ArticleJAMA neurology2018
Assessing Biological and Methodological Aspects of Brain Volume Loss in Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in JAMA neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association of NEDA-4 With No Long-term Disability Progression in Multiple Sclerosis and Comparison With NEDA-3: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2022Pooled it
- Effect of ibudilast on thalamic magnetization transfer ratio and volume in progressive multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2023Trial
- Treatment of internuclear ophthalmoparesis in multiple sclerosis with fampridine: A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over trial.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2019Trial
- Evaluation of no evidence of progression or active disease (NEPAD) in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis in the ORATORIO trial.Annals of neurology · 2018Trial
- Biomarkers of Progression Independent of Relapse Activity-Can We Actually Measure It Yet?International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Retinal thinning differentiates treatment effects in relapsing multiple sclerosis below the clinical threshold.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Observational
- Patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis show accelerated whole brain volume and thalamic volume loss early in disease.Neuroradiology · 2025Article
- A systematic literature review of the association between global brain atrophy and the Expanded Disability Status Scale score in people with multiple sclerosis.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025Review
- Retinal Damage and Visual Network Reconfiguration Defines Visual Function Recovery in Optic Neuritis.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2024Article
- Identification and management of subclinical disease activity in early multiple sclerosis: a review.Journal of neurology · 2024Review
- Brain volume loss in Japanese patients with multiple sclerosis is present in the early to middle stage of the disease.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Deformation-based morphometry identifies deep brain structures protected by ocrelizumab.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2022Article
- Health Economic Impact of Software-Assisted Brain MRI on Therapeutic Decision-Making and Outcomes of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Patients-A Microsimulation Study.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Regional grey matter microstructural changes and volume loss according to disease duration in multiple sclerosis patients.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Interferons and Multiple Sclerosis: Lessons from 25 Years of Clinical and Real-World Experience with Intramuscular Interferon Beta-1a (Avonex).CNS drugs · 2021Review
- Neurodegeneration in Multiple Sclerosis: Symptoms of Silent Progression, Biomarkers and Neuroprotective Therapy-Kynurenines Are Important Players.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- In Vivo Molecular Changes in the Retina of Patients With Multiple Sclerosis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2021Article
- Evolution of Brain Volume Loss Rates in Early Stages of Multiple Sclerosis.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2021Article
- A model for interrogating the clinico-radiological paradox in multiple sclerosis: Internuclear ophthalmoplegia.European journal of neurology · 2021Article
- Cortical fractal dimension predicts disability worsening in Multiple Sclerosis patients.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Before using brain volume loss (BVL) as a marker of therapeutic response in multiple sclerosis (MS), certain biological and methodological issues must be clarified. Objectives: To assess the dynamics of BVL as MS progresses and to evaluate the repeatability and exchangeability of BVL estimates with Jacobian Integration (JI) and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) Software Library (FSL) (specifically, the Structural Image Evaluation, Using Normalisation, of Atrophy-Cross-Sectional [SIENA-X] tool or FMRIB's Integrated Registration and Segmentation Tool [FIRST]). Design, Setting, and Participants: A cohort of patients who had either clinically isolated syndrome or MS was enrolled from February 2011 through October 2015. All underwent a series of annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Images from 2 cohorts of healthy volunteers were used to evaluate short-term repeatability of the MRI measurements (n = 34) and annual BVL (n = 20). Data analysis occurred from January to May 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: The goodness of fit of different models to the dynamics of BVL throughout the MS disease course was assessed. The short-term test-retest error was used as a measure of JI and FSL repeatability. The correlations (R2) of the changes quantified in the brain using JI and FSL, together with the accuracy of the annual BVL cutoffs to discriminate patients with MS from healthy volunteers, were used to measure compatibility of imaging methods. Results: A total of 140 patients with clinically isolated syndrome or MS were enrolled, including 95 women (67.9%); the group had a median (interquartile range) age of 40.7 (33.6-48.1) years. Patients underwent 4 MRI scans with a median (interquartile range) interscan period of 364 (351-379) days. The 34 healthy volunteers (of whom 18 [53%] were women; median [IQR] age, 33.5 [26.2-42.5] years) and 20 healthy volunteers (of whom 10 [50%] were women; median [IQR] age, 33.0 [28.7-39.2] years) underwent 2 MRI scans within a median (IQR) of 24.5 (0.0-74.5) days and 384.5 (366.3-407.8) days for the short-term and long-term MRI follow-up, respectively. The BVL rates were higher in the first 5 years after MS onset (R2 = 0.65 for whole-brain volume change and R2 = 0.52 for gray matter volume change) with a direct association with steroids (β = 0.280; P = .02) and an inverse association with age at MS onset, particularly in the first 5 years (β = 0.015; P = .047). The reproducibility of FSL (SIENA) and JI was similar for whole-brain volume loss, while JI gave more precise, less biased estimates for specific brain regions than FSL (SIENA-X and FIRST). The correlation between whole-brain volume loss using JI and FSL was high (R2 = 0.92), but the same correlations were poor for specific brain regions. The area under curve of the whole-brain volume change to discriminate between patients with MS and healthy volunteers was similar, although the thresholds and accuracy index were distinct for JI and FSL. Conclusions and Relevance: The proposed BVL threshold of less than 0.4% per year as a marker of therapeutic efficiency should be reconsidered because of the different dynamics of BVL as MS progresses and because of the limited reproducibility and variability of estimates using different imaging methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.