Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26869873›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2016

Structural Brain Network Characteristics Can Differentiate CIS from Early RRMS.

Muthuraman Muthuraman, Vinzenz Fleischer, Pierre Kolber, Felix Luessi, Frauke Zipp, Sergiu Groppa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Graph theoretical approach to brain remodeling in multiple sclerosis.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Muthuraman MuthuramanDepartment of Neurology and Neuroimaging Center of the Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz Mainz, Germany.
Vinzenz FleischerDepartment of Neurology and Neuroimaging Center of the Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz Mainz, Germany.
Pierre KolberDepartment of Neurology and Neuroimaging Center of the Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz Mainz, Germany.
Felix LuessiDepartment of Neurology and Neuroimaging Center of the Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz Mainz, Germany.
Frauke ZippDepartment of Neurology and Neuroimaging Center of the Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz Mainz, Germany.
Sergiu GroppaDepartment of Neurology and Neuroimaging Center of the Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz Mainz, Germany.
University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Focal demyelinated lesions, diffuse white matter (WM) damage, and gray matter (GM) atrophy influence directly the disease progression in patients with multiple sclerosis. The aim of this study was to identify specific characteristics of GM and WM structural networks in subjects with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) in comparison to patients with early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Twenty patients with CIS, 33 with RRMS, and 40 healthy subjects were investigated using 3 T-MRI. Diffusion tensor imaging was applied, together with probabilistic tractography and fractional anisotropy (FA) maps for WM and cortical thickness correlation analysis for GM, to determine the structural connectivity patterns. A network topology analysis with the aid of graph theoretical approaches was used to characterize the network at different community levels (modularity, clustering coefficient, global, and local efficiencies). Finally, we applied support vector machines (SVM) to automatically discriminate the two groups. In comparison to CIS subjects, patients with RRMS were found to have increased modular connectivity and higher local clustering, highlighting increased local processing in both GM and WM. Both groups presented increased modularity and clustering coefficients in comparison to healthy controls. SVM algorithms achieved 97% accuracy using the clustering coefficient as classifier derived from GM and 65% using WM from probabilistic tractography and 67% from modularity of FA maps to differentiate between CIS and RRMS patients. We demonstrate a clear increase of modular and local connectivity in patients with early RRMS in comparison to CIS and healthy subjects. Based only on a single anatomic scan and without a priori information, we developed an automated and investigator-independent paradigm that can accurately discriminate between patients with these clinically similar disease entities, and could thus complement the current dissemination-in-time criteria for clinical diagnosis.

Indexed as

connectivitycortical thicknessdiffusion tensor imagingmultiple sclerosissupport vector machines

Identifiers

PMID26869873
PMCPMC4735423
OpenAlexW2257868153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.