Application of the McDonald 2010 criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis in an Argentinean cohort of patients with clinically isolated syndromes
Open accessAbstract
Background: The International Panel on Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis has proposed new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) in patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). We aimed to evaluate these new criteria in a cohort of patients from Buenos Aires, Argentina. Methods: Patients with CIS, in whom MRI was performed within three months of onset of symptoms, were included between January 2005–June 2010. Poser or McDonald 2005 criteria were used as gold standard diagnostic criteria for MS. MRI was assessed by a blind evaluator identifying recently diagnostic MS criteria. New criteria sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were determined. Results: Altogether 101 patients were included. Of these, 86 patients converted to MS (McDonald 2005/Poser) during the follow-up. The mean follow-up time was 7.3±3.2 years (range 1.8–11 years). Sensitivity was 84%, specificity 80%, PPV 96%, NPV 46% and accuracy 82%. The sub-analysis applied only to non-European descendants (mestizos, natives and zambos) showed a high level of accuracy for these new diagnostic criteria in this local ethnic/genetic population (sensitivity 77%, specificity 72%, PPV 94%, NPV 38%). Conclusions: This study assessing McDonald 2010 criteria in a Latin-American population may contribute to its international validation.
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
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.
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?
Several studies support the applicability of the 2010 McDonald Criteria in children.
“Several studies support the applicability of the 2010 McDonald Criteria in children. 29-36”
From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria (2018) · cites this paper as [32]
The Discussion reports high sensitivity and specificity for the 2010 McDonald Criteria in a cohort of 101 patients in Buenos Aires, but it does not report a pediatric analysis. Table 2 gives the cohort’s mean age as 35.5 years. The References list a separate pediatric study, but this paper’s findings do not establish applicability in children. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMRI criteria were tested and validated in European populations with a high incidence of MS, although recent studies investigating the McDonald 2010 criteria in CIS cohorts in Latin America and Asia have reported a similarly good performance.
“Secondly, MRI criteria were tested and validated in European populations with a high incidence of MS 25 , although recent studies investigating the McDonald 2010 criteria in CIS cohorts in Latin America 26 and Asia 27 have reported a similarly good performance.”
From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges (2017) · cites this paper as [26]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
MRI criteria for MS in patients with clinically isolated syndromes
Montalban, X., Tintoré, M., Swanton, J., Barkhof, F., Fazekas, F., Filippi, M., Frederiksen, J., Kappos, L., Palace, J., Polman, C., et al. (2010) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181cec45c · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Noseworthy JH, Lucchinetti C, Rodriguez M, et al. Multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 938-952.
- Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the 'McDonald Crite- ria'. Ann Neurol 2005; 58: 840-846.
- Polman CH, Reingold SC, Banwell B, et al. Diagnostic cri- teria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria. Ann Neurol 2011; 69: 292-302.
- Gomez-Moreno M, Diaz-Sanchez M and Ramos-Gonzalez A. Application of the 2010 McDonald criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis in a Spanish cohort of patients with clini- cally isolated syndromes. Mult Scler 2012; 18: 39-44.
- Thouvenot E, Inghilleri ML, Clarivet B, et al. Time gain using the 2010 McDonald criteria for the diagnosis of multiple scle- rosis after a clinically isolated syndrome. 28th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis 2012, p.184. Lyon, France: SAGE.
- Shalenkov A, Belova B, Shahov D, et al. Revised McDonald crite- ria for early multiple sclerosis diagnostics: Applicability in Rus- sian population. 28th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis 2012, p.413. Lyon, France: SAGE.
- Enderle A, Zephir H, Salleron J, et al. Comparison of McDonald 2005 and 2010 criteria in a cohort of clinically isolated syndrome patients. 28th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis 2012, p.183. Lyon, France: SAGE.
- Bigi S, Marrie RA and Banwell B. Application of the 2010 cri- teria on baseline MRI in a paediatric cohort: Does positivity at onset associate with a more aggressive clinical disease course? 28th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis 2012, p.678. Lyon, France: SAGE.
- Montalbán X, Kappos L, Freedman MS, et al. Application of the revised version of the 2010 McDonald diagnostic criteria: retro- spective comparison using the BENEFIT clinical study dataset. 28th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis 2012, p.648. Lyon, France: SAGE.
- Piri CB and Ozakbas S. The comparison of McDonald 2005, McDonald 2010 and Swanton criteria for prediction of con- version from clinically isolated syndrome to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. 28th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis 2012, p.187. Lyon, France: SAGE.
- Cristiano E, Patrucco L and Rojas JI. A systematic review of the epidemiology of multiple sclerosis in South America. Eur J Neurol 2008; 15: 1273-1278.
- Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, et al. New diagnostic cri- teria for multiple sclerosis: Guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 1983; 13: 227-231.
- Bedoya G, Montoya P, García J, et al. Admixture dynamics in Hispanics: A shift in the nuclear genetic ancestry of a South American population isolate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103: 7234-7239.
- Corach D, Lao O, Bobillo C, et al. Inferring continental ances- try of Argentineans from autosomal, Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA. Ann Hum Genet 2010; 74: 65-76.
- Andersson M, Alvarez-Cermeno J, Bernardi G, et al. Cere- brospinal fluid in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: A consensus report. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57: 897-902.
- Barkhof F, Filippi M, Miller DH, et al. Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain 1997; 120: 2059-2069.
- Dalton CM, Brex PA, Miszkiel KA, et al. Application of the new McDonald criteria to patients with clinically isolated syn- dromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2002; 52: 47-53.
- Barkhof F, Rocca M, Francis G, et al. Validation of diagnos- tic magnetic resonance imaging criteria for multiple sclero- sis and response to interferon beta-1a. Ann Neurol 2003; 53: 718-724.
- Tintore M, Rovira A, Rio J, et al. New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. Application in first demyelinating episode. Neurology 2003; 60: 27-30.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria
Thompson, A. J., Banwell, B. L., Barkhof, F., Carroll, W. M., Coetzee, T., Comi, G., Correale, J., Fazekas, F., Filippi, M., Freedman, M. S., et al. (2018) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(17)30470-2 · Cited by 8,167 · see citing works
Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges
Brownlee, W. J., Hardy, T. A., Fazekas, F., & Miller, D. H. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30959-x · Cited by 701 · see citing works
- Authors
- Patrucco, L., Rojas, J., Miguez, J., & Cristiano, E.
- Affiliations
- Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires (AR)
- Venue
- Multiple Sclerosis Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-02-06
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1297-1301
- ISSN
- 1352-4585 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0970
- OpenAlex
- W1990200610
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Multiple Sclerosis Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Polyomavirus and related diseases
- Keywords
- multiple sclerosis, clinically isolated syndrome, diagnostic criteria, magnetic resonance imaging, diagnostic accuracy, conversion to multiple sclerosis, Latin American populations, Argentina
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Argentina, Demyelinating Diseases, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Multiple Sclerosis, Disease Progression
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
