PURPOSE: To explore the applicability of subtraction magnetic resonance (MR) images to (a) detect active multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, (b) directly quantify lesion load change, and (c) detect treatment effects (distinguish treatment arms) in a placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial by comparing the subtraction scheme with a conventional pair-wise comparison of nonregistered MR images. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Forty-six pairs of MR studies in 40 patients (31 women; mean age, 31.9 years) from a multicenter clinical trial were used. The clinical trial was approved by local ethics review boards, and all subjects gave written informed consent. Active MS lesions were scored by two independent raters, and lesion load measurements were conducted by using semiautomated software. Lesion counts were evaluated by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, interrater agreement was evaluated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and treatment (interferon beta-1b) effect was evaluated by using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: When subtraction images were used, there was a 1.7-fold increase in the detection of positive active lesions, as compared with native image pairs, and significantly greater interobserver agreement (ICC = 0.98 vs 0.91, P < .001). Subtraction images also allowed direct quantification of positive disease activity, a measure that provided sufficient power to distinguish treatment arms (P = .012) compared with the standard measurement of total lesion load change on native images (P = .455). CONCLUSION: MR image subtraction enabled detection of higher numbers of active MS lesions with greater interobserver agreement and exhibited increased power to distinguish treatment arms, as compared with a conventional pair-wise comparison of nonregistered MR images.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To explore the applicability of subtraction magnetic resonance (MR) images to (a) detect active multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, (b) directly quantify lesion load change, and (c) detect treatment effects (distinguish treatment arms) in a placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial by comparing the subtraction scheme with a conventional pair-wise comparison of nonregistered MR images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six pairs of MR studies in 40 patients (31 women; mean age, 31.9 years) from a multicenter clinical trial were used. The clinical trial was approved by local ethics review boards, and all subjects gave written informed consent. Active MS lesions were scored by two independent raters, and lesion load measurements were conducted by using semiautomated software. Lesion counts were evaluated by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, interrater agreement was evaluated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and treatment (interferon beta-1b) effect was evaluated by using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: When subtraction images were used, there was a 1.7-fold increase in the detection of positive active lesions, as compared with native image pairs, and significantly greater interobserver agreement (ICC = 0.98 vs 0.91, P < .001). Subtraction images also allowed direct quantification of positive disease activity, a measure that provided sufficient power to distinguish treatment arms (P = .012) compared with the standard measurement of total lesion load change on native images (P = .455). CONCLUSION: MR image subtraction enabled detection of higher numbers of active MS lesions with greater interobserver agreement and exhibited increased power to distinguish treatment arms, as compared with a conventional pair-wise comparison of nonregistered MR images.
Authors: Petra J W Pouwels; Joost P A Kuijer; John P Mugler; Charles R G Guttmann; Frederik Barkhof Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-10-19 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jeroen J G Geurts; Petra J W Pouwels; Bernard M J Uitdehaag; Chris H Polman; Frederik Barkhof; Jonas A Castelijns Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Y Duan; P G Hildenbrand; M P Sampat; D F Tate; I Csapo; B Moraal; R Bakshi; F Barkhof; D S Meier; C R G Guttmann Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Bastiaan Moraal; Stefan D Roosendaal; Petra J W Pouwels; Hugo Vrenken; Ronald A van Schijndel; Dominik S Meier; Charles R G Guttmann; Jeroen J G Geurts; Frederik Barkhof Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-05-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: L Kappos; C H Polman; M S Freedman; G Edan; H P Hartung; D H Miller; X Montalban; F Barkhof; L Bauer; P Jakobs; C Pohl; R Sandbrink Journal: Neurology Date: 2006-08-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Frederik Barkhof; Chris H Polman; Ernst-Wilhelm Radue; Ludwig Kappos; Mark S Freedman; Gilles Edan; Hans-Peter Hartung; David H Miller; Xavier Montalbán; Peter Poppe; Marlieke de Vos; Fatiha Lasri; Lars Bauer; Susanne Dahms; Klaus Wagner; Christoph Pohl; Rupert Sandbrink Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2007-09
Authors: A Galletto Pregliasco; A Collin; A Guéguen; M A Metten; J Aboab; R Deschamps; O Gout; L Duron; J C Sadik; J Savatovsky; A Lecler Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: M A Schmidt; R A Linker; S Lang; H Lücking; T Engelhorn; S Kloska; M Uder; A Cavallaro; A Dörfler; P Dankerl Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: J van Heerden; D Rawlinson; A M Zhang; R Chakravorty; M A Tacey; P M Desmond; F Gaillard Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-06-18 Impact factor: 3.825