4.6 Article

Isolated cognitive relapses in multiple sclerosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY
Volume 85, Issue 9, Pages 1035-1037

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2013-307275

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Novartis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective While cognition can be affected during sensorimotor multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses, the relevance of isolated cognitive relapses (ICRs ie, those occurring in absence of new sensorimotor symptoms) remain poorly characterised. Here, we decided to explore the relationship between ICR, subjective evaluation of cognitive performance and long-term cognitive decline in a group of subjects with relapsing-remitting MS. Methods We analysed the cognitive performance of 99 clinically stable relapsing-remitting MS for whom data from four consequent clinical and cognitive evaluations were available, that is, a baseline evaluation (t(0)), followed in the subsequent 6 months by a second evaluation performed not later than 2 weeks after a routine brain scan positive for at least one area of gadolinium enhancement (t(1)) and two gadolinium enhancement-negative follow-up evaluations after 6 months (t(2)) and 1 year (t(3)) from t(1). Based on published literature, we defined as a meaningful change in cognition a transient reduction of Symbol Digit Modalities Test score of at least four points at t(1) compared with t(0) and t(2). Results ICRs were found in 17 patients and were not associated with subjective cognitive deficits or depression. Subjects who presented with an ICR at t(1) presented with a significantly reduced cognitive performance at the follow-up evaluations compared with patients without ICR. Conclusions and relevance We showed that ICRs were not associated with changes in mood, fatigue levels or cognitive performance self-evaluations. Our study introduces an operational definition of ICRs and suggests to their role as a factor for cognitive decline in MS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available