Article Type
Changed
Mon, 10/31/2022 - 11:52

To diagnose multiple sclerosis (MS), the central vein sign on brain MRI appears to work as well as oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid, and combining the two biomarkers yields the highest predictive value for MS, a new study indicates.

The presence of oligoclonal bands is “very specific for MS and is obtained by lumbar puncture, which is invasive and can be unpleasant, so it is not an ideal test,” said study investigator Daniel Ontaneda, MD, PhD, with the Mellen Center for MS Treatment and Research at the Cleveland Clinic.

In a pilot study, the central vein sign was “highly correlated with the presence of oligoclonal bands and in many cases could serve to prove that a person has MS without the need for a spinal tap,” Dr. Ontaneda said.

The study was presented at the annual meeting of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS).
 

Reducing the need for lumbar puncture

Oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid are commonly used as a diagnostic biomarker for MS and can serve to meet the requirement for dissemination in time in the 2017 McDonald criteria. Central vein sign is an emerging neuroimaging biomarker for MS that may improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce the need for lumbar puncture.

For the study, the investigators compared the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of central vein sign on MRI with that of oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid for MS diagnosis.

Among the 53 participants, 24 (45%) met 2017 McDonald criteria for dissemination in space and time at baseline, and 27 (51%) met the criteria at 12-month follow-up.

At initial presentation, sensitivity for MS diagnosis was 75% for oligoclonal bands, 83% for central vein sign “Select-3” (3 central vein sign–positive lesions per scan), and 71% for central vein sign “Select-6” (6 central vein sign–positive lesions per scan).

The point estimate of sensitivity of central vein sign was higher than of oligoclonal bands, but there was no significant difference in sensitivities across methods.

Specificity at initial presentation was 76% for oligoclonal bands, 48% for Select-3, and 86% for Select-6.

The presence of oligoclonal bands was more specific than Select-3 for diagnosis of MS at initial presentation (P = .03), as was Select-6 (P = .001). There was no significant difference when comparing cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal bands with central vein sign Select-6.

At 12-month follow-up, the positive predictive value was 84% for oligoclonal bands and 95% for Select-6; combining oligoclonal bands and Select-6 gave a positive predictive value of 100%.

Dr. Ontaneda said that on the basis of these promising pilot data, the researchers have secured funding from the National Institutes of Health for a prospective study to further investigate the central vein sign as a potential biomarker for MS.

He also said there is “active discussion as to whether central vein sign should be added to the diagnostic criteria for MS.

“We think that it’s probably about time that we have diagnostic biomarkers that are sensitive and specific and can help us do away with complicated criteria to make the diagnosis, in favor of an imaging biomarker,” Dr. Ontaneda said.
 

 

 

A green light for further research

Commenting on the study, Shaheen Lakhan, MD, a neurologist and researcher from Boston, said that, “if an imaging finding on an otherwise routinely done MRI for patients with MS is just as good as analyses from the fluid from a spinal tap, of course, neurologists, and for sure patients, would go for the former.

“However, this study doesn’t fully support that argument just yet. It is retrospective with a tiny sample size, and the full way they standardized assessments and reporting hasn’t been fully reported,” said Dr. Lakhan, who was not involved in the study.

The study does, however, offer a “solid signal to green-light further exploration of a noninvasive assessment that may replace the dreaded spinal tap.

“In general, these principles need to be applied to all our invasive diagnostic criteria from biopsies to risky procedures, and also the incorporation of artificial intelligence/machine learning to aid in standardizing and scaling these assessments – and, frankly, reduce human error in readings,” said Dr. Lakhan.

Funding for the study was provided by the Race to Erase MS Foundation and the NIH. Dr. Ontaneda has received research support from the NIH, the National MS Society, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Race to Erase MS Foundation, Genentech, Sanofi, and Novartis and has consulted for Biogen, Genentech, Sanofi, Janssen, Novartis, and Merck. Dr. Lakhan has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

To diagnose multiple sclerosis (MS), the central vein sign on brain MRI appears to work as well as oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid, and combining the two biomarkers yields the highest predictive value for MS, a new study indicates.

