MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409497242 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0318415

Sensitivity of multi-parametric quantitative magnetic resonance imaging for multiple sclerosis pathology

2025· article· en· W4409497242 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Schlaeger, Mark Mühlau, Guillaume Gilbert, Irene M. Vavasour, Thomas Amthor, Mariya Doneva, Aurore Menegaux, María Guadalupe Mora Álvarez, Markus Lauerer, Viola Pongratz, Claus Zimmer, Benedikt Wiestler, Jan S. Kirschke, Christine Preibisch, Ronja Berg

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaPhilips (Canada)
FundersFaculty of Medicine, Munich University of Technology
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisWhite matterMagnetic resonance imagingMagnetization transferGrey matterMedicineNuclear medicineQuantitative susceptibility mappingPathologyLesionQuantitative assessmentBiomarkerNuclear magnetic resonanceRadiologyChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In recent years, quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) made progress towards clinical applicability mainly through advances in acceleration techniques. In patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), objective quantitative MRI-based characterization of subtle pathological alterations in lesions, perilesion (PL), as well as normal-appearing (NA) white matter (NAWM) and grey matter (NAGM) would revolutionize clinical assessment. While numerous quantitative techniques have been applied in studies of MS patients, their diagnostic significance especially for individual patients with relatively short disease duration is unclear. Therefore, we investigated the sensitivity of several quantitative MRI parameters to focal and diffuse MS pathology in a clinical feasibility study with a small sample size. METHODS: In 13 MS patients with a mean disease duration of 8 years and a mean EDSS of 1.1 as well as 14 healthy age-matched controls (HC), we acquired nine (semi-)quantitative magnetic resonance (MR) biomarkers, namely myelin water fraction (MWF), magnetization transfer (MT) saturation (MTsat), inhomogeneous MT ratio (ihMTR), quantitative longitudinal relaxation time (qT1), intrinsic (qT2) and effective (qT2*) quantitative transverse relaxation times, proton density (PD), quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM), and the ratio between T1-weighted and T2-weighted images (T1w/T2w). Four volumes of interest were automatically defined (NA/HC grey matter (GM), NA/HC white matter (WM), lesion, and PL), and biomarker values were analyzed between groups and tissue types. RESULTS: For all nine assessed biomarkers, mean values per patient were significantly different between lesion, PL, and NAWM (p < 0.05, FDR corrected). The lesion values of qT1, qT2, qT2 * , PD, and QSM were rather inhomogeneous. Furthermore, MWF, MTsat, and ihMTR were sensitive to diffuse WM pathology in MS with the largest absolute differences between NAWM and HCWM medians, albeit not statistically significant after correction for multiple testing. DISCUSSION: In our study, we successfully compared nine different quantitative MR parameters within the same subjects for tissue characterization of MS. Our study adds relevant aspects to the current debate on different sensitivities of various quantitative MR biomarkers to MS pathology. While all investigated MR biomarkers allowed characterizing lesions in individual patients, a separation of NAWM and HCWM could be most promising with the myelin-sensitive measures MWF, MTsat, and ihMTR.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.170
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies→French-language works237,207→