4.3 Article

Silent lesions on MRI imaging - Shifting goal posts for treatment decisions in multiple sclerosis

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 24, Issue 12, Pages 1569-1577

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458518798147

Keywords

Disease-modifying therapy; magnetic resonance imaging; subclinical lesions

Funding

  1. independent MSBase Foundation Ltd, a health-related charity
  2. Biogen
  3. Genzyme
  4. Merck
  5. Novartis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The current best practice suggests yearly magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to monitor treatment response in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. Objective: To evaluate the current practice of clinicians changing MS treatment based on subclinical new MRI lesions alone. Methods: Using MSBase, an international MS patient registry with MRI data, we analysed the probability of treatment change among patients with clinically silent new MRI lesions. Results: A total of 8311 MRI brain scans of 4232 patients were identified. Around 26.9% (336/1247) MRIs with one new T2 lesion were followed by disease-modifying therapy (DMT) change, increasing to 50.2% (129/257) with six new T2 lesions. DMT change was twice as likely with new T1 contrast enhancing compared to new T2 lesions odds ratio (OR): 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00-2.96 vs OR: 1.26 (95% CI: 1.22-1.29). DMT change with new MRI lesions occurred most frequently with injectable' DMTs. The probability of switching therapy was greater only after high-efficacy therapies became available in 2007 (after, OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.28-1.59 vs before, OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.520-1.88). Conclusion: MS clinicians rely increasingly on MRI alone in their treatment decisions, utilizing low thresholds (1 new T2 lesion) for optimizing MS therapy. This signals a shift towards no evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-3 since high-efficacy therapies became available.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available