E Ghione1, N Bergsland1,2, M G Dwyer1,3, J Hagemeier1, D Jakimovski1, D P Ramasamy1, D Hojnacki4, A A Lizarraga4, C Kolb4, S Eckert4, B Weinstock-Guttman4, R Zivadinov5,3. 1. From the Department of Neurology (E.G., N.B., M.G.D., J.H., D.J., D.P.R., R.Z.), Buffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center. 2. IRCCS (N.B.), Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi ONLUS, Milan, Italy. 3. Center for Biomedical Imaging at the Clinical Translational Science Institute (M.G.D., R.Z.),University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, New York. 4. Department of Neurology (D.H., A.A.L., C.K., S.E., B.W.-G.), Jacobs Comprehensive MS Treatment and Research Center, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences. 5. From the Department of Neurology (E.G., N.B., M.G.D., J.H., D.J., D.P.R., R.Z.), Buffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center rzivadinov@bnac.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It is unknown whether deceleration of brain atrophy is associated with disability improvement in patients with MS. Our aim was to investigate whether patients with MS with disability improvement develop less brain atrophy compared with those who progress in disability or remain stable. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We followed 980 patients with MS for a mean of 4.8 ± 2.4 years. Subjects were divided into 3 groups: progress in disability (n = 241, 24.6%), disability improvement (n = 101, 10.3%), and stable (n = 638, 65.1%) at follow-up. Disability improvement and progress in disability were defined on the basis of the Expanded Disability Status Scale score change using standardized guidelines. Stable was defined as nonoccurrence of progress in disability or disability improvement. Normalized whole-brain volume was calculated using SIENAX on 3D T1WI, whereas the lateral ventricle was measured using NeuroSTREAM on 2D-T2-FLAIR images. The percentage brain volume change and percentage lateral ventricle volume change were calculated using SIENA and NeuroSTREAM, respectively. Differences among groups were investigated using ANCOVA, adjusted for age at first MR imaging, race, T2 lesion volume, and corresponding baseline structural volume and the Expanded Disability Status Scale. RESULTS: At first MR imaging, there were no differences among progress in disability, disability improvement, and the stable groups in whole-brain volume (P = .71) or lateral ventricle volume (P = .74). During follow-up, patients with disability improvement had the lowest annualized percentage lateral ventricle volume change (1.6% ± 2.7%) followed by patients who were stable (2.1% ± 3.7%) and had progress in disability (4.1% ± 5.5%), respectively (P < .001). The annualized percentage brain volume change values were -0.7% ± 0.7% for disability improvement, -0.8% ± 0.7% for stable, and -1.1% ± 1.1% for progress in disability (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MS who improve in their clinical disability develop less brain atrophy across time compared with those who progress.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It is unknown whether deceleration of brain atrophy is associated with disability improvement in patients with MS. Our aim was to investigate whether patients with MS with disability improvement develop less brain atrophy compared with those who progress in disability or remain stable. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We followed 980 patients with MS for a mean of 4.8 ± 2.4 years. Subjects were divided into 3 groups: progress in disability (n = 241, 24.6%), disability improvement (n = 101, 10.3%), and stable (n = 638, 65.1%) at follow-up. Disability improvement and progress in disability were defined on the basis of the Expanded Disability Status Scale score change using standardized guidelines. Stable was defined as nonoccurrence of progress in disability or disability improvement. Normalized whole-brain volume was calculated using SIENAX on 3D T1WI, whereas the lateral ventricle was measured using NeuroSTREAM on 2D-T2-FLAIR images. The percentage brain volume change and percentage lateral ventricle volume change were calculated using SIENA and NeuroSTREAM, respectively. Differences among groups were investigated using ANCOVA, adjusted for age at first MR imaging, race, T2 lesion volume, and corresponding baseline structural volume and the Expanded Disability Status Scale. RESULTS: At first MR imaging, there were no differences among progress in disability, disability improvement, and the stable groups in whole-brain volume (P = .71) or lateral ventricle volume (P = .74). During follow-up, patients with disability improvement had the lowest annualized percentage lateral ventricle volume change (1.6% ± 2.7%) followed by patients who were stable (2.1% ± 3.7%) and had progress in disability (4.1% ± 5.5%), respectively (P < .001). The annualized percentage brain volume change values were -0.7% ± 0.7% for disability improvement, -0.8% ± 0.7% for stable, and -1.1% ± 1.1% for progress in disability (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with MS who improve in their clinical disability develop less brain atrophy across time compared with those who progress.
Authors: Stephen M Smith; Yongyue Zhang; Mark Jenkinson; Jacqueline Chen; P M Matthews; Antonio Federico; Nicola De Stefano Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: N De Stefano; A Giorgio; M Battaglini; M Rovaris; M P Sormani; F Barkhof; T Korteweg; C Enzinger; F Fazekas; M Calabrese; D Dinacci; G Tedeschi; A Gass; X Montalban; A Rovira; A Thompson; G Comi; D H Miller; M Filippi Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Stephen L Hauser; Amit Bar-Or; Giancarlo Comi; Gavin Giovannoni; Hans-Peter Hartung; Bernhard Hemmer; Fred Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Kottil W Rammohan; Krzysztof Selmaj; Anthony Traboulsee; Jerry S Wolinsky; Douglas L Arnold; Gaelle Klingelschmitt; Donna Masterman; Paulo Fontoura; Shibeshih Belachew; Peter Chin; Nicole Mairon; Hideki Garren; Ludwig Kappos Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Paul O'Connor; Jerry S Wolinsky; Christian Confavreux; Giancarlo Comi; Ludwig Kappos; Tomas P Olsson; Hadj Benzerdjeb; Philippe Truffinet; Lin Wang; Aaron Miller; Mark S Freedman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-10-06 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Susan A Gauthier; Annika M Berger; Zsuzsanna Liptak; Yang Duan; Svetlana Egorova; Guy J Buckle; Bonnie I Glanz; Samia J Khoury; Rohit Bakshi; Howard L Weiner; Charles R G Guttmann Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2009-02
Authors: Jeffrey A Cohen; Alasdair J Coles; Douglas L Arnold; Christian Confavreux; Edward J Fox; Hans-Peter Hartung; Eva Havrdova; Krzysztof W Selmaj; Howard L Weiner; Elizabeth Fisher; Vesna V Brinar; Gavin Giovannoni; Miroslav Stojanovic; Bella I Ertik; Stephen L Lake; David H Margolin; Michael A Panzara; D Alastair S Compston Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Robert Zivadinov; Tomas Uher; Jesper Hagemeier; Manuela Vaneckova; Deepa P Ramasamy; Michaela Tyblova; Niels Bergsland; Zdenek Seidl; Michael G Dwyer; Jan Krasensky; Eva Havrdova; Dana Horakova Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Massimiliano Calabrese; Richard Reynolds; Roberta Magliozzi; Marco Castellaro; Aldo Morra; Antonio Scalfari; Gabriele Farina; Chiara Romualdi; Alberto Gajofatto; Marco Pitteri; Maria Donata Benedetti; Salvatore Monaco Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-12 Impact factor: 3.240