W Paty; C H Polman; S C Reingold; M Sandberg-Wollheim; W Sibley; A Thompson; S van den Noort; B Y Weinshenker; J S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Alexey Samsonov; Andrew L Alexander; Pouria Mossahebi; Yu-Chien Wu; Ian D Duncan; Aaron S Field Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: J P van der Voorn; P J W Pouwels; J M Powers; W Kamphorst; J-J Martin; D Troost; M D Spreeuwenberg; F Barkhof; M S van der Knaap Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-01-27 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yong Wang; Peng Sun; Qing Wang; Kathryn Trinkaus; Robert E Schmidt; Robert T Naismith; Anne H Cross; Sheng-Kwei Song Journal: Brain Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: M Cosottini; I Pesaresi; S Piazza; S Diciotti; G Belmonte; M Battaglini; A Ginestroni; G Siciliano; N De Stefano; M Mascalchi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Kathryn L West; Nathaniel D Kelm; Robert P Carson; Daniel F Gochberg; Kevin C Ess; Mark D Does Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-12-23 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Kathleen M Zackowski; Seth A Smith; Daniel S Reich; Eliza Gordon-Lipkin; BettyAnn A Chodkowski; Divya R Sambandan; Michael Shteyman; Amy J Bastian; Peter C van Zijl; Peter A Calabresi Journal: Brain Date: 2009-03-18 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Vaibhav A Janve; Zhongliang Zu; Song-Yi Yao; Ke Li; Fang Lin Zhang; Kevin J Wilson; Xiawei Ou; Mark D Does; Sriram Subramaniam; Daniel F Gochberg Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 6.556