Evidence Hub

Differences and similarities in the evolution of morphologic brain abnormalities between paediatric and adult-onset multiple sclerosis

Pichler A, Enzinger C, Fuchs S, Plecko-Startinig B, Gruber-Sedlmayr U, Linortner P, Langkammer C, Khalil M et al.

Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England), 2013

21 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Paediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (pMS) is multiple sclerosis (MS) occurring before the age of 18 years and may present and develop differently from adult-onset MS (aMS). Whether there are also differences regarding the accrual of brain changes is largely unknown.

METHODS: We compared the evolution of the T2- and T1-lesion load (LL), the black hole ratio (BHR), and annualised brain volume change (aBVC) between 21 pMS patients (age at onset: 14.4±2.3 years) and 21 aMS patients (age at onset: 29.4±6.5 years) matched for disease duration (pMS: 1.0±1.8 years; aMS: 1.6±1.7 years, p=0.27). Follow-up was for 4.2±3.7 years in pMS and 3.1±0.6 years in aMS. Clinical comparisons included the course of disability assessed with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score and annualised relapse rate (ARR).

RESULTS: At baseline, pMS and aMS had similar EDSS, T1-LL, BHR, whereas T2-LL was higher in aMS (aMS: 9.2±11.6 ccm; pMS: 4.1±6.2 ccm, p=0.02). The change of T2-LL and T1-LL during the observation period was similar in both groups. At follow-up, disability was lower in pMS (EDSS score in pMS: 0.9±0.9; aMS: 1.7±1.3, p=0.04), despite a significantly higher accrual of destructive brain lesions (BHR in pMS: 23.7±23.7%; aMS: 5.9±4.0%, p=0.02) and a similar rate of brain volume loss.

CONCLUSION: Our observation of a morphologically more aggressive disease evolution paralleled by less disability in pMS than in aMS (defined using EDSS) suggests a higher compensatory capacity…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 21 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free