Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34592690›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2021

Central vein sign: A diagnostic biomarker in multiple sclerosis (CAVS-MS) study protocol for a prospective multicenter trial.

D Ontaneda, P Sati, P Raza, M Kilbane, E Gombos, E Alvarez, C Azevedo, P Calabresi, J A Cohen, L Freeman and 19 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Fast Submillimeter Whole-Brain TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Incorporation of the central vein sign into the McDonald criteria.Multiple sclerosis and related disorders · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. How Early Is Early Multiple Sclerosis?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis.WIREs mechanisms of disease · 2023
    Review
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

29 authors.

D OntanedaCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, United States. Electronic address: ontaned@ccf.org.
P SatiCedars Sinai, Los Angeles, CA, United States; NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States.
P RazaCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, United States.
M KilbaneCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, United States.
E GombosCedars Sinai, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
E AlvarezNeurology, U of Colorado, Denver, CO, United States.
C AzevedoUSC, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
P CalabresiNeurology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, United States.
J A CohenCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, United States.
L FreemanDell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States.
R G HenryUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
E E LongbrakeYale University, North Haven, CT, United States.
N MitraUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
N IllenbergerUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
M SchindlerUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
D Moreno-DominguezQMENTA Inc, Boston, MA, United States.
M RamosQMENTA Inc, Boston, MA, United States.
E MowryNeurology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, United States.
J OhUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
P RodriguesQMENTA Inc, Boston, MA, United States.
S ChahinWashington University, St. Louis, MO, United States.
M KaiseyCedars Sinai, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
E WaubantUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
G CutterUAB School of Public Health, Birmingham, AL, United States.
R ShinoharaUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
D S ReichNINDS, NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States.
A SolomonThe University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, United States.
N L SicotteCedars Sinai, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
North American Imaging in MS Cooperative

Funding

Central Vein Sign: A Diagnostic Biomarker in Multiple SclerosisU01NS116776 · NINDS · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI ONTANEDA, DANIEL, SATI, PASCAL · 2020 to 2024
$7.1M
NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS116776
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The specificity and implementation of current MRI-based diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis (MS) are imperfect. Approximately 1 in 5 of individuals diagnosed with MS are eventually determined not to have the disease, with overreliance on MRI findings a major cause of MS misdiagnosis. The central vein sign (CVS), a proposed MRI biomarker for MS lesions, has been extensively studied in numerous cross sectional studies and may increase diagnostic specificity for MS. CVS has desirable analytical, measurement, and scalability properties. "Central Vein Sign: A Diagnostic Biomarker in Multiple Sclerosis (CAVS-MS)" is an NIH-supported, 2-year, prospective, international, multicenter study conducted by the North American Imaging in MS Cooperative (NAIMS) to evaluate CVS as a diagnostic biomarker for immediate translation into clinical care. Study objectives include determining the concordance of CVS and McDonald Criteria to diagnose MS, the sensitivity of CVS to detect MS in those with typical presentations, and the specificity of CVS among those with atypical presentations. The study will recruit a total of 400 participants (200 with typical and 200 with atypical presentations) across 11 sites. T2*-weighted, high-isotropic-resolution, segmented echo-planar MRI will be acquired at baseline and 24 months on 3-tesla scanners, and FLAIR* images (combination of FLAIR and T2*) will be generated for evaluating CVS. Data will be processed on a cloud-based platform that contains clinical and CVS rating modules. Imaging quality control will be conducted by automated methods and neuroradiologist review. CVS will be determined by Select6* and Select3* lesion methods following published criteria at each site and by central readers, including neurologists and neuroradiologists. Automated CVS detection and algorithms for incorporation of CVS into McDonald Criteria will be tested. Diagnosis will be adjudicated by three neurologists who served on the 2017 International Panel on the Diagnosis of MS. The CAVS-MS study aims to definitively establish CVS as a diagnostic biomarker that can be applied broadly to individuals presenting for evaluation of the diagnosis of MS.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisBiomarkersCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMulticenter Studies as TopicProspective StudiesBiomarkersBiomarkerCentral veinDemyelinating diseaseDiagnosisMRIMultiple sclerosisSusceptibility-weighted imagingT2*-weighted imaging

Identifiers

PMID34592690
PMCPMC8482479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.