Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease has been proposed as a separate inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system (CNS) since the discovery of pathogenic antibodies against myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein …
Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is a highly treatable neurologic condition that can cause psychosis. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of routine screening for AE compared with clinically targeted screening in first-episode psychosis patients.
Create a free QxMD account to take advantage of the features offered by Read like saving your papers and creating collections. Get Started Unremitting diarrhoea in a girl diagnosed anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate-receptor encephalitis: A case report Norrapat Onpoaree, Montida Veeravigrom, Anapat Sanpavat, Narissara Suratannon, Palittiya Sintusek World Journal of Clinical Cases 2020 October 26, 8 (20): 4866-4875 BACKGROUND: Asymptomatic cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is common in children; in contrast, in children with a weakened immune system, invasive CMV can occur. This is the first case report of a severe manifestation of CMV esophago-enterocolitis in a girl diagnosed with anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate-receptor (anti-NMDAR) encephalitis who received only a moderate dose of corticosteroid therapy. CASE SUMMARY: A 12-year-old-Thai girl presented with acute behavioural change and headache for 6 d. Electroencephalogram and positivity for NMDAR autoantibodies were compatible with anti-NMDAR encephalitis. Hence, she received pulse methylprednisolone 10 mg/kg per day for 4 d and continued with prednisolone 1.2 mg/kg per day. On day 42 of corticosteroid therapy, she developed unremitting vomiting and diarrhoea. Endoscopy showed multiple ulcers and erythaematous mucosa along the gastrointestinal tract. Tissue CMV viral load and viral-infected cells confirmed CMV esophago-enterocolitis. Therefore, the patient received ganciclovir 5 mg/kg per dose every 12 h for 3 wk and then 5 mg/kg per dose once daily for 3 wk. Unremitting diarrhoea slowly improved from stool output 1-4 L per day to 1-2 L per day after 3 wk of treatment. Pulse methylprednisolone 20 mg/kg for 5 d was initiated and continued with prednisolone 1 mg/kg per day. After this repeated pulse methylprednisolone treatment, surprisingly, diarrhoea subsided. Immunologic work-up was performed to rule out underlying immune deficiency with unremarkable results. CONCLUSION: Unremitting diarrhoea from CMV esophago-enterocolitis subsided with antiviral and methylprednisolone therapy, implying the immune and NMDAR dysregulation in anti-NMDAR encephalitis. Full Text Links We have located links that may give you full text access. Additional links Discussion You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion. Trending Papers Colchicine in Patients with Chronic Coronary Disease. Stefan M Nidorf, Aernoud T L Fiolet, Arend Mosterd, John W Eikelboom, Astrid Schut, Tjerk S J Opstal, Salem H K The, Xiao-Fang Xu, Mark A Ireland, Timo Lenderink, Donald Latchem, Pieter Hoogslag, Anastazia Jerzewski, Peter Nierop, Alan Whelan, Randall Hendriks, Henk Swart, Jeroen Schaap, Aaf F M Kuijper, Maarten W J van Hessen, Pradyot Saklani, Isabel Tan, Angus G Thompson, Allison Morton, Chris Judkins, Willem A Bax, Maurits Dirksen, Marco M W Alings, Graeme J Hankey, Charley A Budgeon, Jan G P Tijssen, Jan H Cornel, Peter L Thompson New England Journal of Medicine 2020 August 31 Extracorporeal life support for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Alain Combes, Matthieu Schmidt, Carol L Hodgson, Eddy Fan, Niall D Ferguson, John F Fraser, Samir Jaber, Antonio Pesenti, Marco Ranieri, Kathryn Rowan, Kiran Shekar, Arthur S Slutsky, Daniel Brodie Intensive Care Medicine 2020 November 2 Clinical strategies for implementing lung and diaphragm-protective ventilation: avoiding insufficient and excessive effort. Ewan C Goligher, Annemijn H Jonkman, Jose Dianti, Katerina Vaporidi, Jeremy R Beitler, Bhakti K Patel, Takeshi Yoshida, Samir Jaber, Martin Dres, Tommaso Mauri, Giacomo Bellani, Alexandre Demoule, Laurent Brochard, Leo Heunks Intensive Care Medicine 2020 November 2 Emergency Department Management of COVID-19: An Evidence-Based Approach. Nicholas M McManus, Ryan Offman, Jason D Oetman Western Journal of Emergency Medicine 