Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit New Manuscript
    • Submit Revised Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit New Manuscript
    • Submit Revised Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology
Home
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed neurology journal
  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

Share

September 30, 2008; 71 (14) Articles

Vanishing MS T2-bright lesions before puberty

A distinct MRI phenotype?

D. Chabas, T. Castillo-Trivino, E. M. Mowry, J. B. Strober, O. A. Glenn, E. Waubant
First published September 29, 2008, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000326896.66714.ae
D. Chabas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T. Castillo-Trivino
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. M. Mowry
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. B. Strober
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
O. A. Glenn
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. Waubant
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Full PDF
Citation
Vanishing MS T2-bright lesions before puberty
A distinct MRI phenotype?
D. Chabas, T. Castillo-Trivino, E. M. Mowry, J. B. Strober, O. A. Glenn, E. Waubant
Neurology Sep 2008, 71 (14) 1090-1093; DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000326896.66714.ae

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions

Make Comment

See Comments

Downloads
366

Share

  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Disclosures
Loading

Abstract

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) onset before puberty may have a distinct clinical presentation. Pediatric patients with MS may less often meet MRI diagnostic criteria for adults. Whether initial MRI presentation is distinct in prepubertal patients is unknown.

Methods: We queried the UCSF MS database for pediatric patients with MS (onset ≤18 years) who underwent brain MRI within 3 months of initial symptoms. The overall number of lesions and the number of well-defined and ovoid, large, confluent, and gadolinium-enhancing lesions were compared between patients with earlier-onset (EOPMS) (<11 years) and later-onset (LOPMS) (≥11 years) pediatric MS. The next available brain MRI scan was used to evaluate lesion resolution.

Results: Thirteen children with EOPMS (median age 8.90 years, range [3.58–10.98], 38% girls) and 18 with LOPMS (median age 14.47 years, range [11.78–18.00], 61% girls) were identified. While the overall number of T2-bright lesions was similar in the two groups, patients with EOPMS had fewer well-defined ovoid T2-bright lesions (median = 7, range [0–29] vs 21.5, [4–100]; p = 0.004) and more often had confluent lesions (31% of patients vs 0%; p = 0.02) on their first MRI compared with patients with LOPMS. Ninety-two percent of patients with EOPMS had a reduction in the number of T2-bright lesions on the second scan compared to 29% of patients with LOPMS (p = 0.002).

Conclusions: The distinct prepubertal multiple sclerosis (MS) MRI phenotype suggests that underlying biologic processes may differ in earlier-onset pediatric MS compared to later-onset pediatric MS. These findings may delay diagnosis in that age range. MRI criteria for MS diagnosis may need to be revised before puberty.

GLOSSARY: ADEM = acute disseminated encephalomyelitis; CIS = clinically isolated syndrome; EOPMS = earlier-onset pediatric MS; LOPMS = later-onset pediatric MS; MS = multiple sclerosis.

Multiple sclerosis (MS) onset before puberty is rare, likely occurring in 0.2–0.6% of all MS cases. It is more challenging to diagnose pediatric MS at the initial presentation, partly because the differential diagnosis is broader and the clinical presentation more variable than in adults.1,2 Children with MS onset before puberty may have an even more distinct presentation; some have encephalopathy (Chabas et al., submitted), and a higher proportion of patients are boys. Furthermore, pediatric patients do not always meet the MRI criteria developed for adult-onset MS.3 For example, the MRIs of pediatric patients with MS often have a lower overall number of, but more tumefactive, T2-bright lesions.4,5 Possible explanations include a more recent biologic onset of the disease, immaturity of the immune system, incomplete myelination, or a different capacity of children to remyelinate and repair. In order to improve our understanding of MRI findings in pediatric MS, we compared initial brain MRI features in children with MS onset before the age of 11 (earlier onset pediatric MS [EOPMS]) vs those with onset between the ages of 11 and 18 (later onset pediatric MS [LOPMS]).

METHODS

We queried the UCSF Pediatric MS database for patients diagnosed with MS or clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) according to recently published operational definitions6 with disease onset before 19 years. The initial brain MRI scans were obtained within 3 months of symptom onset. We used the first subsequent available brain MRI scan to evaluate lesion resolution. MRI scans were performed in various facilities but stored on a UCSF computerized system. All patients had axial or coronal T2-FLAIR images available for review. Initial and second brain MRI scans were blindly reviewed (O.A.G.). The overall number of lesions (defined as foci ≥3 mm of increased signal on the T2-FLAIR images), the number of well-defined ovoid and large (≥1 cm) lesions, and the number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions at presentation were compared between the two age groups (EOPMS and LOPMS). Areas of confluent T2-FLAIR hyperintensity, defined as involving the white matter of greater than two adjacent gyri, were also compared. Lesion reduction (defined as any decrease in the number of T2-bright areas) and resolution (defined as ≥50% decrease in the number of T2-bright areas) between the first and second MRI scans were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics at onset.

We identified 13 children with EOPMS or CIS (median age 8.90 years, range [3.58–10.98], 38% girls) and 18 with LOPMS or CIS (median age 14.47 years, range [11.78–18.00], 61% girls) for whom initial brain scans were available. Clinical course and MRI timing are presented in figure 1. Monoregional presentation occurred in 85% of EOPMS (n = 11) vs 61% of LOPMS (n = 11) patients (Fisher exact test p = 0.24). Including mono- and polyregional onset, the locations of clinical presentations were similar in the EOPMS and LOPMS groups (optic neuritis 23% vs 44%, p = 0.28; brainstem/cerebellar involvement 54% vs 61%, p = 0.73; and spinal cord involvement 23% vs 33%, p = 0.70). Although encephalopathic changes occurred only in 23.1% of the EOPMS vs 5.6% of the LOPMS group (p = 0.28), 69% of patients with EOPMS were initially misdiagnosed with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) (vs 17% of patients with LOPMS, Fisher exact test p = 0.0075).

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 1 Patients’ disease course and MRI timing

This figure represents symptoms at multiple sclerosis (MS) onset and for each additional exacerbation in earlier-onset (age <11 years) (A) and later-onset (age ≥11 years) (B) pediatric patients with MS. The timing of the two first brain MRI scans is provided with respect to clinical exacerbations. All patients met criteria for pediatric CIS (patient 11 in the earlier-onset pediatric MS group, and patients 1, 4, and 11 in the later-onset pediatric MS group) or pediatric relapsing remitting MS.6 Some patients had additional MRI scans that were not used for the analysis but were used to confirm the diagnosis of relapsing remitting MS when needed; these MRIs are not reported in the figure.

Initial brain MRI scan.

The MRI findings of the first scans are summarized in the table. Time between symptom onset and first MRI scan was similar in both groups (median = 8 days [range, 0–64] vs 15 days [range, 0–68], Wilcoxon rank sum test, p = 0.69). Patients with EOPMS had fewer well-defined, ovoid T2-bright lesions and more often had confluent lesions on their first MRI than those with LOPMS (table). Younger patients tended to have fewer enhancing lesions and more deep gray matter involvement compared to older patients. The number of T2-bright or large T2-bright lesions and the proportion of patients with subcortical, brainstem, or cerebellar involvement did not differ between the two groups. We repeated the statistical analysis excluding the four patients who had encephalopathic changes during their first exacerbation; results were similar (not shown).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint

Table MRI findings

Follow-up MRI scan.

The MRI findings of the second scans are summarized in the table. Median time between first and second scans was 111 days (range, 25–1,530) in the EOPMS vs 107 days (range, 34–814) in the LOPMS patients (Wilcoxon rank sum test, p = 0.96). Second scans were available in 12 of the EOPMS and 17 of the LOPMS patients. Significant differences were reported for both overall and well-defined T2-bright lesions. Ninety-two percent of younger patients had a reduction in the number of T2-bright lesions on the second scan compared to 29% of older patients (Fisher exact test p = 0.002). A greater than 50% reduction tended to be more frequent in the younger group. Excluding patients with encephalopathic changes at onset did not substantially change the findings (not shown). Two examples of typical scans for EOPMS and LOPMS are provided in figure 2.

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 2 Examples of MRI findings in a very young patient and in an adolescent patient

The brain MRI scan of a 4-year-old patient (A,B, patient 10) shows the absence of well-defined, ovoid T2-bright areas (A: first scan, coronal FLAIR and axial T2-weighted sequences). The repeat scan shows a dramatic decrease of T2-bright areas (B: second scan, coronal FLAIR and axial FLAIR sequences). The same type of images obtained in a 13-year-old patient (C,D, patient 4) show typical ovoid T2-bright areas suggestive of MS (C: first scan, coronal FLAIR and axial T2-weighted sequences). The repeat scan in this adolescent does not show any significant decrease in the number of T2-bright areas (D: second scan, coronal FLAIR and axial T2-weighted sequences).

DISCUSSION

Although initial clinical characteristics were fairly similar in EOPMS vs LOPMS patients, several brain MRI features were strikingly different. In particular, initial T2-bright lesions in very young patients were less well-defined. Furthermore, a significant number of these lesions vanished on follow-up imaging, suggesting that demyelinating lesions may be different in younger children. Additional differences, although only found as trends in this small cohort, include a higher rate of deep gray matter involvement and less enhancement in young patients. It is our impression that MRI features in adolescents are similar to those reported in adults.

