Defining the response to multiple sclerosis treatment: The role of conventional magnetic resonance imaging

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

During the last two decades, conventional MRI (cMRI) has been extensively used in the diagnostic workup of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, to monitor the natural history of the disease and to evaluate the efficacy of experimental treatments in randomised, controlled clinical trials. In the latter context, a major issue is represented by the high intra- and inter-individual heterogeneity of the MS patterns of disease activity and evolution. Such heterogeneity might explain, at least partially, the weak correlations found between clinical and cMRI aspects in patients with established MS, which is particularly evident when individual patients are considered. As a consequence, the definition of response to MS treatment, when based upon cMRI aspects, is still a challenging task. Although the use of cMRI-derived quantities as a standalone approach to define treatment options and strategies at an individual patient level should be discouraged, an evidence-based integration of clinical and cMRI data might be helpful in selected cases for an optimal work-up of patients undergoing immunomodulating or immunosuppressive treatments.

Original languageEnglish
JournalNeurological Sciences
Volume26
Issue numberSUPPL. 4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2005

Fingerprint

Multiple Sclerosis
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Therapeutics
Immunosuppressive Agents
Randomized Controlled Trials

Keywords

  • Conventional MRI
  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Treatment response

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

@article{272a3e48aeed4a6cb5537b2809008139,
title = "Defining the response to multiple sclerosis treatment: The role of conventional magnetic resonance imaging",
abstract = "During the last two decades, conventional MRI (cMRI) has been extensively used in the diagnostic workup of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, to monitor the natural history of the disease and to evaluate the efficacy of experimental treatments in randomised, controlled clinical trials. In the latter context, a major issue is represented by the high intra- and inter-individual heterogeneity of the MS patterns of disease activity and evolution. Such heterogeneity might explain, at least partially, the weak correlations found between clinical and cMRI aspects in patients with established MS, which is particularly evident when individual patients are considered. As a consequence, the definition of response to MS treatment, when based upon cMRI aspects, is still a challenging task. Although the use of cMRI-derived quantities as a standalone approach to define treatment options and strategies at an individual patient level should be discouraged, an evidence-based integration of clinical and cMRI data might be helpful in selected cases for an optimal work-up of patients undergoing immunomodulating or immunosuppressive treatments.",
keywords = "Conventional MRI, Multiple sclerosis, Treatment response",
author = "Marco Rovaris and M. Filippi",
year = "2005",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s10072-005-0515-5",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
journal = "Neurological Sciences",
issn = "1590-1874",
publisher = "Springer-Verlag Italia s.r.l.",
number = "SUPPL. 4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining the response to multiple sclerosis treatment

T2 - The role of conventional magnetic resonance imaging

AU - Rovaris, Marco

AU - Filippi, M.

PY - 2005/12

Y1 - 2005/12

N2 - During the last two decades, conventional MRI (cMRI) has been extensively used in the diagnostic workup of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, to monitor the natural history of the disease and to evaluate the efficacy of experimental treatments in randomised, controlled clinical trials. In the latter context, a major issue is represented by the high intra- and inter-individual heterogeneity of the MS patterns of disease activity and evolution. Such heterogeneity might explain, at least partially, the weak correlations found between clinical and cMRI aspects in patients with established MS, which is particularly evident when individual patients are considered. As a consequence, the definition of response to MS treatment, when based upon cMRI aspects, is still a challenging task. Although the use of cMRI-derived quantities as a standalone approach to define treatment options and strategies at an individual patient level should be discouraged, an evidence-based integration of clinical and cMRI data might be helpful in selected cases for an optimal work-up of patients undergoing immunomodulating or immunosuppressive treatments.

AB - During the last two decades, conventional MRI (cMRI) has been extensively used in the diagnostic workup of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, to monitor the natural history of the disease and to evaluate the efficacy of experimental treatments in randomised, controlled clinical trials. In the latter context, a major issue is represented by the high intra- and inter-individual heterogeneity of the MS patterns of disease activity and evolution. Such heterogeneity might explain, at least partially, the weak correlations found between clinical and cMRI aspects in patients with established MS, which is particularly evident when individual patients are considered. As a consequence, the definition of response to MS treatment, when based upon cMRI aspects, is still a challenging task. Although the use of cMRI-derived quantities as a standalone approach to define treatment options and strategies at an individual patient level should be discouraged, an evidence-based integration of clinical and cMRI data might be helpful in selected cases for an optimal work-up of patients undergoing immunomodulating or immunosuppressive treatments.

KW - Conventional MRI

KW - Multiple sclerosis

KW - Treatment response

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=30644475234&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=30644475234&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10072-005-0515-5

DO - 10.1007/s10072-005-0515-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 16388359

AN - SCOPUS:30644475234

VL - 26

JO - Neurological Sciences

JF - Neurological Sciences

SN - 1590-1874

IS - SUPPL. 4

ER -