ArticleBrain and behavior2018
Whole-brain atrophy assessed by proportional- versus registration-based pipelines from 3T MRI in multiple sclerosis.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuroimaging markers and disability scales in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- 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
- High throughput method for detecting murine brain atrophy using a clinical 3T MRI.BMC medical imaging · 2023Article
- Brain MRI Predicts Worsening Multiple Sclerosis Disability over 5 Years in the SUMMIT Study.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2020Article
- Whole-brain atrophy assessed by proportional- versus registration-based pipelines from 3T MRI in multiple sclerosis.Brain and behavior · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeWhole-brain atrophy is a standard outcome measure in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials as assessed by various software tools. The effect of processing method on the validity of such data obtained from high-resolution 3T MRI is not known. We compared two commonly used methods of quantifying whole-brain atrophy.
methodsThree-dimensional T1-weighted and FLAIR images were obtained at 3T in MS (n = 61) and normal control (NC, n = 30) groups. Whole-brain atrophy was assessed by two automated pipelines: (a) SPM8 to derive brain parenchymal fraction (BPF, proportional-based method); (b) SIENAX to derive normalized brain parenchymal volume (BPV, registration method). We assessed agreement between BPF and BPV, as well their relationship to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, timed 25-foot walk (T25FW), cognition, and cerebral T2 (FLAIR) lesion volume (T2LV).
resultsBrain parenchymal fraction and BPV showed only partial agreement (r = 0.73) in the MS group, and r = 0.28 in NC. Both methods showed atrophy in MS versus NC (BPF p < 0.01, BPV p < 0.05). Within MS group comparisons, BPF (p < 0.05) but not BPV (p > 0.05) correlated with EDSS score. BPV (p = 0.03) but not BPF (p = 0.08) correlated with T25FW. Both metrics correlated with T2LV (p < 0.05) and cognitive subscales. BPF (p < 0.05) but not BPV (p > 0.05) showed lower brain volume in cognitively impaired (n = 23) versus cognitively preserved (n = 38) patients. However, direct comparisons of BPF and BPV sensitivities to atrophy and clinical correlations were not statistically significant.
conclusionWhole-brain atrophy metrics may not be interchangeable between proportional- and registration-based automated pipelines from 3T MRI in patients with MS.
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.