Differential diagnosis and comparison of diagnostic algorithms in children and adolescents with autoimmune encephalitis in Spain: a prospective cohort study and retrospective analysis

Gemma Olivé-Cirera, Elianet Fonseca, Li-Wen Chen, Anna Fetta, Eugenia Martínez-Hernández, Mar Guasp, Veronica González-Álvarez, Verónica Delgadillo, Verónica Cantarín-Extremera, María Jiménez-Legido, Lorena Monge-Galindo, Ana Felipe, Beatriz Beseler, Eulàlia Turón-Viñas, Joaquín Fernández-Ramos, Maria J Martínez-González, Maria Vázquez-López, Luisa Arrabal Fernandez, Mireia Alvarez-Molinero, Beatriz Muñoz-Cabello, Thaís Armangué
{"title":"Differential diagnosis and comparison of diagnostic algorithms in children and adolescents with autoimmune encephalitis in Spain: a prospective cohort study and retrospective analysis","authors":"Gemma Olivé-Cirera, Elianet Fonseca, Li-Wen Chen, Anna Fetta, Eugenia Martínez-Hernández, Mar Guasp, Veronica González-Álvarez, Verónica Delgadillo, Verónica Cantarín-Extremera, María Jiménez-Legido, Lorena Monge-Galindo, Ana Felipe, Beatriz Beseler, Eulàlia Turón-Viñas, Joaquín Fernández-Ramos, Maria J Martínez-González, Maria Vázquez-López, Luisa Arrabal Fernandez, Mireia Alvarez-Molinero, Beatriz Muñoz-Cabello, Thaís Armangué","doi":"10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00443-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background</h3>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.<h3>Methods</h3>We did a prospective cohort study that included all patients (&lt;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.<h3>Findings</h3>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 <em>vs</em> 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 <em>vs</em> 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 <em>vs</em> six of 306 with the general algorithm), who did not need immunotherapy.<h3>Interpretation</h3>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.<h3>Funding</h3>Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fundació Clínic per la Recerca Biomèdica, The Edmond J Safra Foundation, and la Caixa Foundation.<h3>Translation</h3>For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.","PeriodicalId":22676,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet Neurology","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00443-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

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.

Methods

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.

Findings

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.

Interpretation

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.

Funding

Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fundació Clínic per la Recerca Biomèdica, The Edmond J Safra Foundation, and la Caixa Foundation.

Translation

For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
西班牙儿童和青少年自身免疫性脑炎的鉴别诊断和诊断算法比较:一项前瞻性队列研究和回顾性分析
背景目前的诊断方法对疑似自身免疫性脑炎的儿童的有用性尚不清楚。我们的目的是评估自身免疫性脑炎在临床实践中的诊断,