Editorial Comment: Paramagnetic Rim Lesions—An Imaging Biomarker for Chronic Active Lesions in Multiple Sclerosis May Help to Advance Research in Progressive Disease

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Wu
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Editorial Comment ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Imaging Biomarker ◽  
Advance Research

scholarly journals Editorial comment

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 825-825
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Editorial Comment

Owing to errors made by the authors, Gavin Giovannoni and Tove Christensen, the editorial ‘HERVs: have we been here before?’ Multiple Sclerosis Journal 18(12): 1670-1672, (DOI: 10.1177/1352458512469331 )1 is incorrect. This editorial addressing the article written by Perron and colleagues2 in the same issue, contained a number of errors identified by both the authors of the editorial and the authors of the article. The latter are outlined in the letter from Hervé Perron et al to follow, (DOI: 10.1177/1352458513485051) with additional supplemental information. The authors of the editorial suggested that they rewrite the entire piece to address many of the issues raised and this has also been published on the following pages.

Clinical course in multiple sclerosis patients presenting with a history of progressive disease

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.S. Pandey ◽  
S.C. Krieger ◽  
C. Farrell ◽  
C. Hannigan ◽  
T. DeAngelis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Clinical Course ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis Patients

Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein correlates with multiple sclerosis disease severity

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Högel ◽  
Eero Rissanen ◽  
Christian Barro ◽  
Markus Matilainen ◽  
Marjo Nylund ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Single Molecule ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Disease Duration ◽  
Acidic Protein ◽  
Csf Levels

Background: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of two soluble biomarkers, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and neurofilament light chain (NfL), have been shown to associate with multiple sclerosis (MS) disease progression. Now, both biomarkers can be detected reliably in serum, and importantly, their serum levels correlate well with their CSF levels. Objective: To evaluate the usability of serum GFAP measurement as a biomarker of progressive disease and disease severity in MS. Methods: Clinical course, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), disease duration, patient age and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) parameters were reviewed in 79 MS patients in this cross-sectional hospital-based study. Serum samples were collected for measurement of GFAP and NfL concentrations using single molecule array (Simoa) assay. A cohort of healthy controls was evaluated for comparison. Results: Higher serum concentrations of both GFAP and NfL were associated with higher EDSS, older age, longer disease duration, progressive disease course and MRI pathology. Conclusion: Earlier studies have demonstrated that GFAP, unlike NfL, is not increased in association with acute focal inflammation-related nervous system damage. Our work suggests that GFAP serum level associates with disease progression in MS and could potentially serve as an easily measurable biomarker of central nervous system (CNS) pathology related to disease progression in MS.

Temporal and Clinical Course of Multiple Sclerosis

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica Grazioli ◽  
Channa Kolb ◽  
Bianca Weinstock-Guttman
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Clinical Course ◽  
Disease Classification ◽  
Clinical Relapse ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Genetic Biomarkers ◽  
Active Disease ◽  
Over Time

The temporal and clinical course of multiple sclerosis is heterogeneous, varying among patients as well as over time in the same individual. Greater specificity in describing disease classification and course is important for conduct of clinical trials as well as prognosis for individual patients. This chapter reviews the results of recent consensus panels that have further defined the relapsing and progressive forms of multiple sclerosis through clarification of clinical relapse, subclinical relapse, active disease, and progressive disease. Clinical characteristics, conventional and nonconventional magnetic resonance imaging metrics, and immunologic and genetic biomarkers that can be used to predict disease severity and course are also discussed.

The role of contrast-enhanced and non-contrast-enhanced MRI in the follow-up of multiple sclerosis

2020 ◽  
pp. 028418512094671
Author(s):  
Fariba Zarei ◽  
Mehrnaz Ghaedian ◽  
Tahereh Ghaedian
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Enhanced Mri ◽  
Progressive Group ◽  
Contrast Enhanced ◽  
Routine Administration ◽  
Low Incidence ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Contrast Enhanced Mri

