Magnetic resonance imaging is an established tool in the management of multiple sclerosis (MS). Loss of blood brain barrier integrity assessed by gadolinium (Gd) enhancement is the current standard marker of MS activity. To explore the complex cascade of the inflammatory events, other magnetic resonance imaging, but also positron emission tomographic markers reviewed in this article are being developed to address active neuroinflammation with increased sensitivity and specificity. Alternative magnetic resonance contrast agents, positron emission tomographic tracers and imaging techniques could be more sensitive than Gd to early blood brain barrier alteration, and they could assess the inflammatory cell recruitment and/or the associated edema accumulation. These markers of active neuroinflammation, although some of them are limited to experimental studies, could find great relevance to complete Gd information and thereby increase our understanding of acute lesion pathophysiology and its noninvasive follow-up, especially to monitor treatment efficacy. Furthermore, such accurate markers of inflammation combined with those of neurodegeneration hold promise to provide a more complete picture of MS, which will be of great benefit for future therapeutic strategies. [4]. Currently, a large battery of MRI methods is being developed (measurement of atrophy, T1 hypointensity, iron mapping, spectroscopy, diffusion tensor, magnetization transfer ratio, imaging of cortical anomalies, and so forth) to provide quantitative information on the severity of the neurodegenerative component of MS [5] that is thought to be an important substrate of long-term irreversible disability. By contrast, gadolinium (Gd) enhancement of lesions is the only reference method to assess blood brain barrier (BBB) permeability that reflects the inflammatory component of MS [6], and which is the predominant pathogenic mechanism in the early stages of approximately 85% of patients with a relapsing remitting form of MS. Although Gd is a powerful marker, limiting active inflammation to Gdenhanced lesions is an oversimplification, as Gd can lack sensitivity, specificity, and does not address the cellular and edematous components that accompany active neuroinflammation [7] (Fig. 1). Furthermore, Gd cannot address subtle, but disseminated, inflammation that contributes to clinical progression together with neurodegenerative axonal loss. Consequently, other markers of active neuroinflammation are being developed in experimental animal models, and some have already been translated to human studies. These new markers of active inflammation aim to reflect the BBB permeability more accurately than Gd and to assess the Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article