There are no published pathologic data regarding MS lesions in very young patients, so the extent to which MS pathology differs in that age category is unclear. Rather than representing demyelination, less well-defined brain MRI abnormalities that vanish over time in very early-onset MS may actually represent nonspecific reactive edema, a distinct microglial activation pattern, less axonal loss, or an enhanced ability to remyelinate compared to adults.

The majority of EOPMS patients (69%) were misdiagnosed with ADEM at onset before being referred to the UCSF Regional Pediatric MS Center. These patients did not meet the recently published criteria for ADEM6; we presume that the diagnoses were given based on the presence of encephalopathy in a minority of the patients (23% of the patients), the young age at onset, or the extensiveness and vanishing nature of the T2-bright lesions on the initial MRI scans. All EOPMS patients eventually met the diagnostic criteria for pediatric MS or CIS according to the International Study Group definitions.6 Thus, although our study is limited by its small sample size and the lack of a uniform MRI protocol, it is likely that the distinct MRI phenotype we report in the EOPMS group considerably contributes to the misdiagnosis of the majority of younger patients. MRI criteria for the diagnosis of MS may need to be revised in prepubertal children to account for the poorly defined T2-bright lesions in that age category. Further studies should be performed prospectively with a uniform MRI protocol and analytic method to confirm our findings. Finally, nonconventional imaging techniques may enhance our understanding of disease processes at play.

Footnotes

  • Supported by the National MS Society (The UCSF regional Pediatric MS clinic belongs to the Pediatric MS network initiated by the NMSS).

    Disclosure: The authors report no disclosures.

    Received December 18, 2007. Accepted in final form June 19, 2008.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Ruggieri M, Polizzi A, Pavone L, et al. Multiple sclerosis in children under 6 years of age. Neurology 1999;53:478–484.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.
    Mikaeloff Y, Husson Adamsbaum C, et al. MRI prognostic factors for relapse after acute CNS inflammatory demyelination in childhood. Brain 2004;127:1942–1947.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the “McDonald Criteria.” Ann Neurol 2005;58:840–846.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    Hahn CD, Shroff M, Blaser S, et al. MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis. Evaluation in a pediatric cohort. Neurology 2004;62:806–808.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.
    Balássy C, Bernert G, Wöber-Bingöl C, et al. Long-term MRI observations of childhood-onset relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Neuropediatrics 2001;Feb 32:28–37.
  6. 6.↵
    Krupp LB, Banwell B, Tenembaum S, et al. Consensus definitions proposed for pediatric multiple sclerosis and related disorders. Neurology 2007;68 suppl 2:S7–S12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text

Letters: Rapid online correspondence

No comments have been published for this article.
Comment

REQUIREMENTS

If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org

Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.

If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.

Submission specifications:

  • Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
  • Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
  • Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
  • Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
  • Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.

More guidelines and information on Disputes & Debates

Compose Comment

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
NOTE: The first author must also be the corresponding author of the comment.
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Publishing Agreement
NOTE: All authors, besides the first/corresponding author, must complete a separate Publishing Agreement Form and provide via email to the editorial office before comments can be posted.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

You May Also be Interested in

Back to top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Disclosures
Advertisement

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Safety in Guillain-Barré Syndrome, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy, and Multifocal Motor Neuropathy

Dr. Jeffrey Allen and Dr. Nicholas Purcell

► Watch

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.

Topics Discussed

  • All Pediatric
  • All Clinical Neurology
  • Multiple sclerosis
  • MRI

Alert Me

  • Alert me when eletters are published

Recommended articles

  • Article
    Pediatric multiple sclerosis
    Clinical features and outcome
    Amy Waldman, Jayne Ness, Daniela Pohl et al.
    Neurology, August 29, 2016
  • Articles
    MRI outcomes in a placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab in relapsing MS
    D. H. Miller, D. Soon, K. T. Fernando et al.
    Neurology, April 23, 2007
  • Article
    No association of multiple sclerosis activity and progression with EBV or tobacco use in BENEFIT
    Kassandra L. Munger, Kathryn C. Fitzgerald, Mark S. Freedman et al.
    Neurology, October 09, 2015
  • Articles
    Clinical features of children and adolescents with multiple sclerosis
    J. M. Ness, D. Chabas, A. D. Sadovnick et al.
    Neurology, April 16, 2007
Neurology: 100 (13)

Articles

  • Ahead of Print
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Popular Articles
  • Translations

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Activate a Subscription
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Education
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • AAN.com
  • AANnews
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology | Print ISSN:0028-3878
Online ISSN:1526-632X

© 2023 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise