Abstract
The underlying mechanisms for neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis are complex and incompletely understood. Multivariate and multimodal investigations integrating demographic, clinical, multi-omics, and neuroimaging data provide opportunities for nuanced analyses, aimed to define disease progression markers. We used data from a 12-year longitudinal cohort of 88 people with multiple sclerosis, to test the predictive value of multi-omics, MRI, clinical examinations, self-reports on quality of life, demographics, and general health-related variables for future functional and cognitive disability. Progressive functional loss beyond an Expanded Disability Status Scale score≥4 was used to define a functional loss group. A cognitive decline group was defined by a ≥25% decrease from the maximum (cognitive) Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test score. We used a multiverse approach to identify which baseline variables were most predictive for functional and cognitive loss group memberships, independent of analysis bias.
We identified several factors predicting an increased risk of future functional loss (FLG) and cognitive decline groups (CDG) within the next 12 years from baseline: functional score (0-10, median Odds Ratio per baseline unit increase [mORFLG=2.15±0.51; mORCDG=2.46±1.60]), cognitive scores (1-60 [mORFLG=0.98±0.03; mORCDG=0.91±0.06]), the number of previous relapses [mORFLG=1.56±0.26; mORCDG=1.44±0.60], serum vitamin A levels (umol/l [mORFLG=0.92±0.06; mORCDG=0.33±0.36]), self-reported mental health (1-100 [mORFLG=0.96±0.02; mORCDG=0.91±0.09]) and physical functioning (1-100 [mORFLG=0.99±0.01; mORCDG=0.97±0.03]). Our results suggest that clinical assessment of physical function and cognition, self-reported mental health, and potentially vitamin A levels are the best predictors for risk-group stratifications of people with MS at baseline. While these findings are promising, we also want to underscore the observed analysis-choice induced variability which necessitates both an increase in transparency when reporting study findings as well as strategies which are robust to the many researcher degrees of freedom.
Competing Interest Statement
OAA has received a speaker's honorarium from Lundbeck, Janssen, Otsuka and Lilly, and is a consultant to Coretechs.ai and Precision Health. LTW is a minor shareholder of baba.vision. KMM has served on scientific advisory board for Alexion, received speaker honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi, and has participated in clinical trials organized by Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Otivio, Roche and Sanofi. EAH received honoraria for advisory board activity from Sanofi-Genzyme, and his department has received honoraria for lecturing from Biogen and Merck. OT received speaker honoraria from and served on scientific advisory boards of Biogen, Sanofi-Aventis, Merck, and Novartis, and has participated in clinical trials organized by Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi. The remaining authors declare no other competing interests.
Funding Statement
This project was funded by the Norwegian MS-union (no reference). Model training was performed on the Service for Sensitive Data (TSD) platform, owned by the University of Oslo, operated and developed by the TSD service group at the University of Oslo IT-Department (USIT). Computations were performed using resources provided by UNINETT Sigma2 (#NS9666S) - the National Infrastructure for High Performance Computing and Data Storage in Norway, supported by the Norwegian Research Council (#223273).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Norwegian Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK, 814351). The OFAMS-study and the 10-year follow-up were previously approved by REK (2016/1906) and registered as clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00360906). Ethical approval for the different brain age training datasets was obtained (REK 567301, PVO 17/21624), as well as for the longitudinal validation set (Bergen Breakfast Scanning Club, REK 238310), and the cross-sectional MS data (REK 2011/1846, REK 2016/102). All participants gave their written informed consent according to the Declaration of Helsinki.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Brain age model training data are available from the respective websites of the databases either openly or after application (see supplemental material). The main study data (OFAMS data) can be shared after receiving a new ethics approval upon reasonable request to the authors. Brain age models and analysis code are freely available at https://github.com/MaxKorbmacher/OFAMS_Brain_Age.
