MosMedReg Subtraction Software effectiveness in Multiple Sclerosis Diagnosis Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the automated MosMedReg software for subtraction analysis of longitudinal brain MRI in patients with multiple sclerosis in a routine outpatient setting. The study included 30 paired MRI examinations performed on 1.5 T scanners from different manufacturers using T2, FLAIR, and contrast-enhanced T1 sequences with variable slice thicknesses. Image processing was performed using registration and subtraction algorithms based on the SimpleElastix library. Images were assessed manually by an expert and with the assistance of the software; results were evaluated using clinical and technical scoring systems.

The software provided successful registration and subtraction in all cases, including series different in slice thickness and projections. The average number of newly identified lesions using MosMedReg did not differ from expert assessment (p = 0.25); however, in several cases, subtraction enabled the detection of clinically significant changes that were not observed in standard analysis. False-positive findings associated with technical artifacts due to scan parameter mismatches were also noted.

The results confirm the reproducibility and practical applicability of subtraction analysis with MosMedReg for improving the objectivity and standardization of multiple sclerosis diagnosis in outpatient practice.

1. Coutinho Costa VG, Arau´ jo SE-S, Alves-Leon SV and Gomes FCA (2023) Central nervous system demyelinating diseases: glial cells at the hub of pathology. Front. Immunol. 14: 1135540. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1135540.

2. Zakharova MN. Rasseyannyi skleroz: voprosy diagnostiki i lecheniya. Prakticheskoe rukovodstvo dlya vrachey. Moscow: Media Mente; 2018. 240 p. (In Russ.)

3. Emilio P, Melinda M, Eva KH, et al. Multiple sclerosis: emerging epidemiological trends and redefining the clinical course, The Lancet Regional Health Europe. 2024; 44: 100977. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100977.

4. Walton C, King R, Rechtman L, et al. Rising prevalence of multiple sclerosis worldwide: Insights from the Atlas of MS, third edition. Mult Scler. 2020 Dec; 26(14): 1816-1821. doi: 10.1177/1352458520970841.

5. Rocca, Maria A, et al. Current and future role of MRI in the diagnosis and prognosis of multiple sclerosis. The Lancet Regional Health — Europe. 2024; 44: 100978. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100978.

6. Klinicheskie rekomendatsii "Rasseyannyy skleroz" (po itogam obsuzhdeniya na 5-m Kongresse ROKIRS, g. Ufa, 30.09.2023 i na Prezidiume VON 25.12.2024). 2024. Available at: https://disk.yandex.ru/i/0vzicLGjK2wXBQ (accessed 17.06.2025). (In Russ.)

7. Zürrer WE, Cannon AE, Ilchenko D, et al. Misdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2024; 30(11-12): 1409-1422. doi: 10.1177/13524585241274527.

8. Lee JK, Bermel R, Bullen J, et al. Structured reporting in multiple sclerosis reduces interpretation time. Academic Radiology. 2021; 28(12): 1733-1738. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2020.08.006.

9. Schlaeger S, Shit S, Eichinger P, et al. AI-based detection of contrast-enhancing MRI lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis. Insights Imaging. 2023; 14: 123. doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01460-3.

10. Barnett M, Wang D, Beadnall H, et al. A real-world clinical validation for AI-based MRI monitoring in multiple sclerosis. npj Digital Medicine. 2023; 6: 196. doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00940-6.

11. Eichinger P, Schön S, Pongratz V, et al. Accuracy of unenhanced MRI in the detection of new brain lesions in multiple sclerosis. Radiology. 2019; 291(2): 429-435. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019181568.

12. Sweeney EM, Shinohara RT, Shea CD, et al. Automatic lesion incidence estimation and detection in multiple sclerosis using multisequence longitudinal MRI. AJNR American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2013; 34(1): 68-73. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3172.

13. Homssi M, Sweeney EM, Demmon E, et al. Evaluation of the statistical detection of change algorithm for screening patients with MS with new lesion activity on longitudinal brain MRI. AJNR American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2023; 44(6): 649-655. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A7858.

14. Rovira À, Wattjes M, Tintoré M, et al. MAGNIMS consensus guidelines on the use of MRI in multiple sclerosis—clinical implementation in the diagnostic process. Nature Reviews Neurology. 2015; 11: 471-482. doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.106.

15. Vasil'ev YuA, Petryaykin AV, Kuligovskiy DV, et al. Programma dlya obnaruzheniya likvorei po dannym komp'yuternoy tomografii golovnogo mozga. Certificate of state registration of computer program №2023669002. 2023. (In Russ.)

16. Duan Y, et al. Segmentation of subtraction images for the measurement of lesion change in multiple sclerosis. AJNR American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2008; 29(2): 340-346. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A0795.

17. Billot B, et al. SynthSeg: Segmentation of brain MRI scans of any contrast and resolution without retraining. Medical Image Analysis. 2023; 86: 102789. doi: 10.1016/j.media.2023.102789.

18. Meijer FJA, et al. Ultra-high-resolution subtraction CT angiography in the follow-up of treated intracranial aneurysms. Insights Imaging. 2019; 10: 2. doi: 10.1186/s13244-019-0685-y.

19. Tanaka R, et al. Novel developments in non-invasive imaging of peripheral arterial disease with CT: experience with state-of-the-art, ultra-high-resolution CT and subtraction imaging. Clin Radiol. 2019; 74(1): 51-58. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.03.002.

20. Tanaka R, et al. Novel developments in non-invasive imaging of peripheral arterial disease with CT: experience with state-of-the-art, ultra-high-resolution CT and subtraction imaging. Clinical Radiology. 2019; 74(1): 51-58. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.03.002.

21. Homssi M, Sweeney EM, Demmon E, et al. Evaluation of the statistical detection of change algorithm for screening patients with MS with new lesion activity on longitudinal brain MRI. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2023; 44(6): 649-655. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A7858.

22. Zitova B, Flusser J. Image registration methods: A survey. Image and Vision Computing. 2003; 21: 977-1000.

23. Twining CJ, Cootes T, Marsland S, et al. A unified information-theoretic approach to groupwise nonrigid registration and model building. In: Christensen GE, Sonka M, eds. Information Processing in Medical Imaging. IPMI 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3565. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005. doi: 10.1007/11505730_1.

24. Balakrishnan G, Zhao A, Sabuncu MR, et al. VoxelMorph: A learning framework for deformable medical image registration. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2019; 38(8): 1788-1800. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2019.2897538.

25. Strittmatter A, Weis M, Zöllner FG. A groupwise multiresolution network for DCE-MRI image registration. Scientific Reports. 2025; 15: 9891. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-94275-9.

26. Ratke A, Darsht E, Heinzelmann F, et al. Deep-learning-based deformable image registration of head CT and MRI scans. Frontiers in Physics. 2023; 11: 1292437. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2023.1292437.

27. Xiao H, Teng X, Liu C, et al. A review of deep learning-based three-dimensional medical image registration methods. Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. 2021; 11(12): 4895-4916. doi: 10.21037/qims-21-175.

28. 3D SlicerElastix documentation. Available at: https://github.com/lassoan/SlicerElastix/ (accessed 06.06.2025).

29. Meta VCI Map: Software tools. Available at: https://metavcimap.org/features/software-tools/ (accessed 06.06.2025).

30. Popov VV, Stankevich YUA, Vasil'kiv LM, Tulupov AA. Beskontrastnoe kolichestvennoe issledovanie perfuzionnyh izmenenij golovnogo mozga pri rasseyannom skleroze. Digital Diagnostics. 2024; 5(S1): 86-88. (In Russ.)