Multiple Sclerosis Resource Centre

Welcome to the Multiple Sclerosis Resource Centre. This website is intended for international healthcare professionals with an interest in Multiple Sclerosis. By clicking the link below you are declaring and confirming that you are a healthcare professional

You are here

Immunological differences between classical phenothypes of multiple sclerosis

Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 1-2, 349, pages 10 - 14

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS), one of the most serious inflammatory and neurodegenerative conditions, is characterized by variable clinical courses — relapsing–remitting (RRMS), primary progressive (PPMS) and secondary progressive (SPMS). Although PPMS affects only 10–15% of the patient population, its course and pathophysiological and immunological background are distinct. In this review we present and discuss main differences between different types of MS, with particular focus on the underlying immunological mechanisms.

Highlights

 

  • Immunological and pathophysiological mechanisms determining MS courses are reviewed.
  • Differences between PPMS, RRMS and SPMS are presented and discussed.
  • PPMS features distinct leukocyte surface expression and serum adhesion molecules.
  • Current therapies are ineffective in PPMS due to intact blood–brain barrier.
  • PPMS seems to be evoked by noninflammatory mechanisms.

Keywords: Adhesion molecules, AntiGM3 antibodies, Demyelination, Neurodegeneration, Primary progressive multiple sclerosis, PPMS.

1. Introduction

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system (CNS) with an autoimmune reaction that causes tissue injury and clinical disability[1], [2], and [3]. MS is the most common cause of neurological disability in young adults with the age of onset usually between 20 and 40 years. It seems that disease onset and course may depend on genetic, infectious, immunological or environmental causes. Family members of MS patients are more likely to develop the disease than others in the general population. The prevalence of MS increases the closer the genetic relationship to the proband. The etiology of the disease is unknown, but different immunopathological mechanisms have been described that result in a highly heterogeneous clinical course and neuroradiological appearance.

Here we review the immunological mechanisms that reflect the difference in clinical manifestations of MS. The most important differences between forms of MS are summarized in Table 1 .

Table 1 The comparison between main forms of MS with respect to immunological differences.

  RRMS PPMS SPMS
Age of onset (years) 20–30 About 40 > 40
Gender (male:female) 1:2 1:1 1:2
Frequency 85–90% 10–15% 50–60% of RRMS patients
Blood–brain barrier Damaged Relatively intact Damaged
Serum level of adhesion molecules Normal E-selectin Increased E-selectin Normal E-selectin
Increased L-selectin Normal L-selectin Increased L-selectin
Serum anti-GAGA4 IgM antibodies Positive Negative Positive
Serum antiGM3 antibodies 3% 56% 43%
Disease-modifying therapies' beneficial effect Good No Little

2. Classification and clinical course of MS

There are two main courses of MS: relapsing–remitting (RRMS) and progressive ( Fig. 1 ). The more common course, RRMS (85–90%), characterized by clinical episodes interspersed by periods of stability, affects twice as many women than men and in 40% of patients develops into secondary progressive MS (SPMS) within ten years. Approximately 10 to 15% of patients experience a primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS), which is characterized by gradual neurological dysfunction with or without exacerbations[4], [5], and [6]. Compared with RRMS patients with PPMS have 0 mean age of onset a decade later, the disease does not show female predominance and the spinal cord is more frequently involved. Current disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) used in RRMS have little or no beneficial effect in PPMS due to the different immunological and pathophysiological mechanisms involved[7] and [8].

gr1

Fig. 1 The main types of multiple sclerosis.

The differences in the nature of the inflammatory response between RRMS and PPMS include disturbance of the blood brain barrier (BBB), and the local expression of inflammatory cytokines and chemokines as well as their cognate receptors [9] .

