Routine diagnostics for neural antibodies, clinical correlates, treatment and functional outcome

Bien CG, Bien CI, Onugoren M, De Simoni D, Eigler V, Haensch CA, Holtkamp M, Ismail FS, Kurthen M, Melzer N, Mayer K, Von Podewils F, Rauschka H, Rossetti AO, Schaebitz WR, Simova O, Witt K, Hoeftberger R, May TW (2020)


Publication Type: Journal article

Publication year: 2020

Journal

DOI: 10.1007/s00415-020-09814-3

Abstract

Objective To determine frequencies, interlaboratory reproducibility, clinical ratings, and prognostic implications of neural antibodies in a routine laboratory setting in patients with suspected neuropsychiatric autoimmune conditions. Methods Earliest available samples from 10,919 patients were tested for a broad panel of neural antibodies. Sera that reacted with leucine-rich glioma-inactivated protein 1 (LGI1), contactin-associated protein-2 (CASPR2), or the voltage-gated potassium channel (VGKC) complex were retested for LGI1 and CASPR2 antibodies by another laboratory. Physicians in charge of patients with positive antibody results retrospectively reported on clinical, treatment, and outcome parameters. Results Positive results were obtained for 576 patients (5.3%). Median disease duration was 6 months (interquartile range 0.6-46 months). In most patients, antibodies were detected both in CSF and serum. However, in 16 (28%) patients with N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antibodies, this diagnosis could be made only in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The two laboratories agreed largely on LGI1 and CASPR2 antibody diagnoses (kappa = 0.95). The clinicians (413 responses, 71.7%) rated two-thirds of the antibody-positive patients as autoimmune. Antibodies against the alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor (AMPAR), NMDAR (CSF or high serum titer), gamma-aminobutyric acid-B receptor (GABABR), and LGI1 had >= 90% positive ratings, whereas antibodies against the glycine receptor, VGKC complex, or otherwise unspecified neuropil had <= 40% positive ratings. Of the patients with surface antibodies, 64% improved after >= 3 months, mostly with >= 1 immunotherapy intervention. Conclusions This novel approach starting from routine diagnostics in a dedicated laboratory provides reliable and useful results with therapeutic implications. Counseling should consider clinical presentation, demographic features, and antibody titers of the individual patient.

Involved external institutions

How to cite

APA:

Bien, C.G., Bien, C.I., Onugoren, M., De Simoni, D., Eigler, V., Haensch, C.-A.,... May, T.W. (2020). Routine diagnostics for neural antibodies, clinical correlates, treatment and functional outcome. Journal of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-020-09814-3

MLA:

Bien, Christian G., et al. "Routine diagnostics for neural antibodies, clinical correlates, treatment and functional outcome." Journal of Neurology (2020).

BibTeX: Download