| Literature DB >> 30264269 |
S Jarius1, F Paul2, O Aktas3, N Asgari4, R C Dale5, J de Seze6, D Franciotta7, K Fujihara8, A Jacob9, H J Kim10, I Kleiter11, T Kümpfel12, M Levy13, J Palace14, K Ruprecht15, A Saiz16, C Trebst17, B G Weinshenker18, B Wildemann19.
Abstract
Over the past few years, new-generation cell-based assays have demonstrated a robust association of autoantibodies to full-length human myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG-IgG) with (mostly recurrent) optic neuritis, myelitis and brainstem encephalitis, as well as with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM)-like presentations. Most experts now consider MOG-IgG-associated encephalomyelitis (MOG-EM) a disease entity in its own right, immunopathogenetically distinct from both classic multiple sclerosis (MS) and aquaporin-4 (AQP4)-IgG-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders (NMOSD). Owing to a substantial overlap in clinicoradiological presentation, MOG-EM was often unwittingly misdiagnosed as MS in the past. Accordingly, increasing numbers of patients with suspected or established MS are currently being tested for MOG-IgG. However, screening of large unselected cohorts for rare biomarkers can significantly reduce the positive predictive value of a test. To lessen the hazard of overdiagnosing MOG-EM, which may lead to inappropriate treatment, more selective criteria for MOG-IgG testing are urgently needed. In this paper, we propose indications for MOG-IgG testing based on expert consensus. In addition, we give a list of conditions atypical for MOG-EM ("red flags") that should prompt physicians to challenge a positive MOG-IgG test result. Finally, we provide recommendations regarding assay methodology, specimen sampling and data interpretation, and propose for the first time diagnostic criteria for MOG-EM.Entities:
Keywords: Antibody testing; Consensus recommendations; Diagnosis; Multiple sclerosis (MS); Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) antibodies; Myelitis; Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders (NMOSD); Optic neuritis (ON)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30264269 DOI: 10.1007/s00115-018-0607-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nervenarzt ISSN: 0028-2804 Impact factor: 1.214