No abstract

MRI has improved the diagnostic work-up of multiple sclerosis, but inappropriate image interpretation and application of MRI diagnostic criteria contribute to misdiagnosis. Some diseases, now recognized as conditions distinct from multiple sclerosis, may satisfy the MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis (e.g. neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders, Susac syndrome), thus making the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis more challenging, especially if biomarker testing (such as serum anti-AQP4 antibodies) is not informative. Improvements in MRI technology contribute and promise to better define the typical features of multiple sclerosis lesions (e.g. juxtacortical and periventricular location, cortical involvement). Greater understanding of some key aspects of multiple sclerosis pathobiology has allowed the identification of characteristics more specific to multiple sclerosis (e.g. central vein sign, subpial demyelination and lesional rims), which are not included in the current multiple sclerosis diagnostic criteria. In this review, we provide the clinicians and researchers with a practical guide to enhance the proper recognition of multiple sclerosis lesions, including a thorough definition and illustration of typical MRI features, as well as a discussion of red flags suggestive of alternative diagnoses. We also discuss the possible place of emerging qualitative features of lesions which may become important in the near future.

GM damage is one of the key factors associated with long-term accumulation of disability and cognitive impairment in MS.

MRI red flags proposed over a decade ago by the European Magnetic Resonance Network in MS (MAGNIMS) have guided clinicians in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the past 10 years have seen increased recognition that vascular disease can coexist and possibly interact with MS, improvements in the reliability of ways to differentiate MS from novel antibody-mediated CNS disorders (such as anti-aquaporin-4 antibody and myelin-oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated diseases) and advances in MRI techniques. In this Review, MAGNIMS updates the imaging features that differentiate the most common mimics of MS, particularly age-related cerebrovascular disease and neuromyelitis optica, from MS itself. We also provide a pragmatic summary of the clinically useful MRI features that distinguish MS from its mimics and discuss the future of nonconventional techniques that have identified promising disease-specific features.

Lesions in strategic brain WM tracts contribute to cognitive impairment in MS through a multisystem disconnection syndrome.

Pathological evaluation is the gold standard for identifying multiple sclerosis (MS)-related processes that explain clinical disease manifestations and for guiding the development of new treatments. However, there are intrinsic limitations to the techniques employed, including the limited amount of donors available, samples often representing uncommon cases, and impossibility of follow-up. Correlative studies have demonstrated that MRI is sensitive to the different pathological substrates of MS (inflammation, demyelination and neuro-axonal loss). The role of MRI in evaluating other pathological processes, such as leptomeningeal involvement, central vein and rim of lesions, microstructural abnormalities and iron accumulation as well as recovery mechanisms, has been recently investigated. While techniques used for quantifying pathological processes in different regions of the CNS have advanced the diagnosis and monitoring of MS disease course and treatment, new perspectives and questions have emerged, including how different pathological processes interact over the disease course and when remyelination might occur. Addressing these questions will require longitudinal studies using MRI in large cohorts of patients with different phenotypes.

Depression in MS is linked to atrophy of cortical regions located in the bilateral frontal lobes. A distributed pattern of GM atrophy contributes to the concomitant presence of depression and fatigue in these patients.

Background: The placebo-controlled phase of the PreCISe study showed that glatiramer acetate delayed onset of clinically definite multiple sclerosis (CDMS) in patients with clinically isolated syndrome and brain lesions on MRI. Objective: To compare the effects of early versus delayed glatiramer acetate treatment in the open-label phase of PreCISe. Methods: Patients with a clinically isolated syndrome suggestive of MS with unifocal manifestation and ≥2 T2-weighted brain lesions were randomized to receive glatiramer acetate 20 mg/d (early-treatment, n=198) or placebo (delayed-treatment, n=211) for 36 months or until conversion to CDMS, followed by open-label glatiramer acetate treatment for two years. Results: Early glatiramer acetate treatment reduced CDMS conversion risk by 41% (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.80; p=0.0005) versus delayed-treatment, and was associated with a 972-day delay (185%) in conversion to CDMS, less brain atrophy (−28%, p=0.0209), fewer new T2 lesions/year (−42%, <0.0001) and lower T2 lesion volume (−22%, p=0.0005) versus delayed treatment. Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profile of glatiramer acetate. Conclusions: Effects of early glatiramer acetate treatment on the rate of conversion to CDMS and on MRI measures of disease activity and lesion burden support initiating glatiramer acetate treatment soon after the first clinical symptoms suggestive of MS and continuing treatment to sustain benefits.