The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis: A longitudinal study
Abstract
Objective: To determine gray matter (GM) atrophy rates in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients at all stages of disease, and to identify predictors and clinical correlates of GM atrophy. Methods: MS patients and healthy control subjects were observed over 4 years with standardized magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and neurological examinations. Whole‐brain, GM, and white matter atrophy rates were calculated. Subjects were categorized by disease status and disability progression to determine the clinical significance of atrophy. MRI predictors of atrophy were determined through multiple regression. Results: Subjects included 17 healthy control subjects, 7 patients with clinically isolated syndromes, 36 patients with relapsing‐remitting MS (RRMS), and 27 patients with secondary progressive MS (SPMS). Expressed as fold increase from control subjects, GM atrophy rate increased with disease stage, from 3.4‐fold normal in clinically isolated syndromes patients converting to RRMS to 14‐fold normal in SPMS. In contrast, white matter atrophy rates were constant across all MS disease stages at approximately 3‐fold normal. GM atrophy correlated with disability. MRI measures of focal and diffuse tissue damage accounted for 62% of the variance in GM atrophy in RRMS, but there were no significant predictors of GM atrophy in SPMS. Interpretation: Gray matter tissue damage dominates the pathological process as MS progresses, and underlies neurological disabillity. Imaging correlates of gray matter atrophy indicate that mechanisms differ in RRMS and SPMS. These findings demonstrate the clinical relevance of gray matter atrophy in MS, and underscore the need to understand its causes. Ann Neurol 2008
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Breiman, L. (1996) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00058655 · Cited by 16,325
Peterson, J. W., Bö, L., Mörk, S., Chang, A., & Trapp, B. D. (2001) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.1123 · Cited by 1,403
Cited by
Meningeal inflammation is widespread and linked to cortical pathology in multiple sclerosis
Howell, O. W., Reeves, C. A., Nicholas, R., Carassiti, D., Radotra, B., Gentleman, S. M., Serafini, B., Aloisi, F., Roncaroli, F., Magliozzi, R., et al. (2011) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awr182 · Cited by 858
Virtual hypoxia and chronic necrosis of demyelinated axons in multiple sclerosis
Trapp, B. D., & Stys, P. K. (2009) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70043-2 · Cited by 621
Calabrese, M., Agosta, F., Rinaldi, F., Mattisi, I., Grossi, P., Favaretto, A., Atzori, M., Bernardi, V., Barachino, L., Rinaldi, L., et al. (2009) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneurol.2009.174 · Cited by 555
Will the real multiple sclerosis please stand up?
Stys, P. K., Zamponi, G. W., van Minnen, J., & Geurts, J. J. G. (2012) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3275 · Cited by 475
on behalf of the MAGNIMS study group (2015) · Nature Reviews Neurology · doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2015.157 · Cited by 473
Metadata
- Authors
- Fisher, E., Lee, J., Nakamura, K., & Rudick, R. A.
- Venue
- Annals of Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-07-25
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 255-265
- ISSN
- 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-8249
- OpenAlex
- W2164167069
- Cited by
- 670
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 26.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis: A longitudinal study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ana.21436
- The paper
- Fisher, E., Lee, J., Nakamura, K., & Rudick, R. A. (2008). Gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis: A longitudinal study. Annals of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21436
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.