BACKGROUND: Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) poses significant challenges in clinical management, requiring effective monitoring tools for therapeutic success and relapse detection. This study aims to assess the Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis (CASE) as compared to the modified Rankin scale (mRS) in evaluating AE patients and to determine the real-world adoption of the CASE score.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 20 AE patients, assessing clinical data including symptomatology, diagnostic findings, and therapeutic regimens. Furthermore, we performed a systematic review on the test performance criteria and the real-world use of the CASE score.
RESULTS: The CASE score showed a higher sensitivity in detecting clinical changes compared to the mRS, with a significant correlation between the two scales throughout the disease course (r = 0.85, p < 0.01). A systematic review of 150 articles revealed widespread adoption of the CASE score, especially in Asian populations, demonstrating high reliability and internal consistency.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite limitations such as retrospective design and small sample size, our findings underscore the CASE score\'s utility in both clinical practice and research settings. The CASE score emerges as a valuable tool for monitoring AE patients, offering improved sensitivity over existing scales like the mRS. Further validation studies in diverse populations are warranted to establish its broader applicability and inform future therapeutic interventions.

BACKGROUND: The immunotherapy strategy for autoimmune encephalitis is based on several types and schedules of both first- and second-line drugs. Failing to respond to the latter prompts the use of non-conventional rescue therapies, with higher risks of severe adverse effects. We report on a protocol that entails the use of intravenous immunoglobulin cycles to bridge the 4-month period that the second-line drug rituximab needs to exert its full therapeutic effects.
METHODS: Three patients with NMDAR encephalitis who were non-responders to first-line treatments entered the study. The protocol consisted of six monthly cycles of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG, 0.4 mg/kg/die for 5 days), starting 1 month after the last rituximab infusion (1000 mg at days 0 and 15). Brain MRI and [18F]-FDG-PET were performed at onset and at six and 18 months after onset.
RESULTS: In the three patients, substantial improvements of disability or complete recovery were achieved, without modifications over the 30-to-50-month follow-up. No adverse events nor laboratory test abnormalities were recorded. Imaging findings paralleled the favorable disease courses. Brain [18F]-FDG-PET was more sensitive than MRI in detecting abnormalities.
CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest that the herein-described protocol might be used in patients with NMDAR encephalitis at risk for poor prognosis in the mid-term when they need to shift to rituximab. [18F]-FDG-PET confirmed to be a sensitive tool to detect the minimal brain lesions that can underlie isolated cognitive and psychiatric symptoms.