An update on the role of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting and monitoring multiple sclerosis progression.

INTRODUCTION: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is established in diagnosing and monitoring disease activity in multiple sclerosis (MS), its utility in predicting and monitoring disease progression is less clear. AREAS COVERED: The authors consider changing concepts in the phenotypic classification of MS, including progression independent of relapses; pathological processes underpinning progression; advances in MRI measures to assess them; how well MRI features explain and predict clinical outcomes, including models that assess disease effects on neural networks, and the potential role for machine learning. EXPERT OPINION: Relapsing-remitting and progressive MS have evolved from being viewed as mutually exclusive to having considerable overlap. Progression is likely the consequence of several pathological elements, each important in building more holistic prognostic models beyond conventional phenotypes. MRI is well placed to assess pathogenic processes underpinning progression, but we need to bridge the gap between MRI measures and clinical outcomes. Mapping pathological effects on specific neural networks may help and machine learning methods may be able to optimize predictive markers while identifying new, or previously overlooked, clinically relevant features. The ever-increasing ability to measure features on MRI raises the dilemma of what to measure and when, and the challenge of translating research methods into clinically useable tools.

Genetic influences on disease course and severity, 30 years after a clinically isolated syndrome.

Multiple sclerosis risk has a well-established polygenic component, yet the genetic contribution to disease course and severity remains unclear and difficult to examine. Accurately measuring disease progression requires long-term study of clinical and radiological outcomes with sufficient follow-up duration to confidently confirm disability accrual and multiple sclerosis phenotypes. In this retrospective study, we explore genetic influences on long-term disease course and severity; in a unique cohort of clinically isolated syndrome patients with homogenous 30-year disease duration, deep clinical phenotyping and advanced MRI metrics. Sixty-one clinically isolated syndrome patients [41 female (67%): 20 male (33%)] underwent clinical and MRI assessment at baseline, 1-, 5-, 10-, 14-, 20- and 30-year follow-up (mean age ± standard deviation: 60.9 ± 6.5 years). After 30 years, 29 patients developed relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, 15 developed secondary progressive multiple sclerosis and 17 still had a clinically isolated syndrome. Twenty-seven genes were investigated for associations with clinical outcomes [including disease course and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS)] and brain MRI (including white matter lesions, cortical lesions, and brain tissue volumes) at the 30-year follow-up. Genetic associations with changes in EDSS, relapses, white matter lesions and brain atrophy (third ventricular and medullary measurements) over 30 years were assessed using mixed-effects models. HLA-DRB1*1501-positive (n = 26) patients showed faster white matter lesion accrual [+1.96 lesions/year (0.64-3.29), P = 3.8 × 10-3], greater 30-year white matter lesion volumes [+11.60 ml, (5.49-18.29), P = 1.27 × 10-3] and higher annualized relapse rates [+0.06 relapses/year (0.005-0.11), P = 0.031] compared with HLA-DRB1*1501-negative patients (n = 35). PVRL2-positive patients (n = 41) had more cortical lesions (+0.83 [0.08-1.66], P = 0.042), faster EDSS worsening [+0.06 points/year (0.02-0.11), P = 0.010], greater 30-year EDSS [+1.72 (0.49-2.93), P = 0.013; multiple sclerosis cases: +2.60 (1.30-3.87), P = 2.02 × 10-3], and greater risk of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis [odds ratio (OR) = 12.25 (1.15-23.10), P = 0.031] than PVRL2-negative patients (n = 18). In contrast, IRX1-positive (n = 30) patients had preserved 30-year grey matter fraction [+0.76% (0.28-1.29), P = 8.4 × 10-3], lower risk of cortical lesions [OR = 0.22 (0.05-0.99), P = 0.049] and lower 30-year EDSS [-1.35 (-0.87,-3.44), P = 0.026; multiple sclerosis cases: -2.12 (-0.87, -3.44), P = 5.02 × 10-3] than IRX1-negative patients (n = 30). In multiple sclerosis cases, IRX1-positive patients also had slower EDSS worsening [-0.07 points/year (-0.01,-0.13), P = 0.015] and lower risk of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis [OR = 0.19 (0.04-0.92), P = 0.042]. These exploratory findings support diverse genetic influences on pathological mechanisms associated with multiple sclerosis disease course. HLA-DRB1*1501 influenced white matter inflammation and relapses, while IRX1 (protective) and PVRL2 (adverse) were associated with grey matter pathology (cortical lesions and atrophy), long-term disability worsening and the risk of developing secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.

Autoantibodies in the diagnostic work-up of neuropathy: clinically useful or purely academic?

The search for autoantibodies in patients with acute and chronic neuropathies has become widespread in neurological practice. These tests are more routinely available and therefore are more commonly requested in larger hospitals with neuroscience centres, although they are now also regularly requested from district general hospital settings, including by non-neurologists. However, the clinical value of these frequently expensive tests is often unclear and their impact on management not always obviously beneficial. This article reviews the main immunological tests used to search for specific autoantibodies in the setting of neuropathy and discusses their potential diagnostic importance, together with the eventual therapeutic implications of results obtained.