背景:髓鞘少突胶质细胞糖蛋白抗体相关疾病(MOGAD)的临床谱和诊断已经在优化的基于抗MOG-IgG细胞的测定和专家共识的背景下发展。McDonald对MS标准进行了多次修订,以提高基于临床表现的框架诊断的准确性和特异性。MRI检查结果,和CSF结果。虽然使用MS和MOGAD诊断标准对典型病例有帮助,对于临床重叠的患者,实验室,成像特征未知,构成诊断和管理的不确定性。
目的:报告MOGAD和MS表型特征重叠的多中心队列患者,并评估新的MOGAD诊断标准的应用。
方法:进行了一项合作的回顾性队列研究,以确定血清抗MOG-IgG阳性且符合MS修订的2017年McDonald标准的患者。纵向回顾了符合纳入标准的患者的临床和影像学特征,包括复发,重复MRI,和MOG-IgG详细检测,以允许专家意见小组分配给每个病例。在每个病例的发病和最后一次随访中都应用了国际MOGAD小组提出的标准,并根据陈述与专家作者的诊断任务进行了比较,临床和影像学特征,以及对治疗的反应。
结果:225例MOG-IgG血清阳性病例中有10例(4%)符合研究纳入标准[10例中有7例为女性;初始事件年龄:8名成人(平均年龄26.8岁),两名青少年(平均年龄14.5岁)]。AQP4-IgG均为阴性。除了MOG-IgG的血清滴度,区分临床和影像学特征[即,初始脱髓鞘事件的临床严重程度,放射学特征(视神经/脊柱/大脑),并且在连续扫描中是否存在病变归一化]导致了三个独立分类的共识,这些分类因MOGAD和MS的共享特征而不同。专家小组将患者分为(1)经典MOGAD,即使有MS样,明确定义的脑部病变,当严重事件和大多数T2病变恢复正常时(n=5;MOG-IgG滴度1:100、1:20、1:160、1:40、1:200);(2)经典RRMS包括被认为可能具有假阳性或临床无关的MOG-IgG的病例,由于轻度临床事件和明确定义的MS样病变的影像学没有正常化(n=3;MOG滴度1:20,1:100,1:40);(3)MOGAD和MS重叠表型由轻度和重度临床事件的组合定义,部分T2病变正常化,明确和不明确的病变(n=2;MOG滴度1:20,1:100)。国际MOGAD小组标准的应用与专家分配一致,对五名患者(50%)进行了分类。当在连续MOG-IgG滴度测试后应用MOGAD标准时,将另外一名患者按照与分配一致的方式进行分类。
结论:虽然国际MOGAD小组的诊断标准有助于这种情况的诊断准确性,在一组MOG-IgG血清阳性的患者中,临床和影像学特征重叠的RRMS标准审查可能导致准确性提高。系列血清学,重复成像,密切关注临床过程,和对治疗的反应是进一步完善MOGAD诊断标准需要考虑的可能变量。
BACKGROUND: The clinical spectrum and diagnosis of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (
MOGAD) has evolved in the setting of an optimized anti-MOG-IgG cell-based assay and expert consensus. The McDonald criteria for MS have been revised multiple times to improve the accuracy and specificity of diagnosis on a framework based on clinical presentation, MRI findings, and CSF results. While the uses of MS and
MOGAD diagnostic criteria are helpful for typical cases, such utility for patients with overlapping clinical, laboratorial, and imaging features is unknown, posing diagnostic and management uncertainties.
OBJECTIVE: To report a multicenter cohort of patients with overlapping phenotypic features of
MOGAD and MS and evaluate the application of new
MOGAD diagnostic criteria.
METHODS: A collaborative retrospective cohort study was performed to identify patients with both positive serum anti-MOG-IgG and fulfillment of the MS revised 2017 McDonald criteria. Clinical and radiographic features of patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were reviewed longitudinally, including relapses, repeated MRI, and MOG-IgG testing in detail to allow the panel of expert opinion to assign to each case. The International
MOGAD Panel proposed criteria were applied at onset and last follow-up to each case and compared to the expert author diagnosis assignment based on presentation, clinical and imaging features, and response to treatment.
RESULTS: Ten of 225 (4%) MOG-IgG seropositive cases met study inclusion criteria [seven of 10 were female; age at initial event: eight adults (mean age 26.8 years), two adolescents (mean age 14.5 years)]. AQP4-IgG was negative for all. Apart from serum titers of MOG-IgG, distinguishing clinical and radiographic features [i.e., clinical severity of the initial demyelinating event, radiographic features (optic nerve/spine/brain), and presence/absence of lesion normalization on serial scans] led to consensus of three separate classifications differing by degrees of shared features of MOGAD and MS. Patients were classified by expert panel into (1) Classic MOGAD even with MS-like, well-defined brain lesions, when severe events and most T2 lesions normalized (n = 5; MOG-IgG titers 1:100, 1:20, 1:160, 1:40, 1:200); (2) Classic RRMS included cases thought to have likely false positive or clinically irrelevant MOG-IgG, due to mild clinical events and no radiographic normalization of well-defined MS-like lesions (n = 3; MOG titers 1:20, 1:100, 1:40); (3) MOGAD and MS overlapping phenotype was defined by those with a combination of mild and severe clinical events, partial T2 lesion normalization, both well- and ill-defined lesions (n = 2; MOG titers 1:20, 1:100). The application of the International MOGAD Panel criteria categorized five patients (50%) in agreement with expert assignment. One additional patient was classified in agreement to assignment when MOGAD criteria were applied after serial MOG-IgG titers testing.
CONCLUSIONS: While the International MOGAD Panel diagnostic criteria have helped with accuracy for the diagnosis of this condition, in a group of patients seropositive for MOG-IgG with overlapping clinical and imaging features of RRMS criteria review may lead to increased accuracy. Serial serologies, repeated imaging, close attention to clinical course, and response to therapy are possible variables to consider for further refinement of MOGAD diagnostic criteria.