The presence of oligoclonal bands is “very specific for MS and is obtained by lumbar puncture, which is invasive and can be unpleasant, so it is not an ideal test,” said study investigator Daniel Ontaneda, MD, PhD, with the Mellen Center for MS Treatment and Research at the Cleveland Clinic.

In a pilot study, the central vein sign was “highly correlated with the presence of oligoclonal bands and in many cases could serve to prove that a person has MS without the need for a spinal tap,” Dr. Ontaneda said.

The study was presented at the annual meeting of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS).
 

Reducing the need for lumbar puncture

Oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid are commonly used as a diagnostic biomarker for MS and can serve to meet the requirement for dissemination in time in the 2017 McDonald criteria. Central vein sign is an emerging neuroimaging biomarker for MS that may improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce the need for lumbar puncture.

For the study, the investigators compared the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of central vein sign on MRI with that of oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid for MS diagnosis.

Among the 53 participants, 24 (45%) met 2017 McDonald criteria for dissemination in space and time at baseline, and 27 (51%) met the criteria at 12-month follow-up.

At initial presentation, sensitivity for MS diagnosis was 75% for oligoclonal bands, 83% for central vein sign “Select-3” (3 central vein sign–positive lesions per scan), and 71% for central vein sign “Select-6” (6 central vein sign–positive lesions per scan).

The point estimate of sensitivity of central vein sign was higher than of oligoclonal bands, but there was no significant difference in sensitivities across methods.

Specificity at initial presentation was 76% for oligoclonal bands, 48% for Select-3, and 86% for Select-6.

The presence of oligoclonal bands was more specific than Select-3 for diagnosis of MS at initial presentation (P = .03), as was Select-6 (P = .001). There was no significant difference when comparing cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal bands with central vein sign Select-6.

At 12-month follow-up, the positive predictive value was 84% for oligoclonal bands and 95% for Select-6; combining oligoclonal bands and Select-6 gave a positive predictive value of 100%.

Dr. Ontaneda said that on the basis of these promising pilot data, the researchers have secured funding from the National Institutes of Health for a prospective study to further investigate the central vein sign as a potential biomarker for MS.

He also said there is “active discussion as to whether central vein sign should be added to the diagnostic criteria for MS.

“We think that it’s probably about time that we have diagnostic biomarkers that are sensitive and specific and can help us do away with complicated criteria to make the diagnosis, in favor of an imaging biomarker,” Dr. Ontaneda said.
 

 

 

A green light for further research

Commenting on the study, Shaheen Lakhan, MD, a neurologist and researcher from Boston, said that, “if an imaging finding on an otherwise routinely done MRI for patients with MS is just as good as analyses from the fluid from a spinal tap, of course, neurologists, and for sure patients, would go for the former.

“However, this study doesn’t fully support that argument just yet. It is retrospective with a tiny sample size, and the full way they standardized assessments and reporting hasn’t been fully reported,” said Dr. Lakhan, who was not involved in the study.

The study does, however, offer a “solid signal to green-light further exploration of a noninvasive assessment that may replace the dreaded spinal tap.

“In general, these principles need to be applied to all our invasive diagnostic criteria from biopsies to risky procedures, and also the incorporation of artificial intelligence/machine learning to aid in standardizing and scaling these assessments – and, frankly, reduce human error in readings,” said Dr. Lakhan.

Funding for the study was provided by the Race to Erase MS Foundation and the NIH. Dr. Ontaneda has received research support from the NIH, the National MS Society, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Race to Erase MS Foundation, Genentech, Sanofi, and Novartis and has consulted for Biogen, Genentech, Sanofi, Janssen, Novartis, and Merck. Dr. Lakhan has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

To diagnose multiple sclerosis (MS), the central vein sign on brain MRI appears to work as well as oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid, and combining the two biomarkers yields the highest predictive value for MS, a new study indicates.

