Cited by 151Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications

Graph theoretical framework of brain networks in multiple sclerosis: a review of concepts

Open access
Fleischer, Vinzenz, Radetz, Angela, Ciolac, Dumitru, Muthuraman, Muthuraman, Gonzalez-Escamilla, Gabriel, Zipp, Frauke, Groppa, Sergiu·2019·Neuroscience

Abstract

Network science provides powerful access to essential organizational principles of the human brain. It has been applied in combination with graph theory to characterize brain connectivity patterns. In multiple sclerosis (MS), analysis of the brain networks derived from either structural or functional imaging provides new insights into pathological processes within the gray and white matter. Beyond focal lesions and diffuse tissue damage, network connectivity patterns could be important for closely tracking and predicting the disease course. In this review, we describe concepts of graph theory, highlight novel issues of tissue reorganization in acute and chronic neuroinflammation and address pitfalls with regard to network analysis in MS patients. We further provide an outline of functional and structural connectivity patterns observed in MS, spanning from disconnection and disruption on one hand to adaptation and compensation on the other. Moreover, we link network changes and their relation to clinical disability based on the current literature. Finally, we discuss the perspective of network science in MS for future research and postulate its role in the clinical framework.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.10.033

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fleischer, V., Radetz, A., Ciolac, D., Muthuraman, M., Gonzalez-Escamilla, G., Zipp, F., & Groppa, S.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
Corresponding author
Groppa, Sergiu
Venue
Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
403
Pages
35-53
ISSN
0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2766022883
Cited by
151
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 11
FWCI
1.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OPUS (Augsburg University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
German Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, brain networks, graph theory, structural connectivity, functional connectivity, neuroinflammation, tissue reorganization, disconnection, clinical disability, white matter lesions, gray matter damage, disease progression
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Encephalomyelitis, Autoimmune, Experimental, Humans, Models, Neurological, Multiple Sclerosis, Neural Pathways

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