MS

If it's on your mind and it has to do with multiple sclerosis in any way, post it here.
User avatar
Petr75
Family Elder
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:17 am
Location: Czech Republic

Re: MS

Post by Petr75 » Sat Dec 26, 2020 2:55 am

2020 Dec 9
Hospices Civils de Lyon, Laboratoire d'immunologie, Hôpital Édouard Herriot, Lyon, France
Clinical significance of a single cerebrospinal fluid immunoglobulin band: A retrospective study
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33295240/

Abstract

Background: To demonstrate an inflammatory process in the central nervous system, the presence of at least two immunoglobulin (Ig) bands in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is required. So far, the presence of a single abnormal Ig band is considered as negative.

Objective: The objective was to assess retrospectively the significance of a single CSF Ig band in clinical practice.

Methods and results: Out of 10,286 CSF analyses, we retained 214 results with single Ig. An inflammatory neurological disorder was diagnosed in 41% of patients.

Conclusion: Despite a modest sensitivity, the presence of a single CSF Ig band may be a biomarker of an inflammatory mechanism and, as such, may prompt the clinician to repeat the analysis when the clinical context remains suggestive.

User avatar
Petr75
Family Elder
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:17 am
Location: Czech Republic

Re: MS

Post by Petr75 » Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:41 am

2021 Jan 12
Neuroscience Institute, Allegheny General Hospital, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US
Real world prognosis in MS: does early versus late diagnosis matter?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33432877/

Abstract

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) often presents soon after the onset of a recognized clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). In order to interpret data from CIS trials, it is important to know whether patients presenting as classical CIS provide group data representative of RRMS.

Objective: We aimed to determine whether or not MS patients presenting soon after the onset of symptoms with clinically isolated syndromes have an identifiable clinical profile, including worse outcomes, versus MS patients presenting later.

Methods: Chart review of consecutive patients with newly diagnosed relapsing MS, diagnosed in our clinic between 1989 and 2005. We divided patients into an early presentation group (EP), versus the remaining late presenting group (LP), and analyzed the impact of delay in presentation on 10- and 15-year disability outcomes. We also sought to identify reasons for later presentation.

Results: The two groups were similar in terms of many demographics, clinical risk factors, and long-term disability outcomes (median EDSS 2.25 versus EDSS 2.0 at 10 years). Exceptionally, patients in the EP group had more frequent attacks in the first few years after onset and were diagnosed and treated earlier.

Conclusions: Patients in our MS clinic with EP versus LP were more likely to have multiple attacks in the first 2 years after onset and were treated earlier, but did not have a better 10- or 15-year outcome.

User avatar
Petr75
Family Elder
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:17 am
Location: Czech Republic

Re: MS

Post by Petr75 » Fri Jan 22, 2021 11:45 am

2020 Dec 19
Department of Neurology, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil
Associations between cognitive and clinical disability across MS subtypes: The role of the underlying brain damage
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33477004/

Abstract

Background: Cognitive impairment (CI) is present in all stages and subtypes of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the majority of studies examined relapsing-remitting (RRMS) patients, and did not address cognitive phenotyping. Is still not clear whether patients with progressive MS (PMS) have a distinct pattern of CI compared to RRMS. In addition, there is conflicting data regarding the correlation between clinical and cognitive disability.

Objective: To investigate the differences of CI between PMS and RRMS patients, evaluating cognitive phenotypes. We also aimed to analyze the association between physical and cognitive disability with MRI measures of grey-matter atrophy and lesion burden.

Methods: Thirty patients with PMS and twenty-four with RRMS underwent neurological, neuropsychological (BRB-N, Boston Naming, and Tower of London), and MRI assessments (3T). Brain volume evaluations were performed using FreeSurfer. Principal Components Analysis on neuropsychological yielded six principal cognitive domains. Cognitive deficits were classified according to three categories: no CI, impairment in isolated cognitive domain, or impairment in combined domains.

Results: In the overall sample, the most frequently impaired cognitive domains were information processing speed (IPS) and visual memory. PMS patients had a higher prevalence of verbal memory and verbal fluency deficits, and more frequent impairment in combined cognitive domains compared to RRMS individuals. After multivariable regression analysis with clinical variables, EDSS was associated with most cognitive domains. Nevertheless, after including T1-lesion volume in the model, it was the most consistent predictor of cognitive performance. To further analyze the interaction between EDSS and T1-lesions, we performed GLM analysis with EDSS and T1-hypointense lesion volume as covariates, and T1-lesion volume adjusted better the model for verbal memory (p = 0.013), IPS (p = 0.021) and total number of impaired cognitive domains (p = 0.021).

Conclusions: RRMS and PMS patients tend to have a similar neuropsychological profile in general, but the extent of CI was greater in PMS patients. Worse cognitive performance was associated with increased physical disability, but this correlation was no longer significant after controlling for T1-lesion volume, suggesting that the underlying MS pathology might be involved in this relationship. Thalamic and T1-lesion volumes were the most consistent MRI predictors associated with cognitive disability.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”