Treatment escalation after clinically silent MRI lesions in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Clicks: 34
ID: 322349
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #81 of 457 articles by views in Brain research

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 457 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Clinically silent MRI lesions occur frequently in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) despite disease modifying therapy (DMT). Guidelines only routinely recommend DMT escalation after multiple silent lesions, and adherence is variable. We explored outcomes and the effect of treatment escalation following single and multiple on-treatment silent lesions. This cohort study and emulated target trial used MSBase registry data from 99 clinics in 26 countries between 2007 and 2025. Clinically stable participants receiving any DMT for RRMS with silent lesions versus without silent lesions were compared. Among participants with silent lesions while taking platform or moderate-efficacy DMTs, outcomes following treatment escalation within 6 months versus no treatment escalation (unless a post-MRI clinical event occurred) were compared. The primary outcome was an MS relapse, and the secondary outcome was 6-month confirmed disability worsening. A total of 10,232 participants met inclusion criteria (71.7% female, mean age 41 [SD 11]). The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 27.8% (95% CI: 25.7%-29.9%) in participants with silent lesions versus 14.3% (95% CI: 13.5%-15.2%) without (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.76 [95% CI: 1.57-1.97]). The 2-year cumulative incidence of disability worsening was 13.8% (95% CI: 12.2%-15.5%) in participants with silent lesions versus 11.4% (95% CI: 10.7%-12.2%) without (aHR 1.38 [95% CI: 1.18-1.62]). Rates of relapse and disability worsening were higher following single and multiple silent lesions versus no silent lesions. The emulated trial included 2,264 participants with ≥1 silent lesion on platform or moderate efficacy DMTs, 286 of whom escalated DMT within 6 months following silent lesions. The 4-year cumulative incidence of relapse was lower following treatment escalation (16.8% [95% CI: 12.4%-23.4%]) versus continuation (38.9% [95% CI: 35.8%-42.1%]), aHR 0.34 (95% CI: 0.23-0.47), with similar aHRs following single and multiple silent lesions. The 4-year cumulative incidence of disability worsening was similar following treatment escalation (16.0% [95% CI: 10.8%-22.2%]) versus continuation (17.7% [95% CI: 15.3%-20.1%]), aHR 0.89 (95% CI: 0.56-1.33). People with RRMS with single or multiple on-treatment silent MRI lesions have higher subsequent risks of relapse and disability worsening than people without silent lesions. DMT escalation mitigates the relapse risk, though disability worsening continues at a similar rate over 4 years. Contrary to guidelines, DMT escalation should be considered after single or multiple silent lesions.
Reference Key
openalex_W7170814430 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Cyrus Daruwalla, Courtney Kremler, Francesco Patti, Serkan Ozakbas, Cavit Boz, Lechner-Scott Js, Andrea Surcinelli, Matteo Foschi, Khoury Sj, H Butzkueven, Anneke van der Walt, Zuzana Rous, Mario Habek, J E Meca-Lallana, Gabriel Valero Lopez, Raed Alroughani, Yolanda Blanco, Guy Laureys, Olga Skibina, Katherine Buzzard, Orla Gray, Pamela McCombe, Davide Maimone, P Duquette, Marc Girard, Gómez Prat A, Jose Luis Sanchez-Menoyo, Vincent van Pesch, Aysun Soysal, Maria Pia Amato, Francois Grand'Maison, Judith Wilton, Bart Van Wijmeersch, Oliver Gerlach, Alessandra Lugaresi, Valentina Tomassini, Giovanna De Luca, Bruce Taylor, Yi Chao Foong, Nevin John, Simón Cárdenas‐Robledo, Suzanne Hodgkinson, Richard Macdonell, Barbara Willekens, Justin Garber, Emanuele D'Amico, Murat Terzi, Jana Houskova, Emmanuelle Lapointe, Abdullah Al-Asmi, Michael Barnett, Ivana Štětkářová, R Gouider, Saloua Mrabet, Tunde Csepany, Chris McGuigan, Katrin Gross-Paju, Jens Kühle, Tamara Castillo-Triviño, Simon Kerrigan, Aviva M. Tolkovsky, Mark Wardle, Nick Cunniffe, Izanne Roos, Paul Madley‐Dowd, Alasdair Coles, Tomáš Kalinčík, Jonathan A C Sterne, J L William Brown, the MSBase study group, Mark Marriott, Trevor Kilpatrick, John King, Ai‐Lan Nguyen, Chris Dwyer, Vivien Li, Prashanth Ramachandran, Melissa Chu, Lisa Taylor, Katherine Fazzolari, Hasini Fernando, Margaret Bolger, Jersey Higgins, Clara Chisari, L Salvatore, Catherine Larochelle, Raymond Hupperts, Juan Camilo Carrillo, Javier Olascoaga, Jana Libertínová, Marek Paterka, Marta Vachova, Tomas Kalincik, Bassem Yamout, Pierre Grammond, Sara Eichau, Guillermo Izquierdo, Daniele Spitaleri, Jiwon Oh
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Brain research
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/brain/awag252
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awag252
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.