Advertisement

Cortical quantitative MRI parameters are related to the cognitive status in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

  • Alexandra van Wijnen
  • Franca Petrov
  • Michelle Maiworm
  • Stefan Frisch
  • Christian Foerch
  • Elke Hattingen
  • Helmuth Steinmetz
  • Johannes C. Klein
  • Ralf Deichmann
  • Marlies Wagner
  • René-Maxime GracienEmail author
Magnetic Resonance
First Online:
  • 108 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

We aimed to assess cortical damage in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS)/clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) with a multiparametric, surface-based quantitative MRI (qMRI) approach and to evaluate the correlation of imaging-derived parameters with cognitive scores, hypothesizing that qMRI parameters are correlated with cognitive abilities.

Methods

Multiparametric qMRI-data (T1, T2 and T2* relaxation times and proton density (PD)) were obtained from 34 patients/24 matched healthy control subjects. Cortical qMRI values were analyzed on the reconstructed cortical surface with Freesurfer. We tested for group differences of cortical microstructural parameters between the healthy and patient collectives and for partial Pearson correlations of qMRI parameters with cognitive scores, correcting for age.

Results

Cortical T2-/T2*-/PD values and four cognitive parameters differed between groups (p ≤ 0.046). These cognitive scores, reflecting information processing speed, verbal memory, visuospatial abilities, and attention, were correlated with cortical T2 (p ≤ 0.02) and T2* (p ≤ 0.03). Cortical changes appeared heterogeneous across the cortex and their distribution differed between the parameters. Vertex-wise correlation of T2 with neuropsychological parameters revealed specific patterns of cortical damage being related to distinct cognitive deficits.

Conclusions

Microstructural changes are distributed heterogeneously across the cortex in RRMS/CIS. QMRI has the potential to provide surrogate parameters for the assessment of cognitive impairment in these patients for clinical studies. The characteristics of cognitive impairment in RRMS might depend on the distribution of cortical changes.

Key Points

• The goal of the presented study was to investigate cortical changes in RRMS/CIS and their relation to the cognitive status, using multiparametric quantitative MRI.

• Cortical T2, T2*, and PD increases observed in patients appeared heterogeneous across the cortex and their distribution differed between the parameters.

• Vertex-wise correlation of T2 with neuropsychological scores revealed specific patterns of cortical changes being related to distinct cognitive deficits.

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis Relapsing-remitting Magnetic resonance imaging Cognition Demyelinating diseases 

Abbreviations

BW

Bandwidth

CIS

Clinically isolated syndrome

CNS

Central nervous system

EDSS

Expanded Disability Status Scale

FOV

Field of view

GE

Gradient echo

GM

Gray matter

LPS-3

Leistungsprüfsystem Subtest 3

MS

Multiple sclerosis

PASAT

Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test

qMRI

Quantitative MRI

RCFT

Rey Complex Figure Test

RF

Radio frequency

SDMT

Symbol Digit Modalities Test

TMT

Trail Making Test

VLMT

Verbaler Lern- und Merkfähigkeitstest

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the Clinician Scientists program at Goethe University and by the State of Hesse with a LOEWE-Grant to the CePTER-Consortium (http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/67689811). The sponsors did not influence the study design or the collection, analysis or interpretation of data.

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is René-Maxime Gracien.

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this study. Dr H Steinmetz has received speaker’s honoraria from Bayer, Sanofi, and Boehringer Ingelheim.

Dr JC Klein received speaker honoraria and travel reimbursement from Medtronic, AstraZeneca, Abbott Laboratories, and AbbVie.

Dr Elke Hattingen has received speaker’s honoraria from BRACCO.

Dr R Deichmann received compensation as a Consultant for MR scanner procurement by the Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, UCL, London, UK.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional ethics committee approval was obtained.

