Paramagnetic rim lesions lead to pronounced diffuse periplaque white matter damage in multiple sclerosis.
Multiple sclerosis
T1 relaxation time
T2 relaxation time
iron
paramagnetic rim lesion
periplaque area
progression
proton density
Journal
Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)
ISSN: 1477-0970
Titre abrégé: Mult Scler
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9509185
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2023
10 2023
Historique:
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
15
9
2023
entrez:
15
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Paramagnetic rim lesions (PRLs) are an imaging biomarker in multiple sclerosis (MS), associated with a more severe disease. To determine quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) metrics of PRLs, lesions with diffuse susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI)-hypointense signal (DSHLs) and SWI-isointense lesions (SILs), their surrounding periplaque area (PPA) and the normal-appearing white matter (NAWM). In a cross-sectional study, quantitative MRI metrics were measured in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) using the multi-dynamic multi-echo (MDME) sequence post-processing software "SyMRI." In 30 pwMS, 59 PRLs, 74 DSHLs, and 107 SILs were identified. Beside longer T1 relaxation times of PRLs compared to DSHLs and SILs (2030.5 (1519-2540) vs 1615.8 (1403.3-1953.5) vs 1199.5 (1089.6-1334.6), both PRLs are more destructive than SILs, leading to diffuse periplaque white matter (WM) damage. The quantitative MRI-based evaluation of the PRL PPA could be a marker for silent progression in pwMS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Paramagnetic rim lesions (PRLs) are an imaging biomarker in multiple sclerosis (MS), associated with a more severe disease.
OBJECTIVES
To determine quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) metrics of PRLs, lesions with diffuse susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI)-hypointense signal (DSHLs) and SWI-isointense lesions (SILs), their surrounding periplaque area (PPA) and the normal-appearing white matter (NAWM).
METHODS
In a cross-sectional study, quantitative MRI metrics were measured in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) using the multi-dynamic multi-echo (MDME) sequence post-processing software "SyMRI."
RESULTS
In 30 pwMS, 59 PRLs, 74 DSHLs, and 107 SILs were identified. Beside longer T1 relaxation times of PRLs compared to DSHLs and SILs (2030.5 (1519-2540) vs 1615.8 (1403.3-1953.5) vs 1199.5 (1089.6-1334.6), both
CONCLUSION
PRLs are more destructive than SILs, leading to diffuse periplaque white matter (WM) damage. The quantitative MRI-based evaluation of the PRL PPA could be a marker for silent progression in pwMS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37712486
doi: 10.1177/13524585231197954
pmc: PMC10580674
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1406-1417Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: N.K. has participated in meetings sponsored by, received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Alexion, BMS/Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi-Genzyme and held a grant for a Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Training Fellowship Programme from the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS). V.S. has nothing to disclose. J.L. has nothing to disclose. L.H. has nothing to disclose. G.B. has participated in meetings sponsored by, received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Biogen, Celgene/BMS, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva, and received honoraria for consulting Biogen, Celgene/BMS, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva. He has received unrestricted research grants from Celgene/BMS and Novartis. G.K. has participated in meetings sponsored by, received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Biogen, and received honoraria for consulting from Biogen. F.L. has participated in meetings sponsored by or received honoraria for acting as an advisor/speaker for Bayer, Biogen, Celgene/BMS, Janssen, MedDay, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva. B.K. has received honoraria for speaking and for consulting from Biogen, BMS-Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Teva, and Sanofi-Genzyme outside of the submitted work. No conflict of interest with respect to this study. P.S.R. has received honoraria for consultancy/speaking from AbbVie, Almirall, Alexion, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva and has received research grants from Amicus, Biogen, Merck, and Roche. T.B. has participated in meetings sponsored by and received honoraria (lectures, advisory boards, consultations) from pharmaceutical companies marketing treatments for MS: Allergan, Bayer, Biogen, Bionorica, BMS/Celgene, GSK, GW/Jazz Pharma, Horizon, Janssen-Cilag, MedDay, Merck, Novartis, Octapharma, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva, and UCB. His institution has received financial support in the past 12 months by unrestricted research grants (Biogen, Bayer, BMS/Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva and for participation in clinical trials in multiple sclerosis sponsored by Alexion, Bayer, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Octapharma, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva). H.L. has received honoraria for lectures from Novartis, Biogen, ROCHE, Merck, and Sanofi-Aventis. A.D.-B.’s position as junior group leader for Translational Morphology in Neuroscience is supported by a research grant from Biogen. She has participated in meetings sponsored by, received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Biogen, Celgene (BMS), Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi, and has received an unrestricted grant from Merck GmbH, an affiliate of Merck KGaA. S.H. has participated in meetings sponsored by or received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Biogen and Sanofi-Aventis.
