MR Imaging Signs of Gadolinium Retention Are Not Associated with Long-Term Motor and Cognitive Outcomes in Multiple Sclerosis

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Gulani V,
   2. Calamante F,
   3. Shellock FG, et al

   ; International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Gadolinium deposition in the brain: summary of evidence and recommendations. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:564–70 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30158-8 pmid:28653648

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Kanda T,
   2. Ishii K,
   3. Kawaguchi H, et al

   . High signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: relationship with increasing cumulative dose of a gadolinium-based contrast material. Radiology 2014;270:834–41 doi:10.1148/radiol.13131669 pmid:24475844

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Quattrocchi CC,
   2. Mallio CA,
   3. Errante Y, et al

   . Gadodiamide and dentate nucleus T1 hyperintensity in patients with meningioma evaluated by multiple follow-up contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance examinations with no systemic interval therapy. Invest Radiol 2015;50:470–72 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000154 pmid:25756685

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Wattjes MP,
   2. Ciccarelli O,
   3. Reich DS, et al

   . 2021 MAGNIMS-CMSC-NAIMS consensus recommendations on the use of MRI in patients with multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2021;20:653–70 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00095-8 pmid:34139157

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Brisset JC,
   2. Kremer S,
   3. Hannoun S, et al

   . New OFSEP recommendations for MRI assessment of multiple sclerosis patients: special consideration for gadolinium deposition and frequent acquisitions. J Neuroradiol 2020;47:250–58 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2020.01.083 pmid:32014494

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Errante Y,
   2. Cirimele V,
   3. Mallio CA, et al

   . Progressive increase of T1 signal intensity of the dentate nucleus on unenhanced magnetic resonance images is associated with cumulative doses of intravenously administered gadodiamide in patients with normal renal function, suggesting dechelation. Invest Radiol 2014;49:685–90 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000072 pmid:24872007

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Robert P,
   2. Lehericy S,
   3. Grand S, et al

   . T1-weighted hypersignal in the deep cerebellar nuclei after repeated administrations of gadolinium-based contrast agents in healthy rats: difference between linear and macrocyclic agents. Invest Radiol 2015;50:473–80 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000181 pmid:26107651

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA evaluating the risk of brain deposits with repeated use of gadolinium-based contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). May 18, 2017. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-fda-evaluating-risk-brain-deposits-repeated-use-gadolinium-based. Accessed December 1, 2022
9. 9.↵
   1. McDonald RJ,
   2. McDonald JS,
   3. Kallmes DF, et al

   . Intracranial gadolinium deposition after contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2015;275:772–82 doi:10.1148/radiol.15150025 pmid:25742194

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Welk B,
    2. McArthur E,
    3. Morrow SA, et al

    . Association between gadolinium contrast exposure and the risk of parkinsonism. JAMA 2016;316:96–98 doi:10.1001/jama.2016.8096 pmid:27380348

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Cocozza S,
    2. Pontillo G,
    3. Lanzillo R, et al

    . MRI features suggestive of gadolinium retention do not correlate with Expanded Disability Status Scale worsening in multiple sclerosis. Neuroradiology 2019;61:155–62 doi:10.1007/s00234-018-02150-4 pmid:30617409

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Forslin Y,
    2. Shams S,
    3. Hashim F, et al

    . Retention of gadolinium-based contrast agents in multiple sclerosis: retrospective analysis of an 18-year longitudinal study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:1311–16 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5211 pmid:28495943

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Kühn I,
    2. Maschke H,
    3. Großmann A, et al

    . Dentate-nucleus gadolinium deposition on magnetic resonance imaging: ultrasonographic and clinical correlates in multiple sclerosis patients. Neurol Sci 2022;43:2631–39 doi:10.1007/s10072-021-05702-4 pmid:34735650

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Tedeschi E,
    2. Palma G,
    3. Canna A, et al

    . In vivo dentate nucleus MRI relaxometry correlates with previous administration of gadolinium-based contrast agents. Eur Radiol 2016;26:4577–84 doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4245-2 pmid:26905870

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Wattjes M,
    2. Rovira À,
    3. Miller D, et al.

    Evidence-based guidelines: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines on the use of MRI in multiple sclerosis—establishing disease prognosis and monitoring patients. Nat Rev Neurol 2015;11:597–606 doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2015.157 pmid:26369511

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Wattjes MP,
    2. Ciccarelli O,
    3. Reich DS, et al

    ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis study group; Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centres; North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative MRI Guidelines Working Group. MAGNIMS-CMSC-NAIMS consensus recommendations on the use of MRI in patients with multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2021;20:653–70 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00095-8 pmid:34139157

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Benedict RH,
    2. Amato MP,
    3. Boringa J, et al

    . Brief International Cognitive Assessment for MS (BICAMS): international standards for validation. BMC Neurol 2012;12:55 doi:10.1186/1471-2377-12-55 pmid:22799620

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Goretti B,
    2. Niccolai C,
    3. Hakiki B, et al

    . The Brief International Cognitive Assessment for Multiple Sclerosis (BICAMS): normative values with gender, age and education corrections in the Italian population. BMC Neurol 2014;14:171 doi:10.1186/s12883-014-0171-6 pmid:25204350

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Cocozza S,
    2. Pontillo G,
    3. Russo C, et al