2020 September 25 Glucocorticoids: surprising new findings on their mechanisms of actions. Frank Buttgereit Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2020 November 8 Prone position in ARDS patients: why, when, how and for whom. Claude Guérin, Richard K Albert, Jeremy Beitler, Luciano Gattinoni, Samir Jaber, John J Marini, Laveena Munshi, Laurent Papazian, Antonio Pesenti, Antoine Vieillard-Baron, Jordi Mancebo Intensive Care Medicine 2020 November 10 Severe organising pneumonia following COVID-19. István Vadász, Faeq Husain-Syed, Peter Dorfmüller, Fritz C Roller, Khodr Tello, Matthias Hecker, Rory E Morty, Stefan Gattenlöhner, Hans-Dieter Walmrath, Friedrich Grimminger, Susanne Herold, Werner Seeger Thorax 2020 November 11 Analgesia and sedation in patients with ARDS. Gerald Chanques, Jean-Michel Constantin, John W Devlin, E Wesley Ely, Gilles L Fraser, Céline Gélinas, Timothy D Girard, Claude Guérin, Matthieu Jabaudon, Samir Jaber, Sangeeta Mehta, Thomas Langer, Michael J Murray, Pratik Pandharipande, Bhakti Patel, Jean-François Payen, Kathleen Puntillo, Bram Rochwerg, Yahya Shehabi, Thomas Strøm, Hanne Tanghus Olsen, John P Kress Intensive Care Medicine 2020 November 10
Introduction Neuronal surface-directed antibodies (NSAbs) are considered pathogenic in patients with autoimmune encephalitis (AE). AE commonly presents with prominent seizures and neuropsychiatric features and shows a preferential response to immunotherapies versus anti-seizure medications (ASMs).1–4 This has prompted the introduction of ‘epilepsy of immune aetiology’ within the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) 2017 classification.5 The same NSAbs, as well as high levels of antibodies to intraneuronal glutamic acid decarboxylase-65 (GAD65), are also described in the serum of people with more isolated forms of epilepsy, without core features of encephalitis.6–8 In this context, their clinical, aetiological and therapeutic relevance is unclear, but of major potential importance to all neurologists who manage new-onset epilepsy. In our large, prospective, real-world study of new-onset focal epilepsy, we predicted that formes frustes of AE would help identify clinical features suggesting the presence of NSAbs and asked whether detection of these NSAbs should alter patient management. Materials and methods Between 9 December 2011 and 4 November 2015, consecutive adult patients (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of new-onset focal epilepsy and their first seizure within the previous 12 months were prospectively recruited from the routine practice of two epileptologists at the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Written informed consent and sera were obtained (Ethical approvals: Oxfordshire RECA 07/Q160X/28 and REC16/YH/0013). Clinical data gathered at onset (online supplemental table 1) included detailed phenotype and investigation results, Quality of Life in Epilepsy-31, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score, Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (ACE) and modified Rankin Score (mRS); as well as information to inform the Antibody Prevalence in Epilepsy and Encephalopathy (APE2) score (online supplemental table 2)9 10 and diagnostic criteria for possible or definite AE.11 Subsequently, 1-year and 3-year mRS were ascertained from patients with NSAbs. Supplemental material For NSAbs, sera were tested against autoantigen-expressing live HEK293 cells (live cell-based assay; online supplemental table 3), and for reactivity with the surface of live cultured hippocampal neurons, using sensitive protocols.12 13 Autoantibodies to GAD65 were determined using a commercial radioimmunoprecipitation assay. Statistical analysis was conducted in R (V.3.6.1). Dimensionality reduction was performed using Multiple Factor Analysis in ‘FactoMineR’ with up to 10% missing data imputed using missForest. Stepwise Bayesian general linear modelling analysis was undertaken using ‘arm’. Wilson 95% CIs with continuity correction were calculated using ‘DescTools’. Results NSAb findings Of 241 recruited patients, 22 were excluded (online supplemental table 4). Of the remaining 219, median age was 49 years (range 16–91) and 109 (49.8%) were female. In 23/219 (10.5%) patients, serum NSAbs were detected across candidate and novel autoantigens (table 1) including roughly equal frequencies against leucine-rich glioma inactivated-1 (LGI1), contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CASPR2), plus the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) and γ-aminobutyric acid A/B receptors (GABAAR and GABABR). An additional five patients had antibodies to the surface of live neurons, without an established autoantigen. Autoantibodies to contactin-2, the glycine receptor and the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole propionic acid receptor (AMPAR) were each found in one patient. No dipeptidyl-peptidase-like protein 6 (DPPX) or high-titre GAD65 antibodies were detected. Overall, from the 23 people with NSAbs, 9 had a clinical diagnosis of AE (7/9 fulfilling published criteria).11 By contrast, none of the 196 without NSAbs had a clinical diagnosis of AE (p<0.0001; Fisher’s exact test). VIEW INLINE VIEW POPUP Table 1 Clinical and laboratory features of patients with epilepsy and positive neuronal surface autoantibodies Factors associated with the presence of NSAbs and AE Dimensionality reduction with multiple factor analysis showed that patients were highly heterogeneous and the modest clustering of those with NSAbs was largely driven by a clinical diagnosis of AE (figure 1A,B). Univariate analysis identified 11 clinical parameters that differed significantly between patients with and without NSAbs: age (p=0.04), ictal piloerection (p=0.02), lesional MRI (p=0.04), self-reported mood disturbance (p=0.007), ACE attention domain (p=0.01), ACE total score (p=0.04), QOLIE-31 score (p=0.02), self-reported neuropsychiatric features (p=0.03), epilepsy risk factors (p=0.05), inflammatory cerebrospinal fluid (CSF; p=0.004) and limbic system lesions on MRI (p=0.0002). A multivariate stepwise regression model allocated weighted scores to six of these: age ≥54 years=+1, self-reported mood disturbance=+1, limbic system lesions on MRI=+2, ictal piloerection=+2.5, ACE attention score ≥16=−1.5 and epilepsy risk factors=−1.5 (figure 1C). The probability of NSAb positivity increased with higher scores (Spearman’s ρ=0.99, p<0.0001; figure 1C) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis confirmed these features strongly predicted NSAb status (area under the curve (AUC)=0.83; total score ≥0; sensitivity=66.7%, specificity=84.9%; figure 1D). By contrast, the APE2 score performed less well in predicting NSAb status (sensitivity 43.5%, specificity 79.1%, AUC=0.68) and more accurately predicted criteria-defined AE, particularly if associated with NSAbs (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 78.8%, AUC=0.94; figure 1E). Figure 1 Clinical phenotypes associated with NSAb status in new-onset focal epilepsy. The first two dimensions are shown, highlighting: (A) NSAb-positive (red) or NSAb-negative (grey) status and (B) NSAb-positive (pale red) or NSAb-negative (grey) without encephalitis (dots), or NSAb-positive (dark red) with clinically diagnosed autoimmune encephalitis (triangles). (C) The proportion of patients by total model score. Error bars show 95% CIs. The inset shows the weighting and SE of each factor within the regression model. (D) Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve of the total model score for predicting NSAb status across all patients. (E) ROC curve of the APE2 score for predicting NSAb status across all patients (black), patients not meeting the criteria for autoimmune encephalitis (blue), patients meeting the criteria for autoimmune encephalitis (red) and predicting NSAb-positive criteria-confirmed autoimmune encephalitis across all patients. (F) Scatter plot of modified Rankin score in NSAb-positive patients by immunotherapy status over time (Mann-Whitney U test p values<0.05). AE, autoimmune encephalitis; APE2, Antibody Prevalence in Epilepsy and Encephalopathy; epilepsy RF, epilepsy risk factors; MRI limbic Δ, changes within the limbic system on MRI. Comparisons of those with and without AE From 23 patients with NSAbs (table 1), a comparison of those with (n=9) and without (n=14) a clinical diagnosis of AE revealed several differences in the AE cohort: more ASMs (median of 3 vs 1; p=0.0073), more frequent immunotherapies (7/9 vs 0/14, p=0.0001), higher APE2 scores (median of 6 vs 2; p<0.0001), more frequent MRI limbic inflammation (6/9 vs 0/14; p=0.0008) and a trend towards greater positivity of serum IgGs targeting the surface of live neurons (7/9 vs 5/14, p=0.09). Compared with the seven patients administered immunotherapy, those with NSAbs who were not administered