Aa
CIS - THE CLINICALLY ISOLATED SYNDROME
CIS - the Clinically Isolated Syndrome
WHAT IS IT AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
With the growing evidence that the Disease Modifying Drugs are most useful in treating MS when they are used early in the course of the disease, there has been a flurry of research into what indications there might be to determine who is most at risk to develop Multiple Sclerosis. Ideally we would like to be able to identify who really is at risk for MS when a patient shows up with suggestive symptoms. The best way would be to have a blood test, that only MS patients had, but no one else had. This would be called a "biomarker". Unfortunately, despite intensive research, no suitable biomarker has yet been indentified. We are left with trying to predict which patients who have early signs "suggestive of MS" will convert into "definite MS".
Since RRMS (by far the most common kind) is characterized by symptoms and problems that occur in repeated attacks (Dissemination in Time) and by symptoms and problems that occur in different parts of the Central Nervous System, CNS (Dissemination in Space), our best bet is to look at those people who have only had their first attack. This is a situation called a "Clinically Isolated Syndrome". Waiting for a second attack may take many months or even many years. We know from studies over the last 15 years that early treatment can help delay someone from having that second attack and getting those additional symptoms and problems that would make up the picture of full-blown MS? How do we know which people with a CIS are most likely to "convert" from suspected MS to Definite MS? Where can we look to make the best judgment so we can start treatment to prevent or substantially delay this conversion.
The diagnosis of MS requires that we find evidence that the disease has "acted up" on more than one occasion, more than 4 weeks apart. This is called "Dissemination in Time". This is what is missing in the person with CIS. They have only had one attack. This means that without further information we cannot make a diagnosis of MS. The McDonald Criteria allows us to look at the MRI and, over time, find evidence that there is another attack on the central nervous system. But, we want to predict as early as possible so we can treat and the MRI often does not yield enough information. This is where the study data on CIS plays a role in predicting who will convert to MS.
Over the recent years, doctors and patients have used the term CIS to mean a variety of things - so much so that it has become a confusing term. I found an comprehensive article published in the journal, Multiple Sclerosis, in 2008. (Mulitple Sclerosis 2008; 14: 1157-1174) The method to explore this topic was to bring together 18 experts in the MS field from all over the world into a task force. They met and worked on this in 2007. They worked together to formulate some recommendations for the analysis and work up of a patient with CIS. This group included some of the most well-known names in the field. This was needed because the McDonlad Criteria - has not been the thorough diagnostic aid that some had hoped. In fact, the Criteria have been most useful in "predicting" which patients who did not fulfill all the clinical requirements - of spread of the disease in time and space - were most likely to develop MS rather than being useful in "diagnosing people with MS." In fact, many neurologists have misinterpreted the McDonald Criteria and misused it, as we have discussed so many times in the forum.
THE DEFINITION OF CIS
The task force felt that there were actually several "subtypes" or classes of CIS that had confused practitioners and that might have caused too much variability when they were lumped together in studies. So, they proposed the following groups so that neurologists would have a clearer approach to diagnosis.
First they decided that the term CIS should ONLY refer to the patient that had one, single attack of symptoms and signs that suggested an underlying inflammatory, demyelinating disease. In general, this referred to the appearance of one or more symptoms which appeared fairly suddenly - over hours or days to maybe a week. They defined the classes of CIS based on whether this first attack involved only one symptom, called "monofocal", such as an attack of optic neuritis without any other symptoms, whether there were two or more symptoms, called multifocal, like facial numbness and weakness of a limb, and whether there was associated MRI features consistent with demyelination. They included one scenario, though, that had previously been ignored. This was the patient who had no symptoms, or just very non-specific symptoms (like dizziness or headache), but somehow had MRI lesions found that suggested evidence of multifocal disease of a demyelinating type. This means those people who have MRIs done for some other reason than looking for MS, like as a work up for headaches or after a head injury.
The Classes of CIS
First some definitions:
Mono = one
Focal = spot, place (monofocal - just one spot)
Multi = more than one (multifocal - more than one spot)
I CIS - clinically monofocal, at least one asymptomatic MRI lesion. This person has had one attack and has only one symptom suggestive of a demyelinating lesion in the CNS (for example hypereactive reflexes in one limb). However, they also have at least one lesion on the MRI for which there is no correlating symptom. That MRI lesion should be consistent with MS.
II CIS - clinically multifocal, at least one asymptomatic MRI lesion. This patient had had just one attack, but has indications that there are more than one demyelinating lesion in the CNS. An example of this might be optic neuritis and L'Hermitte's Sign. On the MRI there should be at least one lesion that doesn't have a corresponding lesion, ie. at least one asymptomatic MRI lesion. The MRI lesion(s) should be consistent with MS or demyelination.
III CIS - clinically monofocal, MRI may appear normal; no asymptomatic MRI lesions This patient has had just the one appearance of a single symptom, like pain on eye movement with visual disturbance, and their MRI is normal; there is no asymptomatic MRI lesion. Approximately one third (1/3) of all patients with CIS will have a normal baseline MRI.
IV CIS - clinically multipfocal, MRI may appear normal; no asymptomatic MRI lesions This patient has more than one symptom, for example facial numbness and a urinary urgency of a neurolgical type. The task group deems this a "rare" occurrence, but the article does not elaborate, stating that they believe this is a rare occurence.
V CIS - no clinical presentation (no attack) to suggest demyelinating disease, but MRI is suggestive. An MRI done for some other reason happens to show multiple lesions that are suggestive of demyelination. But the patient has had no symptoms OR they have had very non-specific symptoms like fatigue, headaches or dizziness.
con't below
WHAT IS IT AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
With the growing evidence that the Disease Modifying Drugs are most useful in treating MS when they are used early in the course of the disease, there has been a flurry of research into what indications there might be to determine who is most at risk to develop Multiple Sclerosis. Ideally we would like to be able to identify who really is at risk for MS when a patient shows up with suggestive symptoms. The best way would be to have a blood test, that only MS patients had, but no one else had. This would be called a "biomarker". Unfortunately, despite intensive research, no suitable biomarker has yet been indentified. We are left with trying to predict which patients who have early signs "suggestive of MS" will convert into "definite MS".
Since RRMS (by far the most common kind) is characterized by symptoms and problems that occur in repeated attacks (Dissemination in Time) and by symptoms and problems that occur in different parts of the Central Nervous System, CNS (Dissemination in Space), our best bet is to look at those people who have only had their first attack. This is a situation called a "Clinically Isolated Syndrome". Waiting for a second attack may take many months or even many years. We know from studies over the last 15 years that early treatment can help delay someone from having that second attack and getting those additional symptoms and problems that would make up the picture of full-blown MS? How do we know which people with a CIS are most likely to "convert" from suspected MS to Definite MS? Where can we look to make the best judgment so we can start treatment to prevent or substantially delay this conversion.
The diagnosis of MS requires that we find evidence that the disease has "acted up" on more than one occasion, more than 4 weeks apart. This is called "Dissemination in Time". This is what is missing in the person with CIS. They have only had one attack. This means that without further information we cannot make a diagnosis of MS. The McDonald Criteria allows us to look at the MRI and, over time, find evidence that there is another attack on the central nervous system. But, we want to predict as early as possible so we can treat and the MRI often does not yield enough information. This is where the study data on CIS plays a role in predicting who will convert to MS.
Over the recent years, doctors and patients have used the term CIS to mean a variety of things - so much so that it has become a confusing term. I found an comprehensive article published in the journal, Multiple Sclerosis, in 2008. (Mulitple Sclerosis 2008; 14: 1157-1174) The method to explore this topic was to bring together 18 experts in the MS field from all over the world into a task force. They met and worked on this in 2007. They worked together to formulate some recommendations for the analysis and work up of a patient with CIS. This group included some of the most well-known names in the field. This was needed because the McDonlad Criteria - has not been the thorough diagnostic aid that some had hoped. In fact, the Criteria have been most useful in "predicting" which patients who did not fulfill all the clinical requirements - of spread of the disease in time and space - were most likely to develop MS rather than being useful in "diagnosing people with MS." In fact, many neurologists have misinterpreted the McDonald Criteria and misused it, as we have discussed so many times in the forum.
THE DEFINITION OF CIS
The task force felt that there were actually several "subtypes" or classes of CIS that had confused practitioners and that might have caused too much variability when they were lumped together in studies. So, they proposed the following groups so that neurologists would have a clearer approach to diagnosis.
First they decided that the term CIS should ONLY refer to the patient that had one, single attack of symptoms and signs that suggested an underlying inflammatory, demyelinating disease. In general, this referred to the appearance of one or more symptoms which appeared fairly suddenly - over hours or days to maybe a week. They defined the classes of CIS based on whether this first attack involved only one symptom, called "monofocal", such as an attack of optic neuritis without any other symptoms, whether there were two or more symptoms, called multifocal, like facial numbness and weakness of a limb, and whether there was associated MRI features consistent with demyelination. They included one scenario, though, that had previously been ignored. This was the patient who had no symptoms, or just very non-specific symptoms (like dizziness or headache), but somehow had MRI lesions found that suggested evidence of multifocal disease of a demyelinating type. This means those people who have MRIs done for some other reason than looking for MS, like as a work up for headaches or after a head injury.
The Classes of CIS
First some definitions:
Mono = one
Focal = spot, place (monofocal - just one spot)
Multi = more than one (multifocal - more than one spot)
I CIS - clinically monofocal, at least one asymptomatic MRI lesion. This person has had one attack and has only one symptom suggestive of a demyelinating lesion in the CNS (for example hypereactive reflexes in one limb). However, they also have at least one lesion on the MRI for which there is no correlating symptom. That MRI lesion should be consistent with MS.
II CIS - clinically multifocal, at least one asymptomatic MRI lesion. This patient had had just one attack, but has indications that there are more than one demyelinating lesion in the CNS. An example of this might be optic neuritis and L'Hermitte's Sign. On the MRI there should be at least one lesion that doesn't have a corresponding lesion, ie. at least one asymptomatic MRI lesion. The MRI lesion(s) should be consistent with MS or demyelination.
III CIS - clinically monofocal, MRI may appear normal; no asymptomatic MRI lesions This patient has had just the one appearance of a single symptom, like pain on eye movement with visual disturbance, and their MRI is normal; there is no asymptomatic MRI lesion. Approximately one third (1/3) of all patients with CIS will have a normal baseline MRI.
IV CIS - clinically multipfocal, MRI may appear normal; no asymptomatic MRI lesions This patient has more than one symptom, for example facial numbness and a urinary urgency of a neurolgical type. The task group deems this a "rare" occurrence, but the article does not elaborate, stating that they believe this is a rare occurence.
V CIS - no clinical presentation (no attack) to suggest demyelinating disease, but MRI is suggestive. An MRI done for some other reason happens to show multiple lesions that are suggestive of demyelination. But the patient has had no symptoms OR they have had very non-specific symptoms like fatigue, headaches or dizziness.
con't below
Thanks for the information... I have to admit with the cognative issues I have I could not tell you any of what I read :) But... I do remember thinking what a great bunch of information as I was reading it. Thank you for all the time and effort you put into educating us. I haven't been on in a long time but as weather gets colder and my parents head south I will engage more and more. Stay well and Thank you again for all you time and hard work :)
Debbie
~live as if all your dreams came true~
Debbie
~live as if all your dreams came true~
HI all,
I read every bit of this article and found it really interesting even though most of it has whooshed over my head now and I cannot remember the specifics.