Trafficking of peripheral autoreactive leucocytes through the BBB is crucial to the pathogenesis of RRMS but not PPMS where inflammation persists in the subarachnoid compartment behind an intact or repaired BBB. The transmigration of leukocytes is mediated by selective expression of adhesion molecules, chemokines, chemokine receptors and matrix metalloproteinases. Duran et al. found that leucocyte surface expression of adhesion molecules and soluble serum levels of adhesion molecules in the peripheral blood of PPMS patients differs clearly from that of patients with SPMS or RRMS. They demonstrated increased levels of soluble ICAM-1 and L-selectin in SPMS and RRMS but not in PPMS where there is a pattern similar to that seen in healthy controls [10] . These findings explain why there are fewer and smaller gadolinium enhancing cerebral lesions in MRIs of patients with PPMS than in other subtypes of MS. The results also imply that disruption of the BBB occurs in SPMS and RRMS, which correlates with increased number of inflammatory lesions in the brain. Moreover, progressive forms of MS are characterized by widespread demyelination and diffuse degenerative changes throughout the entire white and gray matter in contrast to the active focal lesions mainly in the white matter occurring in RRMS[11] and [12].

Heat shock proteins (HSP) are augmented as part of the stress response due to inflammation, infection, starvation, hypoxia, exercise, exposure of the cell to toxins, etc. Pronounced immune response against HSP60 or HSP70 in RRMS was not observed in PPMS and SPMS. Thus, the decrease of reactivity to HSP in progressive forms of MS is connected with the less inflammatory nature of progressive MS and may reflect the worse response to immunomodulatory therapy[7] and [8].

4. Immunological response

4.1. Adhesion molecules

In some studies an increased level of E-selectin was found in the serum of patients with PPMS but not in the serum of those with SPMS or RRMS[13] and [14]. In addition, PPMS patients with an increased serum level of E-selectin had a more rapid progression of disability. Ukkonen et al. [15] detected increased cell surface expression of very late activation antigen 4 (VLA-4), lymphocyte function-associated antigen 1(LFA-1) and intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1) in the blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in PPMS patients compared with controls. In addition, the levels of ICAM-1 in the blood and CSF were higher in PPMS patients when compared with SPMS patients, while the level of vascular adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) was higher only in the blood.

These results support the immunological heterogeneity of different leucocyte/endothelial cell interactions occurring in the different clinical forms of MS. This heterogeneity may in part explain the ineffectiveness of DMTs in PPMS due to the relatively intact BBB and low-grade inflammatory response, which is no longer under the control of the peripheral immune system [16] . In addition, anti-inflammatory therapy that influences autoreactive myelin-specific CD4 T-cells is ineffective in the PPMS suggesting that the role of T-cells in the blood is less important than in RRMS.

4.2. Anti-glycan antibodies

Serum anti-glycan antibodies have been considered as diagnostic or prognostic biomarkers in MS. Freedman et al. found that MS patients positive for one of four anti-glycan immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies (anti-GAGA2, anti-GAGA3, anti-GAGA4 and anti-GAGA6) had nearly twice as high the risk of progression than patients without antibodies during the 5 years of this study [17] . Significantly higher levels of IgM anti-GAGA4 antibodies were found in RRMS patients when normalized for total IgM compared to patients with other neurological disorders [18] . These IgM anti-GAGA4 antibodies specific to alpha-glucose antigens are most commonly produced by self-replenishing B1 B-cells, which play an important role in the first line of defense against invading pathogens, removal of senescent cells, cell debris and other self-antigens[19] and [20]. It is interesting that alpha-glucose antigens are found not only within the type IV collagen matrix of the BBB and MS plaques but also exist in several pathogenic fungi and bacteria. This homology may suggest that IgM antibodies could arise through the mechanism of mimicry targeting a cross-reactive response that disrupts the BBB. Interestingly, the presence of anti-GAGA4 antibody may differentiate between PPMS and RRMS/SPMS patients, since nearly all PPMS patients were negative for the anti-GAGA4 antibody in an assay performed by Brettschneider et al. [21] .

4.3. The role of B-cells

The pathological studies described below indicate the important role of B-cells and antibodies in the inflammatory demyelinating process during the different disease stages of MS. Moreover, treatment strategies that target the pathogenic humoral immune response are effective in RRMS; these include intravenous immunoglobulins, plasma exchange or rituximab, which is a monoclonal antibody that depletes the CD20 + B-cells[22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], and [31].