Background Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) for different indications. However, frequent administration of gadolinium in these patients can have some potential complications. So, a more limited approach reducing the use of gadolinium should be considered. Purpose To evaluate the additional benefits of contrast-enhanced MRI over non-contrast-enhanced MRI in routine follow-up of patients with MS. Material and Methods This is a retrospective cohort study including patients with MS who underwent both contrast-enhanced and non-contrast-enhanced MRI for two time-points with an interval of at least six months. Non-contrast-enhanced images were compared for each patient and interpreted as non-progressive or progressive disease. Then, rate and type of enhancing lesions were analyzed and compared between the groups. All images were reviewed and compared visually by two radiologists. Results A total of 462 patients (392 women; mean age = 36 years) were included. Of these patients, 352 were in the non-progressive group and 112 were in progressive group. Comparison of baseline and follow-up contrast-enhanced MRIs revealed that 13 (3.7%) patients in the non-progressive group and 58 (51.8%) patients in progressive group developed enhancing lesions ( P < 0.001). All 58 patients in the progressive group developed new enhancing lesions, whereas all those in the non-progressive group revealed persistent or reactivated enhancing lesions without evidence of new lesions. Conclusion According to the very low incidence rate of new enhancing lesions in patients with non-progressive disease on follow-up non-contrast-enhanced MRI, routine administration of contrast in follow-up studies is not suggested.

scholarly journals Disease-modifying treatments for progressive multiple sclerosis

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (11) ◽  
pp. 1428-1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Comi
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Progressive Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Laboratory Science ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Relapsing Remitting ◽  
Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Major Progress

The last 20 years have seen major progress in the treatment of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) using a variety of drugs targeting immune dysfunction. In contrast, all clinical trials of such agents in primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS) have failed and there is limited evidence of their efficacy in secondary progressive disease. Evolving concepts of the complex interplay between inflammatory and neurodegenerative processes across the course of multiple sclerosis (MS) may explain this discrepancy. This paper will provide an up-to-date overview of the rationale and results of the published clinical trials that have sought to alter the trajectory of both primary and secondary MS, considering studies involving drugs with a primary immune target and also those aiming for neuroprotection. Future areas of study will be discussed, building on these results combined with the experience of treating RRMS and new concepts emerging from laboratory science and animal models.

Epilepsy in multiple sclerosis

Neurology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 89 (24) ◽  
pp. 2462-2468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Burman ◽  
Johan Zelano
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinical Features ◽  
Cumulative Incidence ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Disease Duration ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Expanded Disability Status Scale ◽  
Disability Status ◽  
Relapsing Remitting ◽  
Edss Score

Objective:To determine the cumulative incidence of epilepsy in a population-based cohort of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and to investigate the association between epilepsy and clinical features of MS.Methods:All available patients in the Swedish MS register (n = 14,545) and 3 age- and sex-matched controls per patient randomly selected from the population register (n = 43,635) were included. Data on clinical features of MS were retrieved from the Swedish MS register, and data on epilepsy and death were retrieved from comprehensive patient registers.Results:The cumulative incidence of epilepsy was 3.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.17–3.76) in patients with MS and 1.4% (95% CI 1.30–1.52) in controls (risk ratio 2.5, 95% CI 2.19–2.76). In a Cox proportional model, MS increased the risk of epilepsy (hazard ratio 3.2, 95% CI 2.64–3.94). Patients with relapsing-remitting MS had a cumulative incidence of epilepsy of 2.2% (95% CI 1.88–2.50), whereas patients with progressive disease had a cumulative incidence of 5.5% (95% CI 4.89–6.09). The cumulative incidence rose continuously with increasing disease duration to 5.9% (95% CI 4.90–7.20) in patients with disease duration ≥34 years. Patients with an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score ≥7 had a cumulative incidence of epilepsy of 5.3% (95% CI 3.95–7.00). Disease duration and EDSS score were associated with epilepsy after multiple logistic regression (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% CI 1.01–1.04 per year, p = 0.001; and OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.09–1.26 per EDSS step, p < 0.0001).Conclusions:Epilepsy is more common among patients with MS than in the general population, and a diagnosis of MS increases the risk of epilepsy. Our data suggest a direct link between severity of MS and epilepsy.

scholarly journals GABA: a new imaging biomarker of neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis?

Brain ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 138 (9) ◽  
pp. 2467-2468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola De Stefano ◽  
Antonio Giorgio
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Imaging Biomarker ◽  
Gaba A
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document