The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Prediction of 3-year clinical course in CADASIL
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To obtain simple models predicting disease evolution at 3 years for a given patient with cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL). Methods: Based on data obtained in a prospective study of 236 patients, we built and validated models predicting, at the individual level, 3-year changes in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS), Trail Making Test version B (TMTB), and modified Rankin Scale (mRS). These models were based on different sets of predictors obtained at baseline, including either clinical data (epidemiologic data and cardiovascular risk factors) or clinical data and quantitative MRI markers (volume of lacunes [LLV], volume of white matter hyperintensities, normalized brain volume [BPF], number of microbleeds). The Bayesian information criterion (BIC) and the coefficient of determination (R2) were used to determine models with the highest predictive ability and the lowest numbers of predictors. Results: We obtained validated models with a demonstrated ability to predict, for a given patient, 3-year changes in MMSE, MDRS, TMTB, and mRS (R2 on independent samples: 0.22, 0.12, 0.09, and 0.17, respectively). In all cases, the best models according to R2 and BIC values included only the baseline values of the outcome, of BPF, and of LLV. Inclusion of other potential predictors always led to a loss of generalizability. Conclusions: The prediction of 3-year changes in MMSE, MDRS, TMTB, and mRS for a given patient with CADASIL can be obtained using simple models relying only on the initial values of the considered score, BPF, and LLV.
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“In a longitudinal study, the baseline volume of lacunes was found to predict subsequent global cognitive functioning and disability [30].”
From Clinical and research applications of magnetic resonance imaging in the study of CADASIL (2019) · cites this paper as [30]
In the citing paper
“Baseline brain volumes, or changes in brain volumes over time, also appear to contribute to the prediction of subsequent cognitive functioning and disability [30, 42, 60].”
From Clinical and research applications of magnetic resonance imaging in the study of CADASIL (2019) · cites this paper as [30]
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
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Jouvent, E., Duchesnay, E., Hadj-Selem, F., De Guio, F., Mangin, J.-F., Hervé, D., Duering, M., Ropele, S., Schmidt, R., Dichgans, M., & Chabriat, H.
- Affiliations
- From UMR-S 1161 INSERM (E.J., F.D.G., D.H., H.C.), Sorbonne Paris Cité, University Paris Diderot; Department of Neurology (E.J., F.D.G., D.H., H.C.), AP-HP, Lariboisière Hospital, Paris; DHU NeuroVasc Sorbonne Paris Cité (E.J., F.D.G., D.H., H.C.); LNAO (E.D., F.H.-S., J.-F.M.), Neurospin, I2BM, CEA, Saclay, France; Institute for Stroke and Dementia Research, Klinikum der Universität München (M. Duering, M. Dichgans), Munich; Munich Cluster for Systems Neurology (SyNergy) (M. Dichgans), Munich;...
- Inserm (FR)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2016-10-25
- Volume
- 87
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 1787-1795
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- PMC
- PMC5089530
- OpenAlex
- W2527171213
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 2.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Neurology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Open access LMU (Ludwid Maxmilian's Universitat Munchen) (submittedVersion)
- DZNE Pub (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Cerebrovascular and genetic disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Intracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
- Keywords
- CADASIL, disease progression prediction, cognitive decline, functional outcome, brain parenchymal fraction, white matter hyperintensities, microbleeds, MRI markers
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Bayes Theorem, Female, France, Germany, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mental Status Schedule, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Predictive Value of Tests, Retrospective Studies, Severity of Illness Index, Linear Models, Disease Progression, CADASIL, Young Adult
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