    . Cerebellum and cognition in progressive MS patients: functional changes beyond atrophy? J Neurol 2018;265:2260–66 doi:10.1007/s00415-018-8985-6 pmid:30056570

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Meijer KA,
    2. van Geest Q,
    3. Eijlers AJC, et al

    . Is impaired information processing speed a matter of structural or functional damage in MS? Neuroimage Clin 2018;20:844–50 doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2018.09.021 pmid:30278371

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Borrelli P,
    2. Palma G,
    3. Tedeschi E, et al

    . Improving signal-to-noise ratio in susceptibility weighted imaging: a novel multicomponent non-local approach. PloS One 2015;10:e0126835 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0126835 pmid:26030293

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Palma G,
    2. Tedeschi E,
    3. Borrelli P, et al

    . A novel multiparametric approach to 3D quantitative MRI of the brain. PloS One 2015;10:e0134963 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134963 pmid:26284778

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Battaglini M,
    2. Jenkinson M,
    3. De Stefano N

    . Evaluating and reducing the impact of white matter lesions on brain volume measurements. Hum Brain Mapp 2012;33:2062–71 doi:10.1002/hbm.21344 pmid:21882300

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Vymazal J,
    2. Krámská L,
    3. Brožová H, et al

    . Does serial administration of gadolinium-based contrast agents affect patient neurological and neuropsychological status? Fourteen-year follow-up of patients receiving more than fifty contrast administrations. J Magn Reson Imaging 2020;51:1912–13 doi:10.1002/jmri.26948 pmid:31664740

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Forslin Y,
    2. Martola J,
    3. Bergendal Å, et al

    . Gadolinium retention in the brain: an MRI relaxometry study of linear and macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agents in multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:1265–73 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6112 pmid:31248867

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. Zivadinov R,
    2. Bergsland N,
    3. Hagemeier J, et al

    . Cumulative gadodiamide administration leads to brain gadolinium deposition in early MS. Neurology 2019;93:e611–23 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000007892 pmid:31285398

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
27. 27.↵
    1. Middleton FA,
    2. Strick PL

    . Basal ganglia and cerebellar loops: motor and cognitive circuits. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 2000;31:236–50 doi:10.1016/S0165-0173(99)00040-5 pmid:10719151

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    1. Vilis T,
    2. Hore J

    . Effects of changes in mechanical state of limb on cerebellar intention tremor. J Neurophysiol 1977;40:1214–24 doi:10.1152/jn.1977.40.5.1214 pmid:409809

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
29. 29.↵
    1. Mallio CA,
    2. Quattrocchi CC,
    3. Rovira À, et al

    . Gadolinium deposition safety: seeking the patient's perspective. AJNR Am J Nuroradiol 2020;41:944–46 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6586 pmid:32381539

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    1. Mallio CA,
    2. Piervincenzi C,
    3. Gianolio E, et al

    . Absence of dentate nucleus resting-state functional connectivity changes in nonneurological patients with gadolinium-related hyperintensity on T(1)-weighted images. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019;50:445–55 doi:10.1002/jmri.26669 pmid:30681245

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Lee PH

    . Should we adjust for a confounder if empirical and theoretical criteria yield contradictory results? A simulation study. Sci Rep 2014;4:6085 doi:10.1038/srep06085 pmid:25124526

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Akai H,
    2. Miyagawa K,
    3. Takahashi K, et al

    . Effects of gadolinium deposition in the brain on motor or behavioral function: a mouse model. Radiology 2021;301:409–16 doi:10.1148/radiol.2021210892 pmid:34463554

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Murdoch BE

    . The cerebellum and language: historical perspective and review. Cortex 2010;46:858–68 doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2009.07.018 pmid:19828143

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
34. 34.↵
    1. Wagner S,
    2. Sebastian A,
    3. Lieb K, et al

    . A coordinate-based ALE functional MRI meta-analysis of brain activation during verbal fluency tasks in healthy control subjects. BMC Neurosci 2014;15:19 doi:10.1186/1471-2202-15-19 pmid:24456150

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Kreutzer JS,
    2. DeLuca J,
    3. Caplan B

    1. Patterson J

    . Verbal fluency. In: Kreutzer JS, DeLuca J, Caplan B, eds. Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer-Verlag; 2011:2603–06
36. 36.↵
    1. Ackermann H,
    2. Hertrich I

    . The contribution of the cerebellum to speech processing. J Neurolinguistics 2000;13:95–116 doi:10.1016/S0911-6044(00)00006-3

    CrossRef
37. 37.↵
    1. Pontillo G,
    2. Penna S,
    3. Cocozza S, et al

    . Stratification of multiple sclerosis patients using unsupervised machine learning: a single-visit MRI-driven approach. Eur Radiol 2022;32:5382–91 doi:10.1007/s00330-022-08610-z 35284989 pmid:35284989

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    1. Houtchens MK,
    2. Benedict RH,
    3. Killiany R, et al

    . Thalamic atrophy and cognition in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2007;69:1213–23 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000276992.17011.b5 pmid:17875909

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
39. 39.↵
    1. Petracca M,
    2. Pontillo G,
    3. Moccia M, et al

    . Neuroimaging correlates of cognitive dysfunction in adults with multiple sclerosis. Brain Sci 2021;11:346 doi:10.3390/brainsci11030346 pmid:33803287

    CrossRefPubMed