Multiparameter MRI quantification of microstructural tissue alterations in multiple sclerosis.
Adult
Cerebral Cortex
/ diagnostic imaging
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Gray Matter
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ methods
Male
Middle Aged
Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive
/ diagnostic imaging
Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting
/ diagnostic imaging
Prospective Studies
White Matter
/ diagnostic imaging
Young Adult
Histological MRI
Multiple sclerosis
Quantitative MRI
Relaxometry
Journal
NeuroImage. Clinical
ISSN: 2213-1582
Titre abrégé: Neuroimage Clin
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101597070
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
29
01
2019
revised:
23
04
2019
accepted:
25
05
2019
pubmed:
9
6
2019
medline:
26
6
2020
entrez:
9
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Conventional MRI is not sensitive to many pathological processes underpinning multiple sclerosis (MS) ongoing in normal appearing brain tissue (NABT). Quantitative MRI (qMRI) and a multiparameter mapping (MPM) protocol are used to simultaneously quantify magnetization transfer (MT) saturation, transverse relaxation rate R2* (1/T2*) and longitudinal relaxation rate R1 (1/T1), and assess differences in NABT microstructure between MS patients and healthy controls (HC). This prospective cross-sectional study involves 36 MS patients (21 females, 15 males; age range 22-63 years; 15 relapsing-remitting MS - RRMS; 21 primary or secondary progressive MS - PMS) and 36 age-matched HC (20 females, 16 males); age range 21-61 years). The qMRI maps are computed and segmented in lesions and 3 normal appearing cerebral tissue classes: normal appearing cortical grey matter (NACGM), normal appearing deep grey matter (NADGM), normal appearing white matter (NAWM). Individual median values are extracted for each tissue class and MR parameter. MANOVAs and stepwise regressions assess differences between patients and HC. MS patients are characterized by a decrease in MT, R2* and R1 within NACGM (p < .0001) and NAWM (p < .0001). In NADGM, MT decreases (p < .0001) but R2* and R1 remain normal. These observations tend to be more pronounced in PMS. Quantitative MRI parameters are independent predictors of clinical status: EDSS is significantly related to R1 in NACGM and R2* in NADGM; the latter also predicts motor score. Cognitive score is best predicted by MT parameter within lesions. Multiparametric data of brain microstructure concord with the literature, predict clinical performance and suggest a diffuse reduction in myelin and/or iron content within NABT of MS patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31176293
pii: S2213-1582(19)30229-3
doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101879
pmc: PMC6555891
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
101879Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Eur Radiol. 2016 Aug;26(8):2578-86
pubmed: 26494641
Magn Reson Med. 2009 Jan;61(1):125-35
pubmed: 19097220
Magn Reson Med. 1998 Nov;40(5):749-53
pubmed: 9797159
Lancet Neurol. 2012 Apr;11(4):349-60
pubmed: 22441196
Front Neurosci. 2013 Jun 10;7:95
pubmed: 23772204
Neuroimage. 2014 Jun;93 Pt 1:95-106
pubmed: 24607447
Radiology. 2006 Sep;240(3):811-20
pubmed: 16868279
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016 Dec;44(6):1600-1607
pubmed: 27153293
Cereb Cortex. 2013 Sep;23(9):2261-8
pubmed: 22826609
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 11;378(2):169-180
pubmed: 29320652
Neuroimage. 2014 Jun;93 Pt 2:189-200
pubmed: 23357070
Ann Neurol. 2018 Feb;83(2):210-222
pubmed: 29331092
Brain Pathol. 2015 Jan;25(1):79-98
pubmed: 25521179
Magn Reson Med. 2010 Jul;64(1):229-38
pubmed: 20572153
Mult Scler. 2009 Sep;15(9):1048-54
pubmed: 19556316
J Neuroimaging. 2007 Apr;17 Suppl 1:16S-21S
pubmed: 17425729
Curr Opin Neurol. 2002 Jun;15(3):239-45
pubmed: 12045719
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 21;13(3):e0193839
pubmed: 29561895
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012 Aug;83(8):785-92
pubmed: 22626944
PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e32379
pubmed: 22427831
Neuroimage. 2012 Feb 15;59(4):3774-83
pubmed: 22119648
Nat Rev Neurol. 2015 Dec;11(12):676-86
pubmed: 26526531
Neuroimage. 2019 Jul 1;194:191-210
pubmed: 30677501
Brain Imaging Behav. 2017 Jun;11(3):744-753
pubmed: 27138529
Ann Neurol. 2011 Feb;69(2):292-302
pubmed: 21387374
Front Neurosci. 2014 Sep 10;8:278
pubmed: 25309307
J Neuroimaging. 2007 Apr;17 Suppl 1:22S-26S
pubmed: 17425730
Neuroimage. 2016 Apr 15;130:157-166
pubmed: 26854557
BMC Neurol. 2011 Dec 12;11:153
pubmed: 22152037
Neurol Sci. 2010 Nov;31(Suppl 2):S245-8
pubmed: 20635111
Magn Reson Med. 2010 Jul;64(1):177-85
pubmed: 20572139
Neurology. 2011 Nov 1;77(18):1691-7
pubmed: 21975210
Mult Scler. 2014 Nov;20(13):1692-8
pubmed: 24787429
Neurobiol Aging. 2014 Aug;35(8):1862-72
pubmed: 24656835
Curr Opin Neurol. 2016 Jun;29(3):237-42
pubmed: 27070219
Ann Neurol. 2013 Dec;74(6):848-61
pubmed: 23868451
J Neuroimaging. 2005;15(4 Suppl):10S-21S
pubmed: 16385015
Brain. 2005 Nov;128(Pt 11):2705-12
pubmed: 16230320
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007 Jul;26(1):41-51
pubmed: 17659567
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014 Dec;85(12):1386-95
pubmed: 24899728
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Nov;46(5):1464-1473
pubmed: 28301067
Ann Neurol. 2004 Sep;56(3):407-15
pubmed: 15349868
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 21;10(10):e0140956
pubmed: 26489078
Neuroimage. 2011 Apr 15;55(4):1423-34
pubmed: 21277375
Lancet Neurol. 2007 Oct;6(10):903-12
pubmed: 17884680
JAMA Neurol. 2013 May;70(5):556-64
pubmed: 23460023
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011 Jun-Jul;32(6):1016-20
pubmed: 21393412
Neuroimage Clin. 2018 Apr 26;19:466-475
pubmed: 29984155
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Jul;50(1):201-208
pubmed: 30511803
Neuroimage. 2005 Jul 1;26(3):839-51
pubmed: 15955494