OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability of new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesion counts by clinicians in a multiple sclerosis specialty clinic. DESIGN: An observational study. SETTING: A multiple sclerosis specialty clinic. PATIENTS: Eighty-five patients with multiple sclerosis participating in a National Institutes of Health–supported longitudinal study were included. INTERVENTION: Each patient had a brain MRI scan at entry and 6 months later using a standardized protocol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of new T2 lesions, newly enlarging T2 lesions, and gadolinium-enhancing lesions were measured on the 6-month MRI using a computer-based image analysis program for the original study. For this study, images were reanalyzed by an expert neuroradiologist and 3 clinician raters. The neuroradiologist evaluated the original image pairs; the clinicians evaluated image pairs that were modified to simulate clinical practice. New lesion counts were compared across raters, as was classification of patients as MRI active or inactive. RESULTS: Agreement on lesion counts was highest for gadolinium-enhancing lesions, intermediate for new T2 lesions, and poor for enlarging T2 lesions. In 18% to 25% of the cases, MRI activity was classified differently by the clinician raters compared with the neuroradiologist or computer program. Variability among the clinical raters for estimates of new T2 lesions was affected most strongly by the image modifications that simulated low image quality and different head position. CONCLUSIONS: Between-rater variability in new T2 lesion counts may be reduced by improved standardization of image acquisitions, but this approach may not be practical in most clinical environments. Ultimately, more reliable, robust, and accessible image analysis methods are needed for accurate multiple sclerosis disease-modifying drug monitoring and decision making in the routine clinic setting.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability of new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesion counts by clinicians in a multiple sclerosis specialty clinic. DESIGN: An observational study. SETTING: A multiple sclerosis specialty clinic. PATIENTS: Eighty-five patients with multiple sclerosis participating in a National Institutes of Health–supported longitudinal study were included. INTERVENTION: Each patient had a brain MRI scan at entry and 6 months later using a standardized protocol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of new T2 lesions, newly enlarging T2 lesions, and gadolinium-enhancing lesions were measured on the 6-month MRI using a computer-based image analysis program for the original study. For this study, images were reanalyzed by an expert neuroradiologist and 3 clinician raters. The neuroradiologist evaluated the original image pairs; the clinicians evaluated image pairs that were modified to simulate clinical practice. New lesion counts were compared across raters, as was classification of patients as MRI active or inactive. RESULTS: Agreement on lesion counts was highest for gadolinium-enhancing lesions, intermediate for new T2 lesions, and poor for enlarging T2 lesions. In 18% to 25% of the cases, MRI activity was classified differently by the clinician raters compared with the neuroradiologist or computer program. Variability among the clinical raters for estimates of new T2 lesions was affected most strongly by the image modifications that simulated low image quality and different head position. CONCLUSIONS: Between-rater variability in new T2 lesion counts may be reduced by improved standardization of image acquisitions, but this approach may not be practical in most clinical environments. Ultimately, more reliable, robust, and accessible image analysis methods are needed for accurate multiple sclerosis disease-modifying drug monitoring and decision making in the routine clinic setting.
Authors: M Filippi; D W Paty; L Kappos; F Barkhof; D A Compston; A J Thompson; G J Zhao; C M Wiles; W I McDonald; D H Miller Journal: Neurology Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: E Fisher; R A Rudick; J H Simon; G Cutter; M Baier; J-C Lee; D Miller; B Weinstock-Guttman; M K Mass; D S Dougherty; N A Simonian Journal: Neurology Date: 2002-11-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Gavin Giovannoni; Giancarlo Comi; Stuart Cook; Kottil Rammohan; Peter Rieckmann; Per Soelberg Sørensen; Patrick Vermersch; Peter Chang; Anthony Hamlett; Bruno Musch; Steven J Greenberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ludwig Kappos; Ernst-Wilhelm Radue; Paul O'Connor; Chris Polman; Reinhard Hohlfeld; Peter Calabresi; Krzysztof Selmaj; Catherine Agoropoulou; Malgorzata Leyk; Lixin Zhang-Auberson; Pascale Burtin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Peter A Brex; Olga Ciccarelli; Jonathon I O'Riordan; Michael Sailer; Alan J Thompson; David H Miller Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-01-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Brenda Banwell; Michel Clanet; Jeffrey A Cohen; Massimo Filippi; Kazuo Fujihara; Eva Havrdova; Michael Hutchinson; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Paul O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Mike P Wattjes; Àlex Rovira; David Miller; Tarek A Yousry; Maria P Sormani; Maria P de Stefano; Mar Tintoré; Cristina Auger; Carmen Tur; Massimo Filippi; Maria A Rocca; Franz Fazekas; Ludwig Kappos; Chris Polman Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Maria Trojano; Mar Tintore; Xavier Montalban; Jan Hillert; Tomas Kalincik; Pietro Iaffaldano; Tim Spelman; Maria Pia Sormani; Helmut Butzkueven Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 42.937
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: Claudio Gasperini; Luca Prosperini; Mar Tintoré; Maria Pia Sormani; Massimo Filippi; Jordi Rio; Jacqueline Palace; Maria A Rocca; Olga Ciccarelli; Frederik Barkhof; Jaume Sastre-Garriga; Hugo Vrenken; Jette L Frederiksen; Tarek A Yousry; Christian Enzinger; Alex Rovira; Ludwig Kappos; Carlo Pozzilli; Xavier Montalban; Nicola De Stefano Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-12-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: M Cabezas; J F Corral; A Oliver; Y Díez; M Tintoré; C Auger; X Montalban; X Lladó; D Pareto; À Rovira Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Josa M Frischer; Stephen D Weigand; Yong Guo; Nilufer Kale; Joseph E Parisi; Istvan Pirko; Jay Mandrekar; Stephan Bramow; Imke Metz; Wolfgang Brück; Hans Lassmann; Claudia F Lucchinetti Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2015-08-24 Impact factor: 10.422