Marcello Moccia1, Steven van de Pavert1, Arman Eshaghi1, Lukas Haider1, Jonas Pichat1, Marios Yiannakas1, Sebastien Ourselin1, Yi Wang1, Claudia Wheeler-Kingshott1, Alan Thompson1, Frederik Barkhof1, Olga Ciccarelli2. 1. From the Department of Neuroinflammation, Queen Square MS Centre, NMR Research Unit, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, Faculty of Brain Sciences (M.M., S.v.d.P., A.E., L.H., M.Y., Y.W., C.W.-K., A.T., F.B., O.C.), Centre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering (J.P., S.O.), and Translational Imaging Group, UCL Institute of Healthcare Engineering (F.B.), University College London, UK; Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Care and Research Centre, Department of Neurosciences (M.M.), Federico II University, Naples, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (F.B.), VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre (A.T., F.B., O.C.), UK. 2. From the Department of Neuroinflammation, Queen Square MS Centre, NMR Research Unit, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, Faculty of Brain Sciences (M.M., S.v.d.P., A.E., L.H., M.Y., Y.W., C.W.-K., A.T., F.B., O.C.), Centre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering (J.P., S.O.), and Translational Imaging Group, UCL Institute of Healthcare Engineering (F.B.), University College London, UK; Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Care and Research Centre, Department of Neurosciences (M.M.), Federico II University, Naples, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (F.B.), VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre (A.T., F.B., O.C.), UK. o.ciccarelli@ucl.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify pathologic correlates of magnetization transfer ratio (MTR) in multiple sclerosis (MS) in an MRI-pathology study. METHODS: We acquired MTR maps at 3T from 16 fixed MS brains and 4 controls, and immunostained 100 tissue blocks for neuronal neurofilaments, myelin (SMI94), tissue macrophages (CD68), microglia (IBA1), B-lymphocytes, T-lymphocytes, cytotoxic T-lymphocytes, astrocytes (glial fibrillary acidic protein), and mitochondrial damage (COX4, VDAC). We defined regions of interest in lesions, normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), and cortical normal-appearing gray matter (NAGM). Associations between MTR and immunostaining intensities were explored using linear mixed-effects models (with cassettes nested within patients) and interaction terms (for differences between regions of interest and between cases and controls); a multivariate linear mixed-effects model identified the best pathologic correlates of MTR. RESULTS: MTR was the lowest in white matter (WM) lesions (23.4 ± 9.4%) and the highest in NAWM (38.1 ± 8.7%). In MS brains, lower MTR was associated with lower immunostaining intensity for myelin (coefficient 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.55), macrophages (coefficient 0.03; 95% CI 0.01-0.07), and astrocytes (coefficient 0.51; 95% CI 0.02-1.00), and with greater mitochondrial damage (coefficient 0.31; 95% CI 0.07-0.55). Based on interaction terms, MTR was more strongly associated with myelin in WM (coefficient 1.58; 95% CI 1.09-2.08) and gray matter (GM) lesions (coefficient 0.66; 95% CI 0.13-1.20), and with macrophages (coefficient 1.40; 95% CI 0.56-2.25), astrocytes (coefficient 2.66; 95% CI 1.31-4.01), and mitochondrial damage (coefficient -12.59; 95% CI -23.16 to -2.02) in MS brains than controls. In the multivariate model, myelin immunostaining intensity was the best correlate of MTR (coefficient 0.31; 95% CI 0.09-0.52; p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Myelin was the strongest correlate of MTR, especially in WM and cortical GM lesions, but additional correlates should be kept in mind when designing and interpreting MTR observational and experimental studies in MS.
