Back

Brain Age Gap and Cognitive Processing Speed in Multiple Sclerosis

Lea, R.; Lea, S.; Al-Iedani, O.; Ramadan, S.; Maltby, V.; Lechner-Scott, J.

2026-08-23 neurology
10.64898/2026.08.20.26360954 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background and Objectives: Cognitive impairment is common in multiple sclerosis (MS), but whether brain age gap (BAG) has greater cognitive relevance in MS than in people without brain disease is not known. We tested whether BAG was more strongly associated with cognitive processing speed (CPS) in MS. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of MRI-derived BAG and CPS from a UK Biobank study consisting of 21,117 normative reference subjects with no recorded brain disease and 97 subjects with MS. BAG and CPS were standardized to the normative reference distribution, and an age- and sex-adjusted interaction tested whether the association differed between groups. Separately, a meta-analysis of the relationship of BAG and CPS was performed using published data from five independent MS cohorts (n=1,250 subjects in total). Correlation statistics were pooled to establish the effect size, 95% confidence intervals and p-values. Results: In UK Biobank, there was a moderate negative association between BAG and CPS in MS (r=-0.35, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.17; P<.001), whereas the association in the normative reference group was negligible (r=-0.05, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.04; P<.001). There was a BAG-by-MS interaction indicating an MS-specific correlation (beta =-0.19, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.09; P<.001). Across five independent clinical MS cohorts, the pooled BAG-CPS correlation was r=-0.25 (95% CI -0.33 to -0.18; P<.001). Overall, the magnitude of the association between BAG and CPS was at least five-fold greater in MS than in the normative population. Conclusion: BAG was substantially more strongly associated with CPS in MS than in the normative population. These cross-sectional findings support further evaluation of BAG as an adjunctive MRI marker. Further studies are required to establish mechanism, prognosis, or clinical decision utility.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.