Study subjects or cohorts overlap

Eleven patients overlap with a previous neuropsychological study: Yalachkov Y, Soydaş D, Bergmann J, Frisch S, Behrens M, Foerch C et al (2019) Determinants of quality of life in relapsing-remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis. Multiple sclerosis and related disorders 30:33–7

Methodology

• prospective

• cross-sectional study

• performed at one institution

References

  1. 1.
    Giovannoni G, Soelberg Sorensen P, Cook S et al (2018) Safety and efficacy of cladribine tablets in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results from the randomized extension trial of the CLARITY study. Mult Scler 24:1594–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kurtzke JF (1983) Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 33:1444–1452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amato MP, Zipoli V, Portaccio E (2006) Multiple sclerosis-related cognitive changes: a review of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. J Neurol Sci 245:41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calabrese M, Agosta F, Rinaldi F et al (2009) Cortical lesions and atrophy associated with cognitive impairment in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 66:1144–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pellicano C, Gallo A, Li X et al (2010) Relationship of cortical atrophy to fatigue in patients with multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 67:447–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gobbi C, Rocca MA, Riccitelli G et al (2014) Influence of the topography of brain damage on depression and fatigue in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 20:192–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cercignani M, Dowell NG, Tofts P (2018) Quantitative MRI of the brain: principles of physical measurement, 2nd edn. Boca Raton, CRC Press Taylor & Francis GroupGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gracien RM, Reitz SC, Hof SM et al (2016) Assessment of cortical damage in early multiple sclerosis with quantitative T2 relaxometry. NMR Biomed 29:444–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gracien RM, Reitz SC, Hof SM et al (2016) Changes and variability of proton density and T1 relaxation times in early multiple sclerosis: MRI markers of neuronal damage in the cerebral cortex. Eur Radiol 26:2578–2586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wen J, Yablonskiy DA, Luo J, Lancia S, Hildebolt C, Cross AH (2015) Detection and quantification of regional cortical gray matter damage in multiple sclerosis utilizing gradient echo MRI. Neuroimage Clin 9:164–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Louapre C, Govindarajan ST, Giannì C et al (2016) The association between intra- and juxta-cortical pathology and cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis by quantitative T2* mapping at 7 T MRI. Neuroimage Clin 12:879–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Steenwijk MD, Vrenken H, Jonkman LE et al (2016) High-resolution T1-relaxation time mapping displays subtle, clinically relevant, gray matter damage in long-standing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 22:1279–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lassmann H (2007) New concepts on progressive multiple sclerosis. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 7:239–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lassmann H, Brück W, Lucchinetti CF (2007) The immunopathology of multiple sclerosis: an overview. Brain Pathol 17:210–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fitzner D, Simons M (2010) Chronic progressive multiple sclerosis - pathogenesis of neurodegeneration and therapeutic strategies. Curr Neuropharmacol 8:305–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F et al (2018) Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol 17:162–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neeb H, Ermer V, Stocker T, Shah NJ (2008) Fast quantitative mapping of absolute water content with full brain coverage. Neuroimage 42:1094–1109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laule C, Leung E, Lis DK et al (2006) Myelin water imaging in multiple sclerosis: quantitative correlations with histopathology. Mult Scler 12:747–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yao B, Hametner S, van Gelderen P et al (2014) 7 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging to detect cortical pathology in multiple sclerosis. PLoS One 9:e108863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yalachkov Y, Soydaş D, Bergmann J et al (2019) Determinants of quality of life in relapsing-remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 30:33–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Volz S, Nöth U, Rotarska-Jagiela A, Deichmann R (2010) A fast B1-mapping method for the correction and normalization of magnetization transfer ratio maps at 3 T. Neuroimage 49:3015–3026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gracien RM, Reitz SC, Hof SM et al (2017) Longitudinal quantitative MRI assessment of cortical damage in multiple sclerosis: a pilot study. J Magn Reson Imaging 46:1485–1490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Venkatesan R, Lin W, Haacke EM (1998) Accurate determination of spin-density