The formation of lymphatic-like tissue can be found in the meninges in patients with SPMS but not PPMS or RRMS [1] . These structures are dense clusters of B-cells and plasma cells, which surround areas that resemble germinal centers and contain dendritic cells [32] . Certain chemokines and cytokines such as CXCL13, lymphotoxin and BAFF (B-cell activating factor) are expressed in chronic inflammatory MS lesions and may be involved in the homing of B-cells and the formation of these structures. In addition, CXCL13 up-regulates membrane lymphotoxin LTα1β2 on B-cells, promoting the development of follicular dendritic cells and thus the production of CXCL13 itself [33] . CXCL13 causes a chronic intrathecal B-cell response sustaining the inflammatory process in the CNS. This chemokine also seems to have an important role in RRMS as higher levels have been detected in the CSF during relapse [34] . Furthermore, we have recently found that the CXCL13 CSF level is inversely correlated with the duration of disease in PPMS (unpublished data). In addition, PPMS patients have decreased mRNA levels of CXCR5 (the receptor for CXCL13), CCL5 (RANTES) and its receptor CCR3 in peripheral mononuclear blood cells (PMBCs) compared to RRMS patients, which might reflect the paucity of the inflammatory response[35], [36], and [37].

The clinical trial on rituximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody selectively depleting CD20 + B cells, showed that early treatment of PPMS delays in time to confirmed disease progression in younger patients who had gadolinium-enhancing lesions. These findings confirm that pharmacological depletion of B cells may be beneficial in a subgroup of PPMS patients with significant inflammatory activity [38] and [39]. Ocrelizumab is a fully humanized monoclonal antibody which compared to rituximab bind different but overlapping epitopes of CD20 molecule causing depletion of B lymphocytes. It will be interesting to see if PPMS patients will benefit from ocrelizumab treatment in the ongoing phase III study [40] .

5. Pathophysiological mechanisms of neurodegeneration

5.1. Axonal degeneration mechanisms

Neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation play a key role in pathomechanism of neuronal and axonal injury resulting in permanent neurological deficit in MS. In this process axonal injury is not restricted to demyelinating plaques in the white matter but it is also observed in normal appearing white and gray matter[9], [11], [41], and [42]. Many different immunological mechanisms may lead to axon injury including destruction by specific T-cells, activated microglia, invading macrophages, natural killer cells and auto-antibodies against specific antigens.

In immune-mediated mechanisms of axon damage during demyelination the dominant T lymphocytes within MS lesions are cytotoxic CD8 + T cells (CTLs) [43] . The recruitment of CTLs to lesion sites can undergo antigen-specific expansion and some clones of these cells may recognize and specifically injure axons due to major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I expression on neurons and axons. Activated macrophages and microglia produce a plethora of toxic molecules which induce axonal injury. Particularly reactive oxygen and nitric oxide radicals seem to be most important in neurodegeneration inducing mitochondrial dysfunction and subsequent energy failure that can end in axon death[44] and [45].

Diffuse tissue damage particularly affecting axons plays a major pathophysiological role in the progressive neurological disability seen in MS [46] . Lycke et al. [47] first explored neurofilament proteins as biomarkers of axonal degeneration. They found that CSF neurofilament light (NFL) levels were higher in patients who had suffered a relapse within three months of sampling, indicating a temporal correlation between acute inflammatory activity and neurodegeneration [48] . The presence of elevated intrathecal anti-NFM (neurofilament medium) IgM or IgG antibody levels is a general feature of MS regardless of clinical variables [49] ; however, high levels of NFL in the CSF reflect the degree of neuronal damage and are associated with a worse outcome in MS [50] . The level of intrathecal autoantibodies to NFL is higher in patients with progressive MS than those with RRMS [51] . In addition, CSF CXCL13 chemokine levels in progressive MS correlate significantly with NFL suggesting that neurodegeneration could be dependent on inflammation and humoral autoimmunity[52] and [53].

Imaging studies have revealed that atrophy of gray matter begins at an early stage in the MS course and can even precede white matter lesions [54] . New and active focal inflammatory lesions in the white matter are mainly present in RRMS, while diffuse axon injury of the normal appearing white matter and cortical demyelination are characteristic hallmarks in progressive MS. Additionally atrophy of the spinal cord and gray matter within the brain are more prominent in PPMS compared to RRMS[7] and [55]. Abovementioned differences indicate that the neurodegenerative process is dominant in progressive forms of MS.

5.2. Gangliosides

Gangliosides, a class of acidic glycosphingolipids, constitute an axonal antigen and are also minor constituents of myelin. The synthesis of pathogenic autoantibodies to gangliosides may cause an injury to neuronal tissue and induce a complex local immune process generating a lymphoid environment. Acarin and colleagues [56] found elevated serum antibodies against GM1, asialoGM1 and GD1a significantly more frequently in PPMS than in RRMS or SPMS. Sadatipour et al. [57] found that the percentage of subjects with an increased plasma anti-GM3 response was significantly higher in the PPMS (56.3%) and SPMS (42.9%) groups than in RRMS (2.9%), healthy subjects (2.6%) and subjects with other neurological diseases (14.6%). Stevens et al. found increased IgM antiGM3 antibodies in the CSF of patients with chronic progressive MS [58] . Increased T-cell reactivity to GM3 and GQ1b occurred significantly more often in patients with PPMS than in healthy subjects and patients with other CNS diseases. These findings suggest that ganglioside specific T-cells may contribute to the axonal damage in PPMS [59] .

It is unclear whether elevated antiganglioside antibodies are secondary to axonal damage or are a cause of neurodegeneration in MS [57] . An immune attack directed at axonal antigens could explain the progressive course of MS, as the capacity for CNS axonal regeneration is much more limited than the capacity for remyelination.

The pathophysiology of axonal injury in MS depends on the declining capacity for repair and ongoing gliosis. In addition, the progression in PPMS may be an age-dependent process modulated by an individual's genetic predisposition and environmental influences.

6. Conclusions

Noninflammatory mechanisms are postulated to be responsible for the progressive clinical disability, but little is known about the relationship between axonal degeneration and demyelination in multiple sclerosis. We hope that progress in understanding the immunological associations between inflammation and neurodegeneration will indicate novel therapeutic strategies to control the clinical disease course of PPMS form.

Conflict of interest and sources of funding statement

The authors have no financial conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We thank E. Kaufmann and M. Wójcicka for excellent technical assistance in our unpublished results.

References

  • [1] M. Bradl, H. Lassmann. Progressive multiple sclerosis. Semin Immunopathol. Nov 2009;31(4):455-465 [PubMed PMID: 19730864]
  • [2] A.J. Thompson, C.H. Polman, D.H. Miller, W.I. McDonald, B. Brochet, M.M.X. Filippi, et al. Primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain. Jun 1997;120(Pt 6):1085-1096 [PubMed PMID: 9217691]
  • [3] D.H. Miller, S.M. Leary. Primary-progressive multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. Oct 2007;6(10):903-912 [PubMed PMID: 17884680]
  • [4] C.H. Hawkes, G. Giovannoni. The McDonald Criteria for Multiple Sclerosis: time for clarification. Mult Scler. May 2010;16(5):566-575 [PubMed PMID: 20194583]
  • [5] D.A. Cottrell, M. Kremenchutzky, G.P. Rice, W.J. Koopman, W. Hader, J. Baskerville, et al. The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study. 5. The clinical features and natural history of primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain. Apr 1999;122(Pt 4):625-639 [PubMed PMID: 10219776]
  • [6] M. Koch, E. Kingwell, P. Rieckmann, H. Tremlett. The natural history of primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Neurology. Dec 8 2009;73(23):1996-2002 [PubMed PMID: 19996074]
  • [7] J. Antel, S. Antel, Z. Caramanos, D.L. Arnold, T. Kuhlmann. Primary progressive multiple sclerosis: part of the MS disease spectrum or separate disease entity?. Acta Neuropathol. May 2012;123(5):627-638 [PubMed PMID: 22327362]
  • [8] J. Francisco, M.F.F. Quintanaa, Vissia Vigliettaa, Antonio H. Iglesiasa, Yifat Merblb, Guillermo Izquierdoc, et al. 1. Antigen microarrays identify unique serum autoantibody signatures in clinical and pathologic subtypes of multiple sclerosis. (, 2008)
  • [9] H. Lassmann, W. Bruck, C.F. Lucchinetti. The immunopathology of multiple sclerosis: an overview. Brain Pathol. Apr 2007;17(2):210-218 [PubMed PMID: 17388952]
  • [10] I. Duran, E.M. Martinez-Caceres, J. Rio, N. Barbera, M.E. Marzo, X. Montalban. Immunological profile of patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Expression of adhesion molecules. Brain. Dec 1999;122(Pt 12):2297-2307 [PubMed PMID: 10581223]
  • [11] A. Kutzelnigg, J.C. Faber-Rod, J. Bauer, C.F. Lucchinetti, P.S. Sorensen, H. Laursen, et al. Widespread demyelination in the cerebellar cortex in multiple sclerosis. Brain Pathol. Jan 2007;17(1):38-44 [PubMed PMID: 17493036]
  • [12] S. Bramow, J.M. Frischer, H. Lassmann, N. Koch-Henriksen, C.F. Lucchinetti, P.S. Sorensen, et al. Demyelination versus remyelination in progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain. Oct 2010;133(10):2983-2998 [PubMed PMID: 20855416]
  • [13] G. Giovannoni, J.W. Thorpe, D. Kidd, B.E. Kendall, I.F. Moseley, A.J. Thompson, et al. Soluble E-selectin in multiple sclerosis: raised concentrations in patients with primary progressive disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Jan 1996;60(1):20-26 [PubMed PMID: 8558145. Pubmed Central PMCID: 486184]
  • [14] G.V. McDonnell, S.A. McMillan, J.P. Douglas, A.G. Droogan, S.A. Hawkins. Serum soluble adhesion molecules in multiple sclerosis: raised sVCAM-1, sICAM-1 and sE-selectin in primary progressive disease. J Neurol. Feb 1999;246(2):87-92 [PubMed PMID: 10195402]
  • [15] M. Ukkonen, K. Wu, B. Reipert, P. Dastidar, I. Elovaara. Cell surface adhesion molecules and cytokine profiles in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. Jul 2007;13(6):701-707 [PubMed PMID: 17613596]
  • [16] S.M. Leary, A.J. Thompson. Interferon beta-1a in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci. Feb 15 2003;206(2):215-216 [PubMed PMID: 12559514]
  • [17] M.S. Freedman, C. Metzig, L. Kappos, C.H. Polman, G. Edan, H.P. Hartung, et al. Predictive nature of IgM anti-alpha-glucose serum biomarker for relapse activity and EDSS progression in CIS patients: a BENEFIT study analysis. Mult Scler. Jul 2012;18(7):966-973 [PubMed PMID: 22183938. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3546632]
  • [18] M. Schwarz, L. Spector, M. Gortler, O. Weisshaus, L. Glass-Marmor, A. Karni, et al. Serum anti-Glc(alpha1,4)Glc(alpha) antibodies as a biomarker for relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci. May 15 2006;244(1-2):59-68 [PubMed PMID: 16480743]
  • [19] M.S. Freedman, J. Laks, N. Dotan, R.T. Altstock, A. Dukler, C.J. Sindic. Anti-alpha-glucose-based glycan IgM antibodies predict relapse activity in multiple sclerosis after the first neurological event. Mult Scler. Apr 2009;15(4):422-430 [PubMed PMID: 19324980. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2850589]
  • [20] C.J. Binder, P.X. Shaw, M.K. Chang, A. Boullier, K. Hartvigsen, S. Horkko, et al. The role of natural antibodies in atherogenesis. J Lipid Res. Jul 2005;46(7):1353-1363 [PubMed PMID: 15897601]
  • [21] J. Brettschneider, T.D. Jaskowski, H. Tumani, S. Abdul, D. Husebye, H. Seraj, et al. Serum anti-GAGA4 IgM antibodies differentiate relapsing remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis from primary progressive multiple sclerosis and other neurological diseases. J Neuroimmunol. Dec 10 2009;217(1-2):95-101 [PubMed PMID: 19879655]
  • [22] E.C. Vamvakas, A.A. Pineda, B.G. Weinshenker. Meta-analysis of clinical studies of the efficacy of plasma exchange in the treatment of chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. J Clin Apher. 1995;10(4):163-170 [PubMed PMID: 8770707] Crossref
  • [23] D. Poehlau, J. Federlein, T. Postert, M. Sailer, F. Bethke, L. Kappos, et al. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) treatment for patients with primary or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis — outline of a double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Mult Scler. Apr 1997;3(2):149-152 [PubMed PMID: 9291171]
  • [24] N. Pigard, I. Elovaara, H. Kuusisto, R. Paalavuo, P. Dastidar, K. Zimmermann, et al. Therapeutic activities of intravenous immunoglobulins in multiple sclerosis involve modulation of chemokine expression. J Neuroimmunol. Apr 30 2009;209(1-2):114-120 [PubMed PMID: 19217671]
  • [25] A.R. Rodriguez Orozco. Intravenous immunoglobulin and mitoxantrone stop the progression of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis in a patient with interferon intolerance. Rev Alerg Mex. May-Jun 2004;51(3):124-126 [PubMed PMID: 15314844]
  • [26] A. Uccelli, E. Capello, D. Fenoglio, M. Incagliato, M. Valbonesi, G.L. Mancardi. Intravenous immunoglobulin, plasmalymphocytapheresis and azathioprine in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Ital J Neurol Sci. Feb 1994;15(1):51-53 [PubMed PMID: 8206747]
  • [27] A.H. Cross, R.S. Klein, L. Piccio. Rituximab combination therapy in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. Nov 2012;5(6):311-319 [PubMed PMID: 23139702. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3487534]
  • [28] N.L. Monson, P.D. Cravens, E.M. Frohman, K. Hawker, M.K. Racke. Effect of rituximab on the peripheral blood and cerebrospinal fluid B cells in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol. Feb 2005;62(2):258-264 [PubMed PMID: 15710854]
  • [29] L. Piccio, R.T. Naismith, K. Trinkaus, R.S. Klein, B.J. Parks, J.A. Lyons, et al. Changes in B- and T-lymphocyte and chemokine levels with rituximab treatment in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol. Jun 2010;67(6):707-714 [PubMed PMID: 20558389. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2918395]
  • [30] P.S. Rommer, R. Patejdl, A. Winkelmann, R. Benecke, U.K. Zettl. Rituximab for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: a case series. CNS Drugs. Jul 2011;25(7):607-613 [PubMed PMID: 21699272]
  • [31] B.O. Khatri, M.P. McQuillen, R.G. Hoffmann, G.J. Harrington, D. Schmoll. Plasma exchange in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis: a long-term study. Neurology. Mar 1991;41(3):409-414 [PubMed PMID: 2006010]
  • [32] R. Magliozzi, O. Howell, A. Vora, B. Serafini, R. Nicholas, M. Puopolo, et al. Meningeal B-cell follicles in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis associate with early onset of disease and severe cortical pathology. Brain. Apr 2007;130(Pt 4):1089-1104 [PubMed PMID: 17438020]
  • [33] M. Krumbholz, D. Theil, S. Cepok, B. Hemmer, P. Kivisakk, R.M. Ransohoff, et al. Chemokines in multiple sclerosis: CXCL12 and CXCL13 up-regulation is differentially linked to CNS immune cell recruitment. Brain. Jan 2006;129(Pt 1):200-211 [PubMed PMID: 16280350]
  • [34] S. Ragheb, Y. Li, K. Simon, S. VanHaerents, D. Galimberti, M. De Riz, et al. Multiple sclerosis: BAFF and CXCL13 in cerebrospinal fluid. Mult Scler. Jul 2011;17(7):819-829 [PubMed PMID: 21372118]
  • [35] R. Furlan, M. Rovaris, F. Martinelli Boneschi, M. Khademi, A. Bergami, M. Gironi, et al. Immunological patterns identifying disease course and evolution in multiple sclerosis patients. J Neuroimmunol. Aug 2005;165(1-2):192-200 [PubMed PMID: 15949850]
  • [36] T. Revesz, D. Kidd, A.J. Thompson, R.O. Barnard, W.I. McDonald. A comparison of the pathology of primary and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain. Aug 1994;117(Pt 4):759-765 [PubMed PMID: 7922463]
  • [37] D.M. Muller, M.P. Pender, J.M. Greer. Chemokines and chemokine receptors: potential therapeutic targets in multiple sclerosis. Curr Drug Targets Inflamm Allergy. Sep 2004;3(3):279-290 [PubMed PMID: 15379596]
  • [38] K. Hawker, P. O'Connor, M.S. Freedman, P.A. Calabresi, J. Antel, J. Simon, et al. Rituximab in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis: results of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled multicenter trial. Ann Neurol. Oct 2009;66(4):460-471 [PubMed PMID: 19847908]
  • [39] O. Kantarci. Treatment of primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Semin Neurol. Feb 2013;33(1):74-78 [PubMed PMID: 23709215]
  • [40] H. Gensicke, D. Leppert, O. Yaldizli, R.L. Lindberg, M. Mehling, L. Kappos, et al. Monoclonal antibodies and recombinant immunoglobulins for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. CNS Drugs. Jan 1 2012;26(1):11-37 [PubMed PMID: 22171583]
  • [41] H. Lassmann. Axonal injury in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Jun 2003;74(6):695-697 [PubMed PMID: 12754330. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1738488]
  • [42] H. Lassmann. New concepts on progressive multiple sclerosis. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. May 2007;7(3):239-244 [PubMed PMID: 17488590]
  • [43] J. Booss, M.M. Esiri, W.W. Tourtellotte, D.Y. Mason. Immunohistological analysis of T lymphocyte subsets in the central nervous system in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci. Dec 1983;62(1-3):219-232 [PubMed PMID: 6607973]
  • [44] I. Nikic, D. Merkler, C. Sorbara, M. Brinkoetter, M. Kreutzfeldt, F.M. Bareyre, et al. A reversible form of axon damage in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis and multiple sclerosis. Nat Med. Apr 2011;17(4):495-499 [PubMed PMID: 21441916]
  • [45] D. Mahad, H. Lassmann, D. Turnbull. Review: mitochondria and disease progression in multiple sclerosis. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. Dec 2008;34(6):577-589 [PubMed PMID: 19076696. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2981078]
  • [46] C.M. Rice, D. Cottrell, A. Wilkins, N.J. Scolding. Primary progressive multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Feb 2013;16 [PubMed PMID: 23418213]
  • [47] J.N. Lycke, J.E. Karlsson, O. Andersen, L.E. Rosengren. Neurofilament protein in cerebrospinal fluid: a potential marker of activity in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Mar 1998;64(3):402-404 [PubMed PMID: 9527161. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2170011]
  • [48] M.M. Gresle, H. Butzkueven, G. Shaw. Neurofilament proteins as body fluid biomarkers of neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Int. 2011;2011:315406 [PubMed PMID: 22096635. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3195785]
  • [49] N. Norgren, L. Rosengren, T. Stigbrand. Elevated neurofilament levels in neurological diseases. Brain Res. Oct 10 2003;987(1):25-31 [PubMed PMID: 14499942]
  • [50] J. Salzer, A. Svenningsson, P. Sundstrom. Neurofilament light as a prognostic marker in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. Mar 2010;16(3):287-292 [PubMed PMID: 20086018]
  • [51] C.E. Teunissen, C. Dijkstra, C. Polman. Biological markers in CSF and blood for axonal degeneration in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. Jan 2005;4(1):32-41 [PubMed PMID: 15620855]
  • [52] J. Romme Christensen, L. Bornsen, M. Khademi, T. Olsson, P.E. Jensen, P.S. Sorensen, et al. CSF inflammation and axonal damage are increased and correlate in progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. Nov 2012;24 [PubMed PMID: 23178691]
  • [53] B. Serafini, B. Rosicarelli, R. Magliozzi, E. Stigliano, F. Aloisi. Detection of ectopic B-cell follicles with germinal centers in the meninges of patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain Pathol. Apr 2004;14(2):164-174 [PubMed PMID: 15193029]
  • [54] C.M. Dalton, P.A. Brex, R. Jenkins, N.C. Fox, K.A. Miszkiel, W.R. Crum, et al. Progressive ventricular enlargement in patients with clinically isolated syndromes is associated with the early development of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Aug 2002;73(2):141-147 [PubMed PMID: 12122170. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1737988]
  • [55] M. Bieniek, D.R. Altmann, G.R. Davies, G.T. Ingle, W. Rashid, J. Sastre-Garriga, et al. Cord atrophy separates early primary progressive and relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Sep 2006;77(9):1036-1039 [PubMed PMID: 16793860. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2077733]
  • [56] N. Acarin, J. Rio, A.L. Fernandez, M. Tintore, I. Duran, I. Galan, et al. Different antiganglioside antibody pattern between relapsing–remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand. Feb-Mar 1996;93(2-3):99-103 [PubMed PMID: 8741126]
  • [57] B.T. Sadatipour, J.M. Greer, M.P. Pender. Increased circulating antiganglioside antibodies in primary and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. Dec 1998;44(6):980-983 [PubMed PMID: 9851447]
  • [58] A. Stevens, M. Weller, H. Wietholter. CSF and serum ganglioside antibody patterns in MS. Acta Neurol Scand. Nov 1992;86(5):485-489 [PubMed PMID: 1481629]
  • [59] M.P. Pender, P.A. Csurhes, N.P. Wolfe, K.D. Hooper, M.F. Good, P.A. McCombe, et al. Increased circulating T cell reactivity to GM3 and GQ1b gangliosides in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. J Clin Neurosci. Jan 2003;10(1):63-66 [PubMed PMID: 12464524]

Footnotes

a Department of Neurology, Poznan University School of Medicine, Poland

b Department of Clinical Neuroimmunology, Poznan University School of Medicine, Poland

c Neuroimmunological Unit, Medical Research Center of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan, Poland

lowast Corresponding author at: Department of Clinical Neuroimmunology, Poznan University School of Medicine, Poznan Przybyszewskiego 49, Poland. Tel.: + 48 61 8691535.


Search this site

Stay up-to-date with our monthly e-alert

If you want to regularly receive information on what is happening in MS research sign up to our e-alert.

Subscribe »

About the Editors

  • Prof Timothy Vartanian

    Timothy Vartanian, Professor at the Brain and Mind Research Institute and the Department of Neurology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell...
  • Dr Claire S. Riley

    Claire S. Riley, MD is an assistant attending neurologist and assistant professor of neurology in the Neurological Institute, Columbia University,...
  • Dr Rebecca Farber

    Rebecca Farber, MD is an attending neurologist and assistant professor of neurology at the Neurological Institute, Columbia University, in New...

This online Resource Centre has been made possible by a donation from EMD Serono, Inc., a business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Note that EMD Serono, Inc., has no editorial control or influence over the content of this Resource Centre. The Resource Centre and all content therein are subject to an independent editorial review.

The Grant for Multiple Sclerosis Innovation
supports promising translational research projects by academic researchers to improve understanding of multiple sclerosis (MS) for the ultimate benefit of patients.  For full information and application details, please click here

Journal Editor's choice

Recommended by Prof. Brenda Banwell

Causes of death among persons with multiple sclerosis

Gary R. Cutter, Jeffrey Zimmerman, Amber R. Salter, et al.

Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, September 2015, Vol 4 Issue 5