4.3 Article

Corpus callosum atrophy is strongly associated with cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis: Results of a 17-year longitudinal study

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 21, Issue 9, Pages 1151-1158

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458514560928

Keywords

Corpus callosum; multiple sclerosis; atrophy; MRI; cognitive impairment

Funding

  1. Stockholm County Council
  2. Karolinska Institutet [ALF 20120213]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Cognitive impairment is common in multiple sclerosis (MS) and may be subtle. The corpus callosum is essential for connectivity-demanding cognitive tasks and is significantly affected in MS, therefore it may serve as a marker for cognitive function. Objective: The objective of this paper is to longitudinally study the normalized corpus callosum area (nCCA) as a marker of cognitive function and disability in MS. Methods: Thirty-seven MS patients were followed from 1996 with follow-ups in 2004 and 2013. A healthy matched control group was recruited. The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) were assessed. The nCCA was measured on T2-weighted images. Volumetry was performed with FreeSurfer. Results: Disease duration spanned five decades (1.6-46 years). Annual corpus callosal atrophy rate decreased with disease duration. nCCA was strongly correlated with SDMT (r = 0.793, p < 0.001) and moderately correlated with EDSS (r = -0.545, p < 0.001) after adjusting for disease duration, age and sex. The correlations of brain parenchymal fraction, white matter fraction, gray matter fraction and normalized lesion volume were less strong. Conclusions: The nCCA correlates well with physical and cognitive disability in time perspectives close to two decades, outperforming volumetric measurements. The nCCA is fast and could be feasible for clinical implementation where it may help identify patients in need of neuropsychological evaluation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available