The no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) concept in MS: impact of spinal cord MRI.
Disease activity
Magnetic resonance imaging
Monitoring
Multiple sclerosis
NEDA
No evidence of disease activity
Spinal cord
Journal
Journal of neurology
ISSN: 1432-1459
Titre abrégé: J Neurol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0423161
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
27
08
2021
accepted:
09
11
2021
revised:
08
11
2021
pubmed:
26
11
2021
medline:
24
5
2022
entrez:
25
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Measures to define treatment response, such as no evidence of disease activity (NEDA), are routinely used in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical practice. Although spinal cord involvement is a frequent feature of MS, its magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) monitoring is not routinely performed. To assess the impact of spinal cord MRI in the definition of NEDA in a cohort of people with MS (pwMS) with available spinal cord imaging performed as for routine monitoring. We included 115 pwMS undergoing treatment with first-line disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and retrospectively analyzed the presence of NEDA in the whole cohort, either considering or not spinal cord imaging. When considering only clinical and brain MRI measures, 97 out of 115 pwMS (84.3%) satisfied the criteria for NEDA. In the same cohort, the number of pwMS with NEDA significantly decreased to 88 (76.5%) (p < 0.01) when considering also spinal cord imaging. These findings suggest that, in routine clinical practice, spinal cord MRI monitoring in pwMS under first-line DMTs leads to a slight but significant change in the proportion of subjects classified as clinically and radiologically stable according to the NEDA definition.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Measures to define treatment response, such as no evidence of disease activity (NEDA), are routinely used in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical practice. Although spinal cord involvement is a frequent feature of MS, its magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) monitoring is not routinely performed.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To assess the impact of spinal cord MRI in the definition of NEDA in a cohort of people with MS (pwMS) with available spinal cord imaging performed as for routine monitoring.
METHODS
METHODS
We included 115 pwMS undergoing treatment with first-line disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and retrospectively analyzed the presence of NEDA in the whole cohort, either considering or not spinal cord imaging.
RESULTS
RESULTS
When considering only clinical and brain MRI measures, 97 out of 115 pwMS (84.3%) satisfied the criteria for NEDA. In the same cohort, the number of pwMS with NEDA significantly decreased to 88 (76.5%) (p < 0.01) when considering also spinal cord imaging.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
These findings suggest that, in routine clinical practice, spinal cord MRI monitoring in pwMS under first-line DMTs leads to a slight but significant change in the proportion of subjects classified as clinically and radiologically stable according to the NEDA definition.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34820734
doi: 10.1007/s00415-021-10901-2
pii: 10.1007/s00415-021-10901-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3129-3135Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.
Références
Giovannoni G, Butzkueven H, Dhib-Jalbut S et al (2016) Brain health: time matters in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 9(Suppl. 1):S5–S48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2016.07.003
doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2016.07.003
pubmed: 27640924
Gasperini C, Prosperini L, Tintoré M et al (2019) Unraveling treatment response in multiple sclerosis: a clinical and MRI challenge. Neurology 92:180–192. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000006810
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006810
pubmed: 30587516
pmcid: 6345120
Rotstein D, Montalban X (2019) Reaching an evidence-based prognosis for personalized treatment of multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 15:287–300. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-019-0170-8
doi: 10.1038/s41582-019-0170-8
pubmed: 30940920
Sormani MP, De Stefano N (2013) Defining and scoring response to IFN-β in multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 9:504–512. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2013.146
doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2013.146
pubmed: 23897407
Giovannoni G, Tomic D, Bright JR, Havrdová E (2017) “No evident disease activity”: the use of combined assessments in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 23:1179–1187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458517703193
doi: 10.1177/1352458517703193
pubmed: 28381105
pmcid: 5536258
Kearney H, Altmann DR, Samson RS et al (2015) Cervical cord lesion load is associated with disability independently from atrophy in MS. Neurology 84(4):367–373. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000001186
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001186
pubmed: 25540312
Langer-Gould A, Popat RA, Huang SM et al (2006) Clinical and demographic predictors of long-term disability in patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. Arch Neurol 63:1686–1691. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.63.12.1686
doi: 10.1001/archneur.63.12.1686
pubmed: 17172607
Kearney H, Miller DH, Ceccarelli O (2015) Spinal cord MRI in multiple sclerosis—diagnostic, prognostic and clinical value. Nat Rev Neurol 11:327–338. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2015.80
doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.80
pubmed: 26009002
Arrambide G, Rovira A, Sastre-Garriga J et al (2018) Spinal cord lesions: a modest contributor to diagnosis in clinically isolated syndromes but a relevant prognostic factor. Mult Scler 24:301–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458517697830
doi: 10.1177/1352458517697830
pubmed: 28301287
Rovira À, Wattjes MP, Tintoré M et al (2015) Evidence-based guidelines: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines on the use of MRI in multiple sclerosis-clinical implementation in the diagnostic process. Nat Rev Neurol 11(8):471–482. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2015.106
doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.106
pubmed: 26149978
Wattjes MP, Rovira A, Miller D et al (2015) Evidence-based guidelines: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines on the use of MRI in multiple sclerosis—establishing disease prognosis and monitoring patients. Nat Rev Neurol 11:597–606. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2015.157
doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.157
pubmed: 26369511
Wattjes MP, Ciccarelli O, Reich DS et al (2021) 2021 MAGNIMS–CMSC–NAIMS consensus reccomandations on the use of MRI in patients with multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol S1474–4422(21):00095–00098. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00095-8
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00095-8
Thorpe JW, Kidd D, Moseley IF et al (1996) Spinal MRI in patients with suspected multiple sclerosis and negative brain MRI. Brain 119(Pt 3):709–714. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/119.3.709
doi: 10.1093/brain/119.3.709
pubmed: 8673484
Okuda DT, Mowry EM, Cree BAC et al (2011) Asymptomatic spinal cord lesions predict disease progression in radiologically isolated syndrome. Neurology 76(8):686–692. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31820d8b1d
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31820d8b1d
pubmed: 21270417
pmcid: 3053327
Sombekke MH, Wattjes MP, Balk LJ et al (2013) Spinal cord lesions in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: a powerful tool in diagnosis and prognosis. Neurology 80:69–75. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827b1a67
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827b1a67
pubmed: 23243070
Zecca C, Disanto G, Sormani MP et al (2016) Relevance of asymptomatic spinal MRI lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 22(6):782–791. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458515599246
doi: 10.1177/1352458515599246
pubmed: 26459149
Granella F, Tsabtes E, Graziuso S et al (2019) Spinal cord lesions are frequently asymptomatic in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a retrospective MRI survey. J Neurol 266(12):3031–3037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-019-09526-3
doi: 10.1007/s00415-019-09526-3
pubmed: 31494713
Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F et al (2018) Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol 17:162–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2
pubmed: 29275977
Filippi M, Rocca MA, Bastianello S et al (2013) Guidelines from The Italian Neurological and Neuroradiological Societies for the use of magnetic resonance imaging in daily life clinical practice of multiple sclerosis patients. Neurol Sci 34(12):2085–2093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-013-1485-7
doi: 10.1007/s10072-013-1485-7
pubmed: 23828372
Parks NE, Flanagan EP, Lucchinetti CF, Wingerchuk DM (2017) NEDA treatment target? No evident disease activity as an actionable outcome in practice. J Neurol Sci 383:31–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2017.10.015
doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2017.10.015
pubmed: 29246616
Lublin FD, Coetzee T, Cohen JA et al (2020) The 2013 clinical course descriptors for multiple sclerosis: a clarification. Neurology 94(24):1088–1092. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000009636
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009636
pubmed: 32471886
pmcid: 7455332
Río J, Nos C, Tintoré M et al (2006) Defining the response to interferon-beta in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol 59(2):344–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.20740
doi: 10.1002/ana.20740
pubmed: 16437558
Cortese R, Ciccarelli O (2018) Clinical monitoring of multiple sclerosis should routinely include spinal cord imaging—yes. Mult Scler 24(12):1536–1537. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518778010
doi: 10.1177/1352458518778010
pubmed: 30033804
Filippi M, Preziosa P, Barkhof F et al (2021) Diagnosis of progressive multiple sclerosis from the imaging perspective: a review. JAMA Neurol 78(3):351–364. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.4689
doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.4689
pubmed: 33315071
Brownlee WJ, Altmann DR, Prados F et al (2019) Early imaging predictors of long-term outcomes in relapse-onset multiple sclerosis. Brain 142(8):2276–2287. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awz156
doi: 10.1093/brain/awz156
pubmed: 31342055
Ruggieri S, Logoteta A, Tinelli E et al (2018) Measuring disease activity in multiple sclerosis: the essential role of spinal cord MRI monitoring. Mult Scler 24(S2):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518798575
doi: 10.1177/1352458518798575
Havrdova E, Galetta S, Stefoski D, Comi G (2010) Freedom from disease activity in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 74(Suppl 3):S3–S7. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181dbb51c
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181dbb51c
pubmed: 20421571
Bevan CJ, Cree BAC (2014) Disease activity free status: a new end point for a new era in multiple sclerosis clinical research? JAMA Neurol 71(3):269–270. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2013.5486
doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2013.5486
pubmed: 24395449
Rotstein DL, Healy BC, Malik MT et al (2015) Evaluation of no evidence of disease activity in a 7-year longitudinal multiple sclerosis cohort. JAMA Neurol 72:152–158. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.3537
doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.3537
pubmed: 25531931
Tummala S, Singhal T, Oommen VV et al (2017) Spinal cord as an adjunct to brain magnetic resonance imaging in defining “no evidence of disease activity” in multiple sclerosis. Int J MS Care 19(3):158–164. https://doi.org/10.7224/1537-2073.2016-068
doi: 10.7224/1537-2073.2016-068
pubmed: 28603465
pmcid: 5460870
Prosperini L, Mancinelli C, Haggiag S et al (2020) Minimal evidence of disease activity (MEDA) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 91(3):271–277. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2019-322348
doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2019-322348
pubmed: 31974130