OBJECTIVE: To identify pathologic correlates of magnetization transfer ratio (MTR) in multiple sclerosis (MS) in an MRI-pathology study. METHODS: We acquired MTR maps at 3T from 16 fixed MS brains and 4 controls, and immunostained 100 tissue blocks for neuronal neurofilaments, myelin (SMI94), tissue macrophages (CD68), microglia (IBA1), B-lymphocytes, T-lymphocytes, cytotoxic T-lymphocytes, astrocytes (glial fibrillary acidic protein), and mitochondrial damage (COX4, VDAC). We defined regions of interest in lesions, normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), and cortical normal-appearing gray matter (NAGM). Associations between MTR and immunostaining intensities were explored using linear mixed-effects models (with cassettes nested within patients) and interaction terms (for differences between regions of interest and between cases and controls); a multivariate linear mixed-effects model identified the best pathologic correlates of MTR. RESULTS: MTR was the lowest in white matter (WM) lesions (23.4 ± 9.4%) and the highest in NAWM (38.1 ± 8.7%). In MS brains, lower MTR was associated with lower immunostaining intensity for myelin (coefficient 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.55), macrophages (coefficient 0.03; 95% CI 0.01-0.07), and astrocytes (coefficient 0.51; 95% CI 0.02-1.00), and with greater mitochondrial damage (coefficient 0.31; 95% CI 0.07-0.55). Based on interaction terms, MTR was more strongly associated with myelin in WM (coefficient 1.58; 95% CI 1.09-2.08) and gray matter (GM) lesions (coefficient 0.66; 95% CI 0.13-1.20), and with macrophages (coefficient 1.40; 95% CI 0.56-2.25), astrocytes (coefficient 2.66; 95% CI 1.31-4.01), and mitochondrial damage (coefficient -12.59; 95% CI -23.16 to -2.02) in MS brains than controls. In the multivariate model, myelin immunostaining intensity was the best correlate of MTR (coefficient 0.31; 95% CI 0.09-0.52; p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Myelin was the strongest correlate of MTR, especially in WM and cortical GM lesions, but additional correlates should be kept in mind when designing and interpreting MTR observational and experimental studies in MS.
Authors: Serdest Demir; Bryan Clifford; Wei-Ching Lo; Azadeh Tabari; Augusto Lio M Goncalves Filho; Min Lang; Stephen F Cauley; Kawin Setsompop; Berkin Bilgic; Michael H Lev; Pamela W Schaefer; Otto Rapalino; Susie Y Huang; Tom Hilbert; Thorsten Feiweier; John Conklin Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Cristina Granziera; Jens Wuerfel; Frederik Barkhof; Massimiliano Calabrese; Nicola De Stefano; Christian Enzinger; Nikos Evangelou; Massimo Filippi; Jeroen J G Geurts; Daniel S Reich; Maria A Rocca; Stefan Ropele; Àlex Rovira; Pascal Sati; Ahmed T Toosy; Hugo Vrenken; Claudia A M Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott; Ludwig Kappos Journal: Brain Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Lukas Pirpamer; Bálint Kincses; Zsigmond Tamás Kincses; Christian Kiss; Anna Damulina; Michael Khalil; Rudolf Stollberger; Reinhold Schmidt; Christian Enzinger; Stefan Ropele Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2022-04-20 Impact factor: 4.891
Authors: Douglas L Arnold; Daniela Piani-Meier; Amit Bar-Or; Ralph Hb Benedict; Bruce Ac Cree; Gavin Giovannoni; Ralf Gold; Patrick Vermersch; Sophie Arnould; Frank Dahlke; Thomas Hach; Shannon Ritter; Göril Karlsson; Ludwig Kappos; Robert J Fox Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2022-03-09 Impact factor: 5.855
Authors: Ian J Tagge; Ilana R Leppert; Dumitru Fetco; Jennifer Sw Campbell; David A Rudko; Robert A Brown; Nikola Stikov; G Bruce Pike; Paul S Giacomini; Douglas L Arnold; Sridar Narayanan Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 5.855
Authors: J William L Brown; Ferran Prados; Daniel R Altmann; Baris Kanber; Jonathan Stutters; Nick G Cunniffe; Joanne L Jones; Zoya G Georgieva; Edward J Needham; Cyrus Daruwalla; Claudia Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott; Peter Connick; Siddharthan Chandran; Robin Franklin; David MacManus; Rebecca Samson; Alasdair Coles; Declan Chard Journal: Ann Clin Transl Neurol Date: 2022-09-17 Impact factor: 5.430