Preziosa, Paolo

AbstractBackgroundWhite matter hyper‐intensities (WMH) are observed on FLAIR MRI, increase with age and are more prominent in neurodegenerative diseases such as in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). The aim of this study was to assess the association between WMH and neuropathological staging of amyloid‐beta, neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) and α‐synuclein (α‐syn).MethodIn‐situ 3T‐MRI 3DT1‐weighted and 3D‐FLAIR data were collected for 77 clinically defined and pathologically‐confirmed brain donors; 31 AD, 21 PD and PD dementia (PDD), and 25 controls. WMH were segmented on FLAIR using an in‐house developed multiview convolutional neural network, followed by manual checking, and volume was obtained with FSL. Fifteen brain regions were dissected at autopsy, immunostained and evaluated for neuropathological diagnosis, including Thal amyloid phase, CAA type, and Braak stages for NFT and α‐syn. Group differences were assessed with linear models (corrected for age, gender, post‐mortem delay), and associations with Spearman and Pearson partial correlations.ResultCompared to controls, WMH load was higher in AD (p<0.001), specifically amnestic AD (p = 0.003) rather than non‐amnestic AD (p = 0.053), and higher in PD (p = 0.016), specifically non‐demented PD (p = 0.015) rather than PDD (p = 1.0). No difference in gender was observed (p = 0.38). Without the influence of pathology (in controls), WMH was associated with age (r = 0.49,p = 0.016).In the whole cohort, WMH was associated with Fazekas score (r = 0.67; p<0.001), normalized brain volume (NBV; r = ‐0.31,p = 0.007), gray matter volume (NGMV; r = ‐0.36,p = 0.002), Thal phase (r = 0.24,p0.034), Braak NFT stage (r = 0.33,p = 0.004), and Braak α‐syn stage (r = 0.27, p0.018).Across controls and AD, WMH associated with NBV (r = ‐0.39,p = 0.004), NGMV (r = ‐0.42,p = 0.002), left and right hippocampal volume (r = ‐0.36,p = 0.008 and r = ‐0.32,p = 0.022), Braak NFT (r = 0.41,p<0.001), Thal phase (r = 0.41,p = 0.002), and CAA (r = 0.34,p = 0.01). Amnestic and non‐amnestic AD showed similar results, except for CAA, which was associated with WMH in non‐amnestic AD only (r = 0.33,p = 0.04).Across controls and PD(D), WMH associated with Braak NFT stage (r = 0.39,p = 0.008) and Braak α‐syn stage (r = 0.60,p<0.001), but not with MRI outcome measures. In this respect PD and PDD showed different results; in PD WMH associated with NGMV (r = ‐0.37,p = 0.031), in PDD with left and right hippocampal volume (r = ‐0.44,p = 0.014 and r = ‐0.44,p = 0.015).ConclusionWMH associate with pathological stages of AD and PD(D), and contributes to MRI atrophy.

AbstractBackgroundWhite matter hyper‐intensities (WMH) are observed on FLAIR MRI, increase with age and are more prominent in neurodegenerative diseases such as in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). The aim of this study was to assess the association between WMH and neuropathological staging of amyloid‐beta, neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) and a‐synuclein (a‐syn).MethodIn‐situ 3T‐MRI 3DT1‐weighted and 3D‐FLAIR data were collected for 77 clinically defined and pathologically‐confirmed brain donors; 31 AD, 21 PD and PD dementia (PDD), and 25 controls. WMH were segmented on FLAIR using an in‐house developed multiview convolutional neural network, followed by manual checking, and volume was obtained with FSL. Fifteen brain regions were dissected at autopsy, immunostained and evaluated for neuropathological diagnosis, including Thal amyloid phase, CAA type, and Braak stages for NFT and a‐syn. Group differences were assessed with linear models (corrected for age, gender, post‐mortem delay), and associations with Spearman and Pearson partial correlations.ResultCompared to controls, WMH load was higher in AD (p<0.001), specifically amnestic AD (p = 0.003) rather than non‐amnestic AD (p = 0.053), and higher in PD (p = 0.016), specifically non‐demented PD (p = 0.015) rather than PDD (p = 1.0). No difference in gender was observed (p = 0.38). Without the influence of pathology (in controls), WMH was associated with age (r = 0.49,p = 0.016). In the whole cohort, WMH was associated with Fazekas score (r = 0.67; p<0.001), normalized brain volume (NBV; r = ‐0.31,p = 0.007), gray matter volume (NGMV; r = ‐0.36,p = 0.002), Thal phase (r = 0.24,p0.034), Braak NFT stage (r = 0.33,p = 0.004), and Braak a‐syn stage (r = 0.27, p0.018). Across controls and AD, WMH associated with NBV (r = ‐0.39,p = 0.004), NGMV (r = ‐0.42,p = 0.002), left and right hippocampal volume (r = ‐0.36,p = 0.008 and r = ‐0.32,p = 0.022), Braak NFT (r = 0.41,p<0.001), Thal phase (r = 0.41,p = 0.002), and CAA (r = 0.34,p = 0.01). Amnestic and non‐amnestic AD showed similar results, except for CAA, which was associated with WMH in non‐amnestic AD only (r = 0.33,p = 0.04). Across controls and PD(D), WMH associated with Braak NFT stage (r = 0.39,p = 0.008) and Braak a‐syn stage (r = 0.60,p<0.001), but not with MRI outcome measures. In this respect PD and PDD showed different results; in PD WMH associated with NGMV (r = ‐0.37,p = 0.031), in PDD with left and right hippocampal volume (r = ‐0.44,p = 0.014 and r = ‐0.44,p = 0.015).ConclusionWMH associate with pathological stages of AD and PD(D), and contributes to MRI atrophy.

Abstract MRI has improved the diagnostic work-up of multiple sclerosis, but inappropriate image interpretation and application of MRI diagnostic criteria contribute to misdiagnosis. Some diseases, now recognized as conditions distinct from multiple sclerosis, may satisfy the MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis (e.g. neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders, Susac syndrome), thus making the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis more challenging, especially if biomarker testing (such as serum anti-AQP4 antibodies) is not informative. Improvements in MRI technology contribute and promise to better define the typical features of multiple sclerosis lesions (e.g. juxtacortical and periventricular location, cortical involvement). Greater understanding of some key aspects of multiple sclerosis pathobiology has allowed the identification of characteristics more specific to multiple sclerosis (e.g. central vein sign, subpial demyelination and lesional rims), which are not included in the current multiple sclerosis diagnostic criteria. In this review, we provide the clinicians and researchers with a practical guide to enhance the proper recognition of multiple sclerosis lesions, including a thorough definition and illustration of typical MRI features, as well as a discussion of red flags suggestive of alternative diagnoses. We also discuss the possible place of emerging qualitative features of lesions which may become important in the near future.