Olivé-Cirera Gemma, Fonseca Elianet, Chen Li-Wen, Fetta Anna, Martínez-Hernández Eugenia, Guasp Mar, González-Álvarez Veronica, Delgadillo Verónica, Cantarín-Extremera Verónica, Jiménez-Legido María, Monge-Galindo Lorena, Felipe Ana, Beseler Beatriz, Turón-Viñas Eulàlia, Fernández-Ramos Joaquín, Martínez-González Maria J, Vázquez-López Maria, Arrabal Fernandez Luisa, Alvarez-Molinero Mireia, Muñoz-Cabello Beatriz, Camacho Ana, Nuñez-Enamorado Noemí, Spatola Marianna, Sabater Lídia, Blanco Yolanda, Saiz Albert, Graus Francesc, Dalmau Josep, Armangué Thaís
Neuroimmunology Program, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer/CaixaResearch Institute, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Pediatric Neurology Department, Hospital Parc Taulí de Sabadell, Sabadell, Spain.
Neuroimmunology Program, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer/CaixaResearch Institute, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Pediatric Neuroimmunology Unit, Neurology Department, Sant Joan de Déu Children's Hospital, Barcelona, Spain; Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Esplugues de Llobregat, Spain.
Lancet Neurol. 2025 Jan;24(1):54-64. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(24)00443-5.
The usefulness of current diagnostic approaches in children with suspected autoimmune encephalitis is unknown. We aimed to assess the diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis in clinical practice and to compare the performance of two international diagnostic algorithms (one intended for patients of any age [general], the other intended for paediatric patients), with particular emphasis on the evaluation of patients with probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis because this diagnosis suggests that immunotherapy should be continued or escalated but is difficult to establish.
We did a prospective cohort study that included all patients (<18 years of age) with suspected autoimmune encephalitis recruited at 40 hospitals in Spain whose physicians provided clinical information every 6 months for 2 years or more. Neural antibody testing to confirm diagnosis of antibody-positive autoimmune encephalitis was done at Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer-Hospital Clínic, Barcelona. Patients were classified according to the most probable diagnosis at last follow-up into four prespecified categories. We used multivariable logistic analysis to assess a potential association between immunotherapy and outcome in individuals with probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis. We also did a retrospective analysis of agreement, assessed with the kappa index, between diagnoses made according to the general and paediatric diagnostic algorithms.
Between June 1, 2013, and May 31, 2021, 729 children (mean age 7·1 years [SD 4·9]; 383 boys [53%], 346 girls [47%]) with suspected autoimmune encephalitis were recruited. After a median follow-up of 36 months (IQR 26-60), patients were classified according to their most probable diagnosis: definite autoimmune encephalitis or well defined inflammatory or autoimmune disorders (n=230 [32%]); CNS infections (n=112 [15%]); inflammatory CNS disorders of unknown cause (n=81 [11%], including three (4%) with a novel Klüver-Bucy-like syndrome; and non-inflammatory disorders (n=306 [42%]), which were predominantly epileptic or psychiatric disorders (177 [58%] of 306). Neural antibodies were detected in 150 (65%) of 230 patients who had definite autoimmune encephalitis; 127 (85%) of these 150 individuals had antibodies to the NMDA receptor or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG). Agreement between algorithms was excellent (kappa index 0·99, 95% CI 0·97-1·00) for the diagnosis of children with antibody-positive autoimmune encephalitis, good (0·59, 0·54-0·65) for recommendations of empiric immunotherapy, and poor (0·29, 0·21-0·37) for the diagnosis of probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis. Compared with the general algorithm, the paediatric algorithm included more patients in the probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis category (173 vs 41). These patients included some of those who had a diagnosis of CNS inflammatory disorder of unknown cause at the last follow-up (80 of 81 with the paediatric algorithm vs 31 of 81 with the general algorithm), who might have benefitted from immunotherapy, and some of those diagnosed with a non-inflammatory disorder at the last follow-up (47 of 306 with the paediatric algorithm vs six of 306 with the general algorithm), who did not need immunotherapy.
