We assessed the interobserver agreement on the radiological part of the International Panel (IP) criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS), comprising the assessment of dissemination in space (DIS) and time (DIT) based exclusively on MRI. Four radiologists trained and four radiologists naive in the application of the IP criteria scored the fulfillment for DIS (i.e., ≥3 periventricular, ≥1 infratentorial, ≥1 juxtacortical, ≥ 1 enhancing lesion or a total of ≥9 T2-weighted lesions) and DIT (presence of new or enhancing lesions at follow-up) in baseline and two follow-up scans from 20 patients suspected for having MS. The IP-trained radiologists agreed at least moderately on all assessments (κ>0.40), whereas the IP-naive radiologists showed fair agreement (κ<0.40) on five of 16 assessments. In the final conclusion on DIS and DIT, the IP-trained radiologists agreed substantially on both items (κ=0.62 and κ=0.60, respectively) compared with a fair agreement on DIS (κ=0.29) and moderate agreement on DIT (κ=0.52) among the IP-naive radiologists. Given the poor interobserver agreement among IP-naive observers, the new IP criteria for MS require additional training and should perhaps be simplified.
MRI Diagnosis Brain Multiple sclerosis
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The VU University Center for MS Research is supported by the Dutch MSResearch Foundation (Voorschoten, The Netherlands). Further, the DutchMS Research Foundation (Voorschoten, The Netherlands) also supportsT.Korteweg (grant 00–425 MS).
Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L et al (1983) New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 13:227–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald WI, Compston A, Edan G et al (2001) Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 50:121–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkhof F, Filippi M, Miller DH et al (1997) Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain 120(Pt 11):2059–2069PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tintore M, Rovira A, Martinez MJ et al (2000) Isolated demyelinating syndromes: comparison of different MR imaging criteria to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:702–706PubMedGoogle Scholar
Dalton CM, Brex PA, Miszkiel KA et al (2002) Application of the new McDonald criteria to patients with clinically isolated syndromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 52:47–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
CHAMPS Study Group (2002) Baseline MRI characteristics of patients at high risk for multiple sclerosis: results from the CHAMPS trial. Controlled High-Risk Subjects Avonex Multiple Sclerosis Prevention Study. Mult Scler 8:330–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CHAMPS Study Group (2002) MRI predictors of early conversion to clinically definite MS in the CHAMPS placebo group. Neurology 59:998–1005Google Scholar
Tintore M, Rovira A, Rio J et al (2003) New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: application in first demyelinating episode. Neurology 60:27–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkhof F, Filippi M, van Waesberghe JH, Campi A, Miller DH, Ader HJ (1999) Interobserver agreement for diagnostic MRI criteria in suspected multiple sclerosis. Neuroradiology 41:347–350PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zipoli V, Portaccio E, Siracusa G, Pracucci G, Sorbi S, Amato MP (2003) Interobserver agreement on Poser’s and the new McDonald’s diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 9:481–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paty DW, Oger JJ, Kastrukoff LF et al (1988) MRI in the diagnosis of MS: a prospective study with comparison of clinical evaluation, evoked potentials, oligoclonal banding, and CT. Neurology 38:180–185PubMedGoogle Scholar
Molyneux PD, Miller DH, Filippi M et al (1999) Visual analysis of serial T2-weighted MRI in multiple sclerosis: intra- and interobserver reproducibility. Neuroradiology 41:882–888PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovaris M, Barkhof F, Bastianello S et al (1999) Multiple sclerosis: interobserver agreement in reporting active lesions on serial brain MRI using conventional spin echo, fast spin echo, fast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery and post-contrast T1-weighted images. J Neurol 246:920–925PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filippi M, Gawne-Cain ML, Gasperini C et al (1998) Effect of training and different measurement strategies on the reproducibility of brain MRI lesion load measurements in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 50:238–244PubMedGoogle Scholar
Dalton CM, Brex PA, Miszkiel KA et al (2003) New T2 lesions enable an earlier diagnosis of multiple sclerosis in clinically isolated syndromes. Ann Neurol 53:673–676PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar