Multiple Sclerosis and Neuroimmunology Program, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland Medical Center, Bolwell, 5th Floor, 11100 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
J Neurol. 2017 Nov;264(11):2284-2292. doi: 10.1007/s00415-017-8627-4. Epub 2017 Oct 3.
The aim of this study is to compare the rates of clinically relevant and clinically irrelevant neuronal autoantibodies among patients presenting with new neurological symptoms. We reviewed 401 neurological patients who were tested for the Mayo-Clinic paraneoplastic panel from January 2014 to December 2014 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. We divided antibody-positive patients into two groups: clinically relevant (CR), in which a recognizable autoimmune or paraneoplastic syndrome was confirmed, and clinically irrelevant (CI), in which an autoimmune/paraneoplastic etiology was initially suspected but an alternative diagnosis was eventually found. We used Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables to identify differences between the two groups. Fifty-three patients tested positive for one or more neuronal autoantibodies. There were 17 CR (65% females, mean age 56 years), 33 CI, and 3 indeterminate patients. Compared to CI patients, CR patients were more likely to present with movement disorders or stiff person syndrome, have inflammatory CSF markers, cancer or smoking history, concomitant hyponatremia, and classical onconeuronal antibodies. CI patients were more likely to have a neuromuscular presentation, a chronic course, and antibodies against synaptic antigens. By combining the most robust differentiating factors, we developed a simple scale that predicted clinical relevance with an odds ratio of 50.3 (CI 8.2-309.9, P < 0.0001) if the score was ≥ 2. Up to 62% of neuronal autoantibody-positive patients are ultimately found to have an alternative diagnosis. Several clinical and laboratory factors can differentiate CR from CI patients to aid in interpretation of positive results.
本研究旨在比较新出现神经症状患者中临床相关和临床无关神经元自身抗体的发生率。我们回顾了 2014 年 1 月至 2014 年 12 月在约翰霍普金斯医院接受梅奥诊所副肿瘤小组检测的 401 例神经科患者。我们将抗体阳性患者分为两组:临床相关(CR),其中明确诊断为自身免疫或副肿瘤综合征;临床无关(CI),最初怀疑为自身免疫/副肿瘤病因,但最终发现其他诊断。我们使用 Fisher 确切检验进行分类变量分析,Mann-Whitney U 检验进行连续变量分析,以确定两组之间的差异。53 例患者检测出一种或多种神经元自身抗体阳性。其中 17 例为 CR(65%为女性,平均年龄 56 岁),33 例为 CI,3 例为不确定。与 CI 患者相比,CR 患者更可能出现运动障碍或僵硬人综合征、炎症性 CSF 标志物、癌症或吸烟史、同时伴有低钠血症和经典神经原性抗体。CI 患者更可能出现神经肌肉表现、慢性病程和突触抗原抗体。通过结合最具区分力的因素,我们开发了一个简单的评分系统,如果评分≥2,则预测临床相关性的优势比为 50.3(95%CI 8.2-309.9,P<0.0001)。多达 62%的神经元自身抗体阳性患者最终被发现有其他诊断。一些临床和实验室因素可以区分 CR 和 CI 患者,有助于解释阳性结果。