About a third of children with suspected autoimmune encephalitis eventually had confirmation of this diagnosis, or diagnosis of another well defined inflammatory disorder. Frequent mimics of autoimmune encephalitis were infectious, epileptic, and psychiatric disorders. Both algorithms performed well in the diagnosis of antibody-positive autoimmune encephalitis, but the paediatric algorithm under-recognised definite autoimmune encephalitis that can occur without autoantibodies and might have overdiagnosed patients with probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis. By contrast, the general algorithm might have underdiagnosed patients with probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis. Given that the diagnosis of probable antibody-negative autoimmune encephalitis has treatment implications, inaccuracies on this diagnostic category leads to overuse or underuse of immunotherapy.
Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fundació Clínic per la Recerca Biomèdica, The Edmond J Safra Foundation, and la Caixa Foundation.
For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
目前诊断方法对疑似自身免疫性脑炎儿童的有效性尚不清楚。我们旨在评估临床实践中自身免疫性脑炎的诊断情况,并比较两种国际诊断算法(一种适用于任何年龄的患者[通用算法],另一种适用于儿科患者)的性能,特别强调对可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者的评估,因为这一诊断提示应继续或加强免疫治疗,但难以确立。
我们进行了一项前瞻性队列研究,纳入了西班牙40家医院招募的所有疑似自身免疫性脑炎的患者(年龄<18岁),这些医院的医生每6个月提供2年或更长时间的临床信息。在巴塞罗那的August Pi i Sunyer生物医学研究所-临床医院进行神经抗体检测,以确诊抗体阳性的自身免疫性脑炎。根据最后一次随访时最可能的诊断将患者分为四个预先设定的类别。我们使用多变量逻辑分析来评估可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者中免疫治疗与预后之间的潜在关联。我们还对根据通用算法和儿科算法做出的诊断之间的一致性进行了回顾性分析,用kappa指数进行评估。
在2013年6月1日至2021年5月31日期间,招募了729名疑似自身免疫性脑炎的儿童(平均年龄7.1岁[标准差4.9];383名男孩[53%],346名女孩[47%])。中位随访36个月(四分位间距26 - 60)后,根据最可能的诊断对患者进行分类:确诊的自身免疫性脑炎或明确的炎症性或自身免疫性疾病(n = 230 [32%]);中枢神经系统感染(n = 112 [15%]);病因不明的炎症性中枢神经系统疾病(n = 81 [11%],包括3例[4%]患有新型克吕弗-布西样综合征);以及非炎症性疾病(n = 306 [42%]),主要是癫痫或精神疾病(306例中的177例[58%])。在230例确诊为自身免疫性脑炎的患者中,150例(65%)检测到神经抗体;这150例患者中有127例(85%)具有抗N-甲基-D-天冬氨酸受体或髓鞘少突胶质细胞糖蛋白(MOG)抗体。对于抗体阳性的自身免疫性脑炎患儿的诊断,算法之间的一致性极佳(kappa指数0.99,95%置信区间0.97 - 1.00);对于经验性免疫治疗的推荐,一致性良好(0.59,0.54 - 0.65);对于可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎的诊断,一致性较差(0.29,0.21 - 0.37)。与通用算法相比,儿科算法将更多患者归入可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎类别(173例对41例)。这些患者包括一些在最后一次随访时被诊断为病因不明的中枢神经系统炎症性疾病的患者(儿科算法的81例中有80例,通用算法的81例中有31例),他们可能从免疫治疗中获益;以及一些在最后一次随访时被诊断为非炎症性疾病(儿科算法的306例中有47例,通用算法的306例中有6例),他们不需要免疫治疗。
约三分之一疑似自身免疫性脑炎的儿童最终确诊为此病,或被诊断为其他明确的炎症性疾病。自身免疫性脑炎常见的模仿疾病为感染性、癫痫性和精神性疾病。两种算法在抗体阳性的自身免疫性脑炎诊断中表现良好,但儿科算法未充分识别无自身抗体时也可能发生的确诊自身免疫性脑炎,且可能对可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者过度诊断。相比之下,通用算法可能对可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者诊断不足。鉴于可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎的诊断对治疗有影响,这一诊断类别的不准确导致免疫治疗的过度使用或使用不足。
卡洛斯三世卫生研究所、生物医学研究临床基金会、埃德蒙·J·萨夫拉基金会和拉卡伊萨基金会。
摘要的西班牙语翻译见补充材料部分。