Références
Magn Reson Med. 2008 Aug;60(2):320-9
pubmed: 18666127
J Clin Invest. 2016 Jul 1;126(7):2597-609
pubmed: 27270171
Brain. 1987 Dec;110 ( Pt 6):1579-616
pubmed: 3427402
Neurology. 2009 Nov 17;73(20):1616-23
pubmed: 19890070
Neuroimage Clin. 2022;34:103012
pubmed: 35487133
Mult Scler. 2023 May;29(6):680-690
pubmed: 37036134
JAMA Neurol. 2020 Sep 1;77(9):1132-1140
pubmed: 32511687
Am J Pathol. 2000 Jul;157(1):267-76
pubmed: 10880396
Invest Radiol. 2017 Oct;52(10):647-657
pubmed: 28257339
Brain. 2021 Jul 28;144(6):1684-1696
pubmed: 33693571
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014 Jan;85(1):67-75
pubmed: 23486991
Eur Radiol. 2019 Dec;29(12):7063-7072
pubmed: 31286188
Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2021 Apr;8(4):877-886
pubmed: 33704933
Eur J Neurol. 2021 May;28(5):1609-1616
pubmed: 33370478
Mult Scler. 2020 Jan;26(1):79-90
pubmed: 31397221
Front Neurol. 2021 Dec 21;12:632749
pubmed: 34992573
Front Neurosci. 2022 Mar 02;16:837452
pubmed: 35310094
Magn Reson Imaging. 2023 Jan;95:12-18
pubmed: 36270415
J Neurol. 2015;262(4):1074-80
pubmed: 25761376
Lancet Neurol. 2018 Feb;17(2):162-173
pubmed: 29275977
Mult Scler. 2021 Oct;27(11):1679-1681
pubmed: 34474630
Neurology. 2021 Aug 10;97(6):e543-e553
pubmed: 34088875
Acta Neuropathol. 2017 Jan;133(1):25-42
pubmed: 27796537
Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2020 Mar 30;6(1):2055217320915480
pubmed: 32284875
Ann Neurol. 2011 Feb;69(2):292-302
pubmed: 21387374
Ann Neurol. 2022 Sep;92(3):486-502
pubmed: 35713309
Magn Reson Med. 1989 Sep;11(3):337-48
pubmed: 2779421
Mult Scler. 2023 Mar;29(3):352-362
pubmed: 36515487
Mult Scler. 2021 Sep;27(10):1520-1532
pubmed: 33183125
Mult Scler. 2023 Mar;29(3):374-384
pubmed: 36537667
Neurology. 2005 Apr 12;64(7):1144-51
pubmed: 15824338
BMJ Neurol Open. 2022 Jun 7;4(1):e000240
pubmed: 35720980
Brain. 2019 Jan 1;142(1):133-145
pubmed: 30561514
Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2022 Oct;66:104070
pubmed: 35914471
Brain. 2021 Apr 12;144(3):833-847
pubmed: 33484118
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Dec 1;76(12):1474-1483
pubmed: 31403674
Brain. 2011 Dec;134(Pt 12):3602-15
pubmed: 22171355