and T1 in the presence of RF-field inhomogeneities and flip-angle miscalibration. Magn Reson Med 40:592–602Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baudrexel S, Nöth U, Schüre JR, Deichmann R (2018) T1 mapping with the variable flip angle technique: a simple correction for insufficient spoiling of transverse magnetization. Magn Reson Med 79:3082–3092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Volz S, Nöth U, Deichmann R (2012) Correction of systematic errors in quantitative proton density mapping. Magn Reson Med 68:74–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nöth U, Volz S, Hattingen E, Deichmann R (2014) An improved method for retrospective motion correction in quantitative T2* mapping. Neuroimage 92:106–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Baudrexel S, Volz S, Preibisch C et al (2009) Rapid single-scan T2*-mapping using exponential excitation pulses and image-based correction for linear background gradients. Magn Reson Med 62:263–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nöth U, Shrestha M, Schüre JR, Deichmann R (2017) Quantitative in vivo T2 mapping using fast spin echo techniques - a linear correction procedure. Neuroimage 157:476–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Volz S, Nöth U, Jurcoane A, Ziemann U, Hattingen E, Deichmann R (2012) Quantitative proton density mapping: correcting the receiver sensitivity bias via pseudo proton densities. Neuroimage 63:540–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nöth U, Hattingen E, Bähr O, Tichy J, Deichmann R (2015) Improved visibility of brain tumors in synthetic MP-RAGE anatomies with pure T1 weighting. NMR Biomed 28:818–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gracien RM, Jurcoane A, Wagner M et al (2016) Multimodal quantitative MRI assessment of cortical damage in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 44:1600–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Calabrese M, Atzori M, Bernardi V et al (2007) Cortical atrophy is relevant in multiple sclerosis at clinical onset. J Neurol 254:1212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Griffin CM, Chard DT, Parker GJ, Barker GJ, Thompson AJ, Miller DH (2002) The relationship between lesion and normal appearing brain tissue abnormalities in early relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 249:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Neeb H, Dierkes T, Shah NJ (2004) Quantitative T1 mapping and absolute water content measurement using MRI. Int Congr Ser 1265:113–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Brex PA, Parker GJ, Leary SM et al (2000) Lesion heterogeneity in multiple sclerosis: a study of the relations between appearances on T1 weighted images, T1 relaxation times, and metabolite concentrations. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 68:627–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gelman N, Ewing JR, Gorell JM, Spickler EM, Solomon EG (2001) Interregional variation of longitudinal relaxation rates in human brain at 3.0 T: relation to estimated iron and water contents. Magn Reson Med 45:71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weiskopf N, Suckling J, Williams G et al (2013) Quantitative multi-parameter mapping of R1, PD*, MT, and R2* at 3T: a multi-center validation. Front Neurosci.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2013.00095
  38. 38.
    Houtchens MK, Benedict RH, Killiany R et al (2007) Thalamic atrophy and cognition in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 69:1213–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Batista S, Zivadinov R, Hoogs M et al (2012) Basal ganglia, thalamus and neocortical atrophy predicting slowed cognitive processing in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 259:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schoonheim MM, Popescu V, Rueda Lopes FC et al (2012) Subcortical atrophy and cognition: sex effects in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 79:1754–1761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schoonheim MM, Hulst HE, Brandt RB et al (2015) Thalamus structure and function determine severity of cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 84:776–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Varjacic A, Mantini D, Demeyere N, Gillebert CR (2018) Neural signatures of trail making test performance: evidence from lesion-mapping and neuroimaging studies. Neuropsychologia 115:78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandra van Wijnen
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Franca Petrov
    • 1
    • 3
  • Michelle Maiworm
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Stefan Frisch
    • 4
  • Christian Foerch
    • 1
  • Elke Hattingen
    • 2
  • Helmuth Steinmetz
    • 1
  • Johannes C. Klein
    • 5
  • Ralf Deichmann
    • 3
  • Marlies Wagner
    • 2
  • René-Maxime Gracien
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyGoethe UniversityFrankfurt/MainGermany
  2. 2.Department of NeuroradiologyGoethe UniversityFrankfurt/MainGermany
  3. 3.Brain Imaging CenterGoethe UniversityFrankfurt/MainGermany
  4. 4.Institute of PsychologyGoethe UniversityFrankfurt/MainGermany
  5. 5.Nuffield Department of Clinical NeurosciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options