What I would be interested in knowing is the size of lesions over time. Let us say for example someone had a CIS 8 to 10 years ago how big would their lesion be on their MRI today? Are we talking tiny or bigger? Or is this one of those things which is different for every person?
I read every bit of this article and found it really interesting even though most of it has whooshed over my head now and I cannot remember the specifics.
What I would be interested in knowing is the size of lesions over time. Let us say for example someone had a CIS 8 to 10 years ago how big would their lesion be on their MRI today? Are we talking tiny or bigger? Or is this one of those things which is different for every person?
I have 8 brain lesions and 1 spinal lesion. I started with headache and ear pain. Now I still have daily headache 6mths later. Vibrating in my hip, Hip pain, Numb heel, Weakness on my right side. Neuritis in my left eye 3 times in as many months, Dizziness, Fatigue, My feet feel as if they are being crushed when standing. It stinks but I know alot of people have it worse than me so I should not complain. I appreciate all the knowledge you give us. I want you for my neuro;-)
Quix
This is a great article. Thanks very much for taking the time and effort to explain all this.
I'm feeling really sad though. Most of my sx, if not all, are in the criteria and lists. With multiple episodes over many years. You could say I've had chronic CIS! LOL Sx are, of course, progressing.
All but a couple of doctors have ever taken my sx seriously. Tests have been grudgingly done - mostly the wrong ones (like, substituting a chest xray for a planned lumbar puncture when there are absolutely no indications of thoracic disease and multiple cns sx!). Most docs have dismissed, some have been downright rude.
It took a new, young female doc to insist on xrays/scans. The first of which has shown...as I knew all along...significant vertebral disease with other 'abnormalities that indicate need for further scans (always a bit concerning when radiological reports are terse and hastily refer you for more scans in capital letters!!).
My point is that my sx haven't demoralised me, they need not have disabled me. What has totally demoralised and disabled me is the arrogant, dismissive attitude of doctors.
But this is general in the UK, I think they are taught at med school that F pts are nasty, mysterious creatures who spend their whole lives ruminating on getting some disease or other so they deserve nothing but the worst!
Hugs
sammxx
This is a great article. Thanks very much for taking the time and effort to explain all this.
I'm feeling really sad though. Most of my sx, if not all, are in the criteria and lists. With multiple episodes over many years. You could say I've had chronic CIS! LOL Sx are, of course, progressing.
All but a couple of doctors have ever taken my sx seriously. Tests have been grudgingly done - mostly the wrong ones (like, substituting a chest xray for a planned lumbar puncture when there are absolutely no indications of thoracic disease and multiple cns sx!). Most docs have dismissed, some have been downright rude.
It took a new, young female doc to insist on xrays/scans. The first of which has shown...as I knew all along...significant vertebral disease with other 'abnormalities that indicate need for further scans (always a bit concerning when radiological reports are terse and hastily refer you for more scans in capital letters!!).
My point is that my sx haven't demoralised me, they need not have disabled me. What has totally demoralised and disabled me is the arrogant, dismissive attitude of doctors.
But this is general in the UK, I think they are taught at med school that F pts are nasty, mysterious creatures who spend their whole lives ruminating on getting some disease or other so they deserve nothing but the worst!
Hugs
sammxx
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Multiple Sclerosis Community
Top Neurology Answerers
Australia
ON
Queensland, Australia
Queen Creek, AZ
Find out how beta-blocker eye drops show promising results for acute migraine relief.
In this special Missouri Medicine report, doctors examine advances in diagnosis and treatment of this devastating and costly neurodegenerative disease.
Here are 12 simple – and fun! – ways to boost your brainpower.
Discover some of the causes of dizziness and how to treat it.
Discover the common causes of headaches and how to treat headache pain.
Two of the largest studies on Alzheimer’s have yielded new clues about the disease