immunotherapy showed lower disability after 1 and 3 years (both p<0.05), and 11/16 (68.8%) were asymptomatic at 3-year follow-up (mRS=0 ; figure 1F). Hence, despite no immunotherapy, patients with NSAbs, but without AE, generally showed good outcomes. Discussion In this prospective study of 219 consecutive adults with new-onset focal epilepsy, NSAb status was best predicted by a combination of clinical parameters which closely resemble features observed in AE. Almost half of our patients with NSAbs were diagnosed with AE, and ~30% fulfilled stringent criteria for AE.11 Of those with NSAbs and more isolated forms of epilepsy, without individual features of AE, almost all were treated with ASMs alone and typically remained asymptomatic at long-term follow-up. Overall, these findings suggest that detection of NSAbs in patients with new-onset seizures, but without features of AE, should not alter current clinical management. Our observations should help guide the frequent clinical dilemma of which patients with new-onset seizures to test for autoantibodies and subsequently treat with immunotherapy. Taken together, our data suggest the clinical phenotype is paramount in guiding the relevance of autoantibody results, and provide data to address an outstanding question from a recent ILAE consensus statement.7 This ILAE statement also highlighted controversy over the term ‘autoimmune epilepsy’.7 In routine clinical practice, this nomenclature acts as a valuable signpost and aide memoire when seeing patients with seizures.2 14 However, ‘epilepsy’ carries several social stigmata and is defined by an enduring tendency to seizures. In AE, this lifelong risk is refuted by a recent study,4 despite several forms of AE commonly leading to hippocampal atrophy.2–4 7 10 The alternative concept of acute symptomatic seizures may more accurately capture the nature of seizures in patients with AE. Data-driven modifications to nomenclature will benefit from longer-term follow-up studies. Ictal piloerection, low mood and attention and MRI limbic system changes are recognised features of late-onset AE, particularly in association with LGI1 antibodies.2 4 14 15 The absence of movement disorders or more diffuse cognitive impairment as predictive factors in our model suggests the overall syndrome may reflect a formes frustes of AE. This contrasts with APE2 score parameters,9 which appear to largely reflect more florid features seen in classical AE. Our observational study has several limitations. These include limited CSF autoantibody measurements, which reflected UK practice particularly at the start of the study period. Yet,w ithout this valuable parameter, a diagnosis of NMDAR-antibody encephalitis is still possible.11 Yet, two of our four patients with serum NMDAR antibodies did not have features consistent with encephalitis, likely suggesting detection of clinically unrelated serum antibodies in these cases. In addition, our series in total only identified nine AE cases, although this may be considered substantial given the largely outpatient-based recruitment. This, and the high (~10%) seroprevalence rate, may reflect a referral bias given Oxford’s interest in AE, but is well aligned with other available estimates.6 9 10 Our serological data identified some samples with NSAbs proven by live cell-based assays, but without concomitant cell surface neuronal reactivities. This was especially evident in the cohort without a clinical diagnosis of AE, and perhaps these antibodies reflect low-affinity or low-titre autoantibodies which are not disease relevant. Their specificity, however, remains reassuring given their typical selectivity for just one of eight surface-expressed autoantigens. In the future, our prediction model will benefit from validation in independent, larger studies which may compare the risk of enduring seizures in the NSAb-positive versus NSAb-negative populations, with and without AE, something which we did not survey at follow-up. Hence, we cannot comment on long-term seizure status in the 5/16 patients (31%) who had NSAbs, no diagnosis of AE and 3-year mRS >0. In these patients, it remains possible that immunotherapy would have led to a greater benefit. However, in our view, this finding is more likely to be consistent with the predicted ~30% of all people with epilepsy who are known to become ASM resistant: this provides a testable hypothesis for a future randomised controlled