4.5 Review

Magnetic resonance outcome measures in multiple sclerosis trials: time to rethink?

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages 290-299

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000095

Keywords

inflammation; MRI; multiple sclerosis; neurodegeneration; treatment outcomes

Funding

  1. Bayer Schering Pharma
  2. Biogen Idec
  3. Merck Serono
  4. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
  5. Novartis
  6. Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla
  7. Italian Ministry of Health
  8. CurePSP
  9. Jacques and Gloria Gossweiler Foundation (Switzerland)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of reviewWe summarize MRI measures currently available to assess treatment efficacy and safety in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials and discuss novel metrics that could enter the clinical arena in the near future.Recent findingsIn relapsing remitting MS, MRI measures of disease activity (new T2 and gadolinium-enhancing lesions) provide a good surrogacy of treatment effect on relapse rate and disability progression; however, their value in progressive MS remains elusive. For the progressive disease forms, these measures need to be combined with quantities assessing the extent of irreversible tissue loss, which have already been introduced in some clinical trials (e.g., evolution of active lesions into permanent black holes and brain atrophy). Novel measures (e.g., quantification of gray matter and spinal cord atrophy) have demonstrated a great value in explaining patients' clinical outcome, but still need to be fully validated. Despite showing promise, evaluations of cortical lesions, of microscopic tissue abnormalities, and of functional cortical reorganization are still some way off for monitoring of treatment effects.SummaryTrial outcomes in MS should include measures of inflammation and neurodegeneration, which should be combined according to the disease clinical phenotype, phase of the study, and the supposed mechanism of action of the drug tested.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available