Wallace J Brownlee1, Josephine K Swanton2, Katherine A Miszkiel2, David H Miller2, Olga Ciccarelli2. 1. From the Queen Square Multiple Sclerosis Centre (W.J.B., J.K.S., D.H.M., O.C.), Department of Neuroinflammation, UCL Institute of Neurology, London; Lysholm Department of Neuroradiology (K.A.M.), National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London; and NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre (D.H.M., O.C.), London, UK. w.brownlee@ucl.ac.uk. 2. From the Queen Square Multiple Sclerosis Centre (W.J.B., J.K.S., D.H.M., O.C.), Department of Neuroinflammation, UCL Institute of Neurology, London; Lysholm Department of Neuroradiology (K.A.M.), National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London; and NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre (D.H.M., O.C.), London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether inclusion of lesions in the symptomatic region influences the performance of dissemination in space (DIS) criteria for a diagnosis of clinically definite multiple sclerosis (CDMS) in patients with a clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). METHODS: We studied 30 patients with CIS with brainstem/cerebellar and spinal cord syndromes who had MRI scans at the time of CIS and were followed up for the development of CDMS. We retrospectively applied the McDonald 2010 DIS criteria (excluding all lesions in the symptomatic region) to baseline MRI scans and 2 modified DIS criteria: (1) the inclusion of asymptomatic lesions in the symptomatic region in DIS, and (2) the inclusion of any lesion in the symptomatic region in DIS. The performance of the McDonald 2010 DIS criteria and the 2 modified criteria for the development of CDMS was compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the DIS criteria was, respectively, 73%, 73%, and 73% for the McDonald 2010 criteria, 80%, 73%, and 77% when asymptomatic lesions in the symptomatic region were included, and 87%, 73%, and 80% when any lesion in the symptomatic region was included in DIS. CONCLUSIONS: Including lesions in the symptomatic region in DIS increases the sensitivity of MRI criteria for diagnosing multiple sclerosis without compromising specificity. These findings may help inform future revisions of the diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with CIS, including lesions in the symptomatic region as part of the criteria for DIS does not significantly increase the accuracy for predicting the development of CDMS. The study lacks the precision to detect an important change in accuracy.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether inclusion of lesions in the symptomatic region influences the performance of dissemination in space (DIS) criteria for a diagnosis of clinically definite multiple sclerosis (CDMS) in patients with a clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). METHODS: We studied 30 patients with CIS with brainstem/cerebellar and spinal cord syndromes who had MRI scans at the time of CIS and were followed up for the development of CDMS. We retrospectively applied the McDonald 2010 DIS criteria (excluding all lesions in the symptomatic region) to baseline MRI scans and 2 modified DIS criteria: (1) the inclusion of asymptomatic lesions in the symptomatic region in DIS, and (2) the inclusion of any lesion in the symptomatic region in DIS. The performance of the McDonald 2010 DIS criteria and the 2 modified criteria for the development of CDMS was compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the DIS criteria was, respectively, 73%, 73%, and 73% for the McDonald 2010 criteria, 80%, 73%, and 77% when asymptomatic lesions in the symptomatic region were included, and 87%, 73%, and 80% when any lesion in the symptomatic region was included in DIS. CONCLUSIONS: Including lesions in the symptomatic region in DIS increases the sensitivity of MRI criteria for diagnosing multiple sclerosis without compromising specificity. These findings may help inform future revisions of the diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with CIS, including lesions in the symptomatic region as part of the criteria for DIS does not significantly increase the accuracy for predicting the development of CDMS. The study lacks the precision to detect an important change in accuracy.
Authors: Àlex Rovira; Mike P Wattjes; Mar Tintoré; Carmen Tur; Tarek A Yousry; Maria P Sormani; Nicola De Stefano; Massimo Filippi; Cristina Auger; Maria A Rocca; Frederik Barkhof; Franz Fazekas; Ludwig Kappos; Chris Polman; David Miller; Xavier Montalban Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2015-07-07 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: C M Poser; D W Paty; L Scheinberg; W I McDonald; F A Davis; G C Ebers; K P Johnson; W A Sibley; D H Silberberg; W W Tourtellotte Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1983-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: L K Fisniku; P A Brex; D R Altmann; K A Miszkiel; C E Benton; R Lanyon; A J Thompson; D H Miller Journal: Brain Date: 2008-01-29 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: J K Swanton; K Fernando; C M Dalton; K A Miszkiel; A J Thompson; G T Plant; D H Miller Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2005-07-25 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Gilles Edan; Massimo Filippi; Hans-Peter Hartung; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Luanne M Metz; Henry F McFarland; Paul W O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Brian G Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 10.422
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: Massimo Filippi; Maria A Rocca; Olga Ciccarelli; Nicola De Stefano; Nikos Evangelou; Ludwig Kappos; Alex Rovira; Jaume Sastre-Garriga; Mar Tintorè; Jette L Frederiksen; Claudio Gasperini; Jacqueline Palace; Daniel S Reich; Brenda Banwell; Xavier Montalban; Frederik Barkhof Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2016-01-26 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Wallace J Brownlee; Katherine A Miszkiel; Carmen Tur; Frederik Barkhof; David H Miller; Olga Ciccarelli Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-08-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Lorenzo Gaetani; Luca Prosperini; Andrea Mancini; Paolo Eusebi; Maria Chiara Cerri; Carlo Pozzilli; Paolo Calabresi; Paola Sarchielli; Massimiliano Di Filippo Journal: J Neurol Date: 2018-09-08 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Marloes Hj Hagens; Jessica Burggraaff; Iris D Kilsdonk; Serena Ruggieri; Sara Collorone; Rosa Cortese; Niamh Cawley; Emilia Sbardella; Michaela Andelova; Michael Amann; Johanna M Lieb; Patrizia Pantano; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Joep Killestein; Celia Oreja-Guevara; Jens Wuerfel; Olga Ciccarelli; Claudio Gasperini; Carsten Lukas; Alex Rovira; Frederik Barkhof; Mike P Wattjes Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Charidimos Tsagkas; Katrin Parmar; Simon Pezold; Christian Barro; Mallar M Chakravarty; Laura Gaetano; Yvonne Naegelin; Michael Amann; Athina Papadopoulou; Jens Wuerfel; Ludwig Kappos; Jens Kuhle; Till Sprenger; Cristina Granziera; Stefano Magon Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2021-02-24 Impact factor: 5.038