trial. Overall, our observations support the concept that, in patients who present with new-onset focal seizures, clinical features which are consistent with a ‘mild encephalitis’ helps identify those with NSAbs which should alter patient management. This clinico-serological syndrome appeared characteristic and its recognition will improve detection and treatment of these patients. These findings should discourage widespread screening strategies to identify patients with autoantibodies among unselected seizure cohorts. References ↵Irani SR, Michell AW, Lang B, et al. Faciobrachial dystonic seizures precede Lgi1 antibody limbic encephalitis. Ann Neurol 2011;69:892–900.doi:10.1002/ana.22307 ↵Thompson J, Bi M, Murchison AG, et al. The importance of early immunotherapy in patients with faciobrachial dystonic seizures. Brain 2018;141:348–56.doi:10.1093/brain/awx323OpenUrlCrossRef ↵Geis C, Planagumà J, Carreño M, et al. Autoimmune seizures and epilepsy. J Clin Invest 2019;129:926–40.doi:10.1172/JCI125178OpenUrlPubMed ↵de Bruijn MAAM, van Sonderen A, van Coevorden-Hameete MH, et al. Evaluation of seizure treatment in anti-LGI1, anti-NMDAR, and anti-GABABR encephalitis. Neurology 2019;92:e2185–96.doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000007475pmid:30979857OpenUrlPubMed ↵Scheffer IE, Berkovic S, Capovilla G, et al. ILAE classification of the epilepsies: position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology. Epilepsia 2017;58:512–21.doi:10.1111/epi.13709pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28276062OpenUrlPubMed ↵Brenner T, Sills GJ, Hart Y, et al. Prevalence of neurologic autoantibodies in cohorts of patients with new and established epilepsy. Epilepsia 2013;54:1028–35.doi:10.1111/epi.12127pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23464826OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵Steriade C, Britton J, Dale RC, et al. Acute symptomatic seizures secondary to autoimmune encephalitis and autoimmune-associated epilepsy: conceptual definitions. Epilepsia 2020;61:1341–51.doi:10.1111/epi.16571pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32544279OpenUrlPubMed ↵von Podewils F, Suesse M, Geithner J, et al. Prevalence and outcome of late-onset seizures due to autoimmune etiology: a prospective observational population-based cohort study. Epilepsia 2017;58:1542–50.doi:10.1111/epi.13834pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28681401OpenUrlPubMed ↵Dubey D, Alqallaf A, Hays R, et al. Neurological autoantibody prevalence in epilepsy of unknown etiology. JAMA Neurol 2017;74:397–402.doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.5429pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28166327OpenUrlPubMed ↵Dubey D, Kothapalli N, McKeon A, et al. Predictors of neural-specific autoantibodies and immunotherapy response in patients with cognitive dysfunction. J Neuroimmunol 2018;323:62–72.doi:10.1016/j.jneuroim.2018.07.009pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30196836OpenUrlPubMed ↵Graus F, Titulaer MJ, Balu R, et al. A clinical approach to diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis. Lancet Neurol 2016;15:391–404.doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00401-9pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26906964OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵Makuch M, Wilson R, Al-Diwani A, et al. N-Methyl-D-aspartate receptor antibody production from germinal center reactions: therapeutic implications. Ann Neurol 2018;83:553–61.doi:10.1002/ana.25173pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29406578OpenUrlPubMed ↵Ramberger M, Berretta A, Tan JMM, et al. Distinctive binding properties of human monoclonal LGI1 autoantibodies determine pathogenic mechanisms. Brain 2020;143:1731–45.doi:10.1093/brain/awaa104pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32437528OpenUrlPubMed ↵Quek AML, Britton JW, McKeon A, et al. Autoimmune epilepsy: clinical characteristics and response to immunotherapy. Arch Neurol 2012;69:582–93.doi:10.1001/archneurol.2011.2985pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22451162OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵Rocamora R, Becerra JL, Fossas P, et al. Pilomotor seizures: an autonomic semiology of limbic encephalitis? Seizure 2014;23:670–3.doi:10.1016/j.seizure.2014.04.013pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24890932OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed