3.8 Article

A longitudinal VBM study monitoring treatment with erythropoietin in patients with Friedreich ataxia

期刊

ACTA RADIOLOGICA OPEN
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/2047981614531573

关键词

CNS; thalamus; parietal cortex; Friedreich ataxia; voxel-based morphometry; erythropoietin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Recombinant human erythropoietin (rhuEPO) has received considerable attention because of its neuroprotective properties. It has recently been reported that rhuEPO increases frataxin levels in combination with clinical improvement in rhuEPO treated patients with Friedreich ataxia (FRDA). Purpose: To determine possible therapy dependent intracranial volume changes after treatment with rhuEPO using voxel-based morphometry (VBM). Material and Methods: Nine FRDA patients were scanned on the same 1.5-Tesla MRI scanner before and after treatment with rhuEPO. FRDA patients received 5000 IU rhuEPO thrice weekly subcutaneously for a time period of 8 weeks followed by 2000 IU thrice weekly over 6 months. To test for re-test reliability a control group of 12 healthy volunteers were scanned twice on the same scanner without rhuEPO treatment. Neurological state was defined by the Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) and the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA). Statistical parametric mapping software was used for image processing and statistical analysis. Results: When comparing follow-up scans after rhuEPO treatment with baseline scans (P <0.001 uncorrected) an increase of gray matter volume was observed bilaterally in the Pulvinar and the posterior parietal cortex. Moreover, clinical improvement detected using specific Ataxia scores correlated with VBM results in the pulvinar. Conclusion: Given the limitation of a small sample size, our study confirms previous findings that MRI may serve as reliable biomarker in neurodegenerative diseases as well as in monitoring of microstructural changes representing disease progression and/or therapy effects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据