The presence of oligoclonal bands is “very specific for MS and is obtained by lumbar puncture, which is invasive and can be unpleasant, so it is not an ideal test,” said study investigator Daniel Ontaneda, MD, PhD, with the Mellen Center for MS Treatment and Research at the Cleveland Clinic.

In a pilot study, the central vein sign was “highly correlated with the presence of oligoclonal bands and in many cases could serve to prove that a person has MS without the need for a spinal tap,” Dr. Ontaneda said.

The study was presented at the annual meeting of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS).
 

Reducing the need for lumbar puncture

Oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid are commonly used as a diagnostic biomarker for MS and can serve to meet the requirement for dissemination in time in the 2017 McDonald criteria. Central vein sign is an emerging neuroimaging biomarker for MS that may improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce the need for lumbar puncture.

For the study, the investigators compared the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of central vein sign on MRI with that of oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid for MS diagnosis.

Among the 53 participants, 24 (45%) met 2017 McDonald criteria for dissemination in space and time at baseline, and 27 (51%) met the criteria at 12-month follow-up.

At initial presentation, sensitivity for MS diagnosis was 75% for oligoclonal bands, 83% for central vein sign “Select-3” (3 central vein sign–positive lesions per scan), and 71% for central vein sign “Select-6” (6 central vein sign–positive lesions per scan).

The point estimate of sensitivity of central vein sign was higher than of oligoclonal bands, but there was no significant difference in sensitivities across methods.

Specificity at initial presentation was 76% for oligoclonal bands, 48% for Select-3, and 86% for Select-6.

The presence of oligoclonal bands was more specific than Select-3 for diagnosis of MS at initial presentation (P = .03), as was Select-6 (P = .001). There was no significant difference when comparing cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal bands with central vein sign Select-6.

At 12-month follow-up, the positive predictive value was 84% for oligoclonal bands and 95% for Select-6; combining oligoclonal bands and Select-6 gave a positive predictive value of 100%.

Dr. Ontaneda said that on the basis of these promising pilot data, the researchers have secured funding from the National Institutes of Health for a prospective study to further investigate the central vein sign as a potential biomarker for MS.

He also said there is “active discussion as to whether central vein sign should be added to the diagnostic criteria for MS.

“We think that it’s probably about time that we have diagnostic biomarkers that are sensitive and specific and can help us do away with complicated criteria to make the diagnosis, in favor of an imaging biomarker,” Dr. Ontaneda said.
 

 

 

A green light for further research

Commenting on the study, Shaheen Lakhan, MD, a neurologist and researcher from Boston, said that, “if an imaging finding on an otherwise routinely done MRI for patients with MS is just as good as analyses from the fluid from a spinal tap, of course, neurologists, and for sure patients, would go for the former.

“However, this study doesn’t fully support that argument just yet. It is retrospective with a tiny sample size, and the full way they standardized assessments and reporting hasn’t been fully reported,” said Dr. Lakhan, who was not involved in the study.

The study does, however, offer a “solid signal to green-light further exploration of a noninvasive assessment that may replace the dreaded spinal tap.

“In general, these principles need to be applied to all our invasive diagnostic criteria from biopsies to risky procedures, and also the incorporation of artificial intelligence/machine learning to aid in standardizing and scaling these assessments – and, frankly, reduce human error in readings,” said Dr. Lakhan.

Funding for the study was provided by the Race to Erase MS Foundation and the NIH. Dr. Ontaneda has received research support from the NIH, the National MS Society, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Race to Erase MS Foundation, Genentech, Sanofi, and Novartis and has consulted for Biogen, Genentech, Sanofi, Janssen, Novartis, and Merck. Dr. Lakhan has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM ECTRIMS 2022

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article