MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4367302635 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000203626

Paramagnetic rim lesions predict the development of clinical MS in radiologically isolated syndrome: results from a prospective cohort study (S27.003)

2023· article· en· W4367302635 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiwon Oh, Timothy Lim, Suradech Suthiphosuwan, Adrian I. Espiritu, Melanie Guenette, Aditya Bharatha, Pascal Sati, Martina Absinta, Daniel S. Reich

Notice bibliographique

RevueNeurology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingClinically isolated syndromeProspective cohort studyFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryInternal medicineCohortMultiple sclerosisLogistic regressionLesionNuclear medicineRadiologyPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

<h3>Objective:</h3> To determine the association of various MRI measures and subsequent development of clinical MS in people with radiologically isolated syndrome (pwRIS). <h3>Background:</h3> We previously found that most pwRIS have high proportions of white matter lesions positive for the central vein sign (CVS+L) and at least one paramagnetic rim lesion (PRL), representing perivenular and chronic active demyelination, respectively. Whether PRL and CVS+L relate to the risk of developing clinical MS in pwRIS prospectively is unknown. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> PwRIS were recruited prospectively and underwent 3T-MRI, including 3D-FLAIR and T2*segmented EPI of the brain, and sagittal T1-PSIR of the cervical spinal cord(SC). MRIs were evaluated for presence of PRL,CVS+L, and SC lesions (SCL). <h3>Results:</h3> 36 pwRIS (median age 43 years, 70% women, median time of clinical follow-up 6.3 years) were included in the study. Clinical MS developed in 9 (25%) subjects with a median time to first clinical event of 5.2 years. 67% developed RRMS and 33% PPMS. At baseline, pwRIS who developed clinical MS vs those who did not had a higher median number of PRL (11 vs 1, p=0.01) and CVS+L(34 vs 10, p=0.04). Longitudinally, number of new brain lesions, PRL, CVS+L (all p&lt;0.01) and SCL (p=0.02) were higher in those who subsequently developed clinical MS. Multivariable logistic regression using backward stepwise selection identified baseline PRL count as the most predictive variable of MS development among baseline and follow-up imaging measures (p=0.01). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> In this prospective cohort of pwRIS, 25% developed MS within 5 years after initial diagnosis, with 33% diagnosed as PPMS. Baseline PRL count was the most predictive MRI measure for subsequent development of clinical MS in pwRIS, suggesting that PRLs may have prognostic utility. Continued follow-up of this cohort and validation in larger datasets will be important to confirm the clinical predictive value of PRL and CVS+L in pwRIS. <b>Disclosure:</b> Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Roche. The institution of Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Biogen-Idec. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for BMS. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for EMD-Serono. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Sanofi-Genzyme. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Novartis. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Eli Lilly. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $0-$499 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Roche. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Biogen-Idec. Dr. Oh has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Sanofi-Genzyme. The institution of Dr. Oh has received research support from Biogen-Idec. The institution of Dr. Oh has received research support from EMD-Serono. The institution of Dr. Oh has received research support from Biogen-Idec. Timothy R. Lim has nothing to disclose. Dr. Suthiphosuwan has nothing to disclose. Dr. Espiritu has nothing to disclose. Melanie Guenette has nothing to disclose. Dr. Bharatha has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Novartis. The institution of Dr. Sati has received research support from National Multiple Sclerosis Society. The institution of Dr. Sati has received research support from National Institutes of Health. Dr. Sati has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care. Dr. Absinta has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for GSK. Dr. Absinta has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Abata Therapeutics. The institution of Dr. Absinta has received research support from International MS Alliance. The institution of Dr. Absinta has received research support from FRRB Early Career Award. The institution of Dr. Absinta has received research support from Cariplo Foundation. Dr. Reich has received research support from NIH. The institution of Dr. Reich has received research support from Vertex Pharmaceuticals. The institution of Dr. Reich has received research support from Adelson Medical Research Foundation. The institution of Dr. Reich has received research support from Myelin Repair Foundation. The institution of Dr. Reich has received research support from Sanofi-Genzyme. The institution of Dr. Reich has received research support from Abata Therapeutics. The institution of Dr. Reich has received research support from National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Dr. Reich has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a CME Faculty with PeerView. Dr. Reich has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a CME Faculty with AcademicCME. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with Sanofi-Genzyme that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Board of Directors with ACTRIMS that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with Abata Therapeutics that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with Roche that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with American Brain Foundation that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with University of Basel RC2NB that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with Tuscan Doctorate in Neuroscience that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Editorial Board with Multiple Sclerosis Journal that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Reich has a non-compensated relationship as a Advisor with Glaxo-Smith-Kline that is relevant to AAN interests or activities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,324

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,357
Écart entre enseignants0,312 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNeurologyMême sujetSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesTravaux en français237 207