“Stable” vs. “silent progressive multiple sclerosis”: a real-world retrospective clinical imaging Brazilian study

ABSTRACT

Background: Clinical and imaging are required to characterize activity and progression in MS. The parameters for activity are well defined but not those for progression. The ideal aim for long-term treatment is that neither clinical nor imaging signs of disease should be present, and also no brain atrophy. Objectives: To conduct a comparative clinical-imaging study focusing on MRI brain volumetry. Methods: 174 consecutive relapsing-remitting MS patients (McDonald 2001) were studied, focusing on activity and progression. Annual clinical evaluations (relapse rate and EDSS) and MRI data, along with the annualized evolution of the corpus callosum index (CCI), were compared. Results: Out of 174 patients, 148 were considered clinically “stable” based on EDSS. However, 33 (22.2%) out of this group showed annualized reductions in CCI of more than 0.5%, which was the cutoff for defining significant brain atrophy. Conclusions: Among apparently “stable” relapsing-remitting MS patients, 1/5 showed significant brain atrophy over a follow-up period of at least 7 years. We consider it reasonable to suggest that MRI volume sequences should be included in follow-up protocols, so as to provide information on the real treatment response status.

RESUMO

Antecedentes: Critérios clínicos e de imagem são necessários para caracterizar atividade e progressão em esclerose múltipla (EM). Os parâmetros para a atividade são bem definidos, o que não ocorre com a progressão. O objetivo ideal para tratamento em longo prazo inclui ausência de sinais clínicos e de imagem, assim como inexistência de atrofia cerebral.

Objetivos: Estudo comparativo de aspectos clínicos e correlatos de imagem, com foco em volumetria cerebral. Métodos: Foram avaliados 174 pacientes consecutivos com o diagnóstico de EM surto-remissiva (McDonald 2001), com foco em dados de atividade e progressão. A avaliação clínica anual (taxa de surtos e escala expandida do estado de incapacidade - EDSS) e dados de imagem, assim como a evolução anualizada do Índice de Corpo Caloso (CCI), foram comparados. Resultados: Da amostra inicial de 174 pacientes, 148 foram considerados “clinicamente estáveis” com base na EDSS. Todavia, 33 (22,2%) pacientes desse grupo mostraram redução volumétrica anualizada no índice de corpo caloso acima de 0,5%, nível de corte para definir a atrofia cerebral significativa. Conclusões: Entre pacientes de EM surto-remissiva aparentemente estáveis, cerca de 1/5 apresentou sinais de atrofia cerebral significativa em sete anos de seguimento. Consideramos razoável sugerir que sequências de volumetria deveriam ser incluídas nos protocolos de seguimento, fornecendo informação quanto ao real estado da resposta ao tratamento.

Keywords:

Multiple Sclerosis - Neuroimaging - Corpus Callosum

Palavras-chave:

Esclerose Múltipla - Neuroimagem - Corpo Caloso

Authors’ contributions:

GMAF, FFAF: data acquisition and main document; PVS, RCS: data acquisition and revision of manuscript.

Publication History

Received: 01 June 2020

Accepted: 16 March 2021

Article published online:
31 January 2023

• References

• 1 Lublin FD, Reingold S. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 1996; Apr; 46 (04) 907-911 https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.46.4.907
• 2 Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: An expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; Nov; 33 (11) 1444-1452 https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.33.11.1444
• 3 Lublin FD, Reingold S, Cohen J, Cutter GR, Sørensen PS, Thompson AJ. et al. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis. The 2013 revisions. Neurology 2014; Jul; 83 (03) 278-286 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.20200234202002340560
• 4 Barkhof F, Filippi M, Miller DH, Scheltens P, Campi A, Polman CH. et al. Comparison of MR imaging criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite MS. Brain 1997; Nov; 120 (11) 2059-2069 https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/120.11.2059
• 5 Tintoré M, Rovira A, Martinéz M, Rio J, Díaz-Villoslada P, Brieva L. et al. Isolated demyelinating syndromes: comparison of different MR imaging criteria to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; Apr; 21 (04) 702-706
• 6 McDonald WI, Compston A, Edan G, Goodkin D, Hartung HP, Lublin FD. et al. Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001; Jul; 50 (01) 121-127 https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.1032
• 7 Figueira FF, Santos VS, Figueira GM, Silva ACM. Corpus callosum index: A practical method for long-term follow-up in multiple sclerosis. Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr 2007; Dec; 65(4A) 931-935 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-282X2007000600001
• 8 Havrdova E, Galetta S, Hutchinson M, Stefoski D, Bates D, Polman CH. et al. Effect of natalizumab on clinical and radiological disease activity in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (AFFIRM) study. Lancet Neurol 2009; Mar; 8 (03) 254-260 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70021-3
• 9 De Stefano N, Stromillo ML, Giorgio A, Bartolozzi ML, Battaglini M, Baldini M. et al. Establishing pathological cut-offs of brain atrophy rates in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016; Jan; 87 (01) 93-99 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2014-309903
• 10 University of California, San Francisco MS-EPIC Team. Cree BAC, Hollenbach JA, Bove R, Kirkish G, Sacco S. et al. Silent Progression in Disease Activity-Free Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2019; May; 85 (05) 653-666 https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25463
• 11 Hansen S, Muenssinger J, Kronhoffman S, Lautenbacher S, Oschmann P, Keune PM. Cognitive tools in multiple sclerosis revisited. Sensitivity and specificity of a short version of Rao’s Brief Repeatable Battery. BMC Neurol 2015; Nov; 15: 246-246 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-015-0497-8
• 12 Healy BC, Buckle GJ, Ali EN, Egorova S, Khalid F, Tauhid S. et al. Characterizing clinical and MRI dissociation in patients with multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimaging 2017; Sep; 27 (05) 481-485 https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.12433
• 13 Bakshi R, Healy BC, Dupuy SL, Kirkish G, Khalid F, Gundel T. et al. Brain MRI predicts worsening multiple sclerosis disability over 5 years in the SUMMIT study. J Neuroimaging 2020; Mar; 30 (02) 212-218 https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.12688
• 14 Granberg T, Martola J, Bergendal G, Shams S, Damangir S, Aspelin P. et al. Corpus callosum atrophy is strongly associated with cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis: results of a 17-year longitudinal study. Mult Scler 2015; Aug; 21 (09) 1151-1158 https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458514560928
• 15 Granberg T, Bergendal G, Shams S, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen-Wiberg M, Fredrikson S. et al. MRI-defined corpus callosal atrophy in multiple sclerosis: a comparison of volumetric measurements, corpus callosum area and index. J Neuroimaging Nov-Dec 2015; 25 (06) 996-1001 https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.12237
• 16 Gonçalves LI, Passos GR, Conzatti LP, Burger JLP, Tomasi GH, Zandoná ME. et al. Correlation between the corpus callosum index and brain atrophy, lesion load, and cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2018; Feb; 20: 154-158 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2018.01.015
• 17 Oh J, Sicotte N. New imaging approaches for precision diagnosis and disease staging in MS?. Mult Scler 2020; Apr; 26 (05) 568-575 https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458519871817