Both evoked potentials and cognitive tests may provide useful informat
ion which cannot be derived from the clinical observation. For this re
ason, there have been some attempts to use EPs in monitoring the natur
al history of the disease and in assessing the efficacy of therapeutic
trials. However, no conclusion con be derived from the few available
data. Although MRI is more sensitive than EPs in revealing new lesions
in brain, cerebellum and brainstem, EPs are more sensitive in reveali
ng optic nerve and spinel cord lesions. Moreover, the poor relationshi
p between brain MRI abnormalities and disability has raised the possib
ility that cognitive evaluation may be an additional sensitive marker
of brain involvement over lime. Since the gold standard for the assess
ment of disease activity is uncertain, it is therefore advisable that
frequent MRI, EPs and cognitive assessment may integrate clinical outc
omes measured by conventional scales, both in the study of the natural
disease course and in monitoring clinical trials.