BACKGROUND: In some active multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, a strong immune reaction at the lesion edge may contain growth and thereby isolate the lesion from the surrounding parenchyma. Our previous studies suggest that this process involves opening of the blood-brain barrier in capillaries at the lesion edge, seen on MRI as centripetal contrast enhancement and a colocalized phase rim. We hypothesized that using these features to characterize early lesion evolution will allow in vivo tracking of tissue degeneration and/or repair, thus improving the evaluation of potential therapies for chronic active lesions. METHODS: Centripetally and centrifugally enhancing lesions were studied in 17 patients with MS using 7-tesla MRI. High-resolution, susceptibility-weighted, T1-weighted (before/after gadolinium), and dynamic contrast-enhanced scans were acquired at baseline and months 1, 3, 6, and 12. For each lesion, time evolution of the phase rim, lesion volume, and T1 hypointensity were assessed. In autopsies of 3 progressive MS cases, the histopathology of the phase rim was determined. RESULTS: In centripetal lesions, a phase rim colocalized with initial contrast enhancement. In 12 of 22, this phase rim persisted after enhancement resolved. Compared with centripetal lesions with transient rim, those with persistent rim had less volume shrinkage and became more T1 hypointense between months 3 and 12. No centrifugal lesions developed phase rims at any time point. Pathologically, persistent rims corresponded to an iron-laden inflammatory myeloid cell population at the edge of chronic demyelinated lesions. CONCLUSION: In early lesion evolution, a persistent phase rim in lesions that shrink least and become more T1 hypointense over time suggests that the rim might mark failure of early lesion repair and/or irreversible tissue damage. In later stages of MS, phase rim lesions continue to smolder, exerting detrimental effects on affected brain tissue. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00001248. FUNDING: The Intramural Research Program of NINDS supported this study.
BACKGROUND: In some active multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, a strong immune reaction at the lesion edge may contain growth and thereby isolate the lesion from the surrounding parenchyma. Our previous studies suggest that this process involves opening of the blood-brain barrier in capillaries at the lesion edge, seen on MRI as centripetal contrast enhancement and a colocalized phase rim. We hypothesized that using these features to characterize early lesion evolution will allow in vivo tracking of tissue degeneration and/or repair, thus improving the evaluation of potential therapies for chronic active lesions. METHODS: Centripetally and centrifugally enhancing lesions were studied in 17 patients with MS using 7-tesla MRI. High-resolution, susceptibility-weighted, T1-weighted (before/after gadolinium), and dynamic contrast-enhanced scans were acquired at baseline and months 1, 3, 6, and 12. For each lesion, time evolution of the phase rim, lesion volume, and T1 hypointensity were assessed. In autopsies of 3 progressive MS cases, the histopathology of the phase rim was determined. RESULTS: In centripetal lesions, a phase rim colocalized with initial contrast enhancement. In 12 of 22, this phase rim persisted after enhancement resolved. Compared with centripetal lesions with transient rim, those with persistent rim had less volume shrinkage and became more T1 hypointense between months 3 and 12. No centrifugal lesions developed phase rims at any time point. Pathologically, persistent rims corresponded to an iron-laden inflammatory myeloid cell population at the edge of chronic demyelinated lesions. CONCLUSION: In early lesion evolution, a persistent phase rim in lesions that shrink least and become more T1 hypointense over time suggests that the rim might mark failure of early lesion repair and/or irreversible tissue damage. In later stages of MS, phase rim lesions continue to smolder, exerting detrimental effects on affected brain tissue. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00001248. FUNDING: The Intramural Research Program of NINDS supported this study.
Authors: Wei Bian; Kristin Harter; Kathryn E Hammond-Rosenbluth; Janine M Lupo; Duan Xu; Douglas Ac Kelley; Daniel B Vigneron; Sarah J Nelson; Daniel Pelletier Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2012-05-28 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: David Pitt; Aaron Boster; Wei Pei; Eric Wohleb; Adam Jasne; Cherian R Zachariah; Kottil Rammohan; Michael V Knopp; Petra Schmalbrock Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2010-07
Authors: Khalil S Rawji; Manoj K Mishra; Nathan J Michaels; Serge Rivest; Peter K Stys; V Wee Yong Journal: Brain Date: 2016-01-29 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Dmitriy A Yablonskiy; Jie Luo; Alexander L Sukstanskii; Aditi Iyer; Anne H Cross Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-08-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Stephan Bramow; Josa M Frischer; Hans Lassmann; Nils Koch-Henriksen; Claudia F Lucchinetti; Per S Sørensen; Henning Laursen Journal: Brain Date: 2010-09-20 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Martina Absinta; Govind Nair; Massimo Filippi; Abhik Ray-Chaudhury; Maria I Reyes-Mantilla; Carlos A Pardo; Daniel S Reich Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: J-M Tillema; S D Weigand; M Dayan; Y Shu; O H Kantarci; C F Lucchinetti; J D Port Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-04-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ulrike W Kaunzner; Yeona Kang; Shun Zhang; Eric Morris; Yihao Yao; Sneha Pandya; Sandra M Hurtado Rua; Calvin Park; Kelly M Gillen; Thanh D Nguyen; Yi Wang; David Pitt; Susan A Gauthier Journal: Brain Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Brian J Burkett; Andrew J Fagan; Joel P Felmlee; David F Black; John I Lane; John D Port; Charlotte H Rydberg; Kirk M Welker Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2021-01-02 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Martina Absinta; Govind Nair; Maria Chiara G Monaco; Dragan Maric; Nathanael J Lee; Seung-Kwon Ha; Nicholas J Luciano; Pascal Sati; Steven Jacobson; Daniel S Reich Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2019-03-30 Impact factor: 10.422