Using MRI to make informed clinical decisions in multiple sclerosis care

Current Opinion in Neurology

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 244-249

  Bermel, Robert A ^a,b   Naismith, Robert T ^a  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Disability; MRI; multiple sclerosis; relapse

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM;

CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EVALUATION; DISEASE ACTIVITY; HUMAN; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NEUROIMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT MONITORING; REVIEW; DECISION MAKING; DISABILITY; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING;

DECISION MAKING; DISABILITY EVALUATION; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; DISEASE PROGRESSION; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS;

EID: 84929458798     PISSN: 13507540     EISSN: 14736551     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000204     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Kidd D, Thorpe JW, Kendall BE, et al. MRI dynamics of brain and spinal cord in progressive multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996; 60:15-19.
2. Thorpe JW, Kidd D, Moseley IF, et al. Serial gadolinium-enhanced MRI of the brain and spinal cord in early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1996; 46:373-378.
3. Polman CH, Reingold SC, Banwell B, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 Revisions to the McDonald criteria. Ann Neurol 2011; 69:292-302.
4. Brex PA, Ciccarelli O, O'Riordan JI, et al. A longitudinal study of abnormalities on MRI and disability from multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2002; 346:158-164.
5. Fisniku LK, Brex PA, Altmann DR, et al. Disability and T2 MRI lesions: a 20-year follow-up of patients with relapse onset of multiple sclerosis. Brain 2008; 131 (Pt 3):808-817.
6. Lublin FD, Reingold SC, Cohen JA, et al. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: the 2013 revisions. Neurology 2014; 83:278-286.
7. Paty DW, McFarland H. Magnetic resonance techniques to monitor the long term evolution of multiple sclerosis pathology and to monitor definitive clinical trials. J Neurology Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 64 (Suppl 1):S47-S51.
8. Grigor C, Capell H, Stirling A, et al. Effect of a treatment strategy of tight control for rheumatoid arthritis (the TICORA study): a single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 364:263-269.
9. Havrdova E, Galetta S, Hutchinson M, 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; 8:254-260.
10. Rio J, Nos C, Tintore M, et al. Assessment of different treatment failure criteria in a cohort of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients treated with interferon b: implications for clinical trials. Ann Neurol 2002; 52:400-406.
11. Rudick RA, Lee JC, Simon J, Fisher E. Significance of T2 lesions in multiple sclerosis: a 13-year longitudinal study. Ann Neurol 2006; 60:236-242.
12. Bermel RA, You X, Foulds P, et al. Predictors of long-term outcome in multiple sclerosis patients treated with interferon b. Ann Neurol 2013; 73:95-103.
13. Prosperini L, Gallo V, Petsas N, et al. One-year MRI scan predicts clinical response to interferon beta in multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2009; 16:1202-1209.
14. Rotstein DL, Healy BC, Malik MT, et al. Evaluation of no evidence of disease activity in a 7-year longitudinal multiple sclerosis cohort. JAMA Neurol 2015; 72:152-158.
15. Nixon R, Bergvall N, Tomic D, et al. No evidence of disease activity: indirect comparisons of oral therapies for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Adv Ther 2014; 31:1134-1154.
16. Nash RA, Hutton GJ, Racke MK, et al. High-dose immunosuppressive therapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (HALT-MS): a 3-year interim report. JAMA Neurol 2015; 72:159-169.
17. O'Connor P, Miller D, Riester K, et al. Relapse rates and enhancing lesions in a phase II trial of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2005; 11:568-572.
18. Kappos L, Antel J, Comi G, et al. Oral fingolimod (FTY720) for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006; 355:1124-1140
19. Kappos L, Gold R, Miller DH, et al. Efficacy and safety of oral fumarate in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study. Lancet 2008; 372:1463-1472.
20. Sormani MP, De Stefano N. Defining and scoring response to IFN-b in multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 2013; 9:504-512.
21. Freedman MS, Selchen D, Arnold DL, et al. Treatment optimization in MS: Canadian MS Working Group updated recommendations. Can J Neurol Sci 2013; 40:307-323.
22. Simon JH, Bermel RA, Rudick RA. Simple MRI metrics contribute to optimal care of the patient with multiple sclerosis. Am J Neuroradiol 2014; 35:831-832.
23. Ro J. Any evident MRI T2 lesion activity should guide change of therapy in multiple sclerosis: no. Mult Scler J 2015; 21:132-133.
24. Rudick RA, Lee J-C, Simon J, et al. Defining interferon b response status in multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol 2004; 56:548-555.
25. R?ó J, Castilló J, Rovira A, et al. Measures in the first year of therapy predict the response to interferon b in MS. Mult Scler 2009; 15:848-853.
26. Bermel RA, You X, Foulds P, et al. Predictors of long-term outcome in multiple sclerosis patients treated with interferon b. Ann Neurol 2013; 73:95-103.
27. Sormani M, Rio J, Tintorè M, et al. Scoring treatment response in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J 2013; 19:605-612.
28. Sormani MP, De Stefano N. Defining and scoring response to IFN-b in multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 2013; 9:504-512.
29. Sormani M, Signori A, Stromillo M, DeStefanoN.Refining response to treatment as defined by the Modified Rio Score. Mult Scler J 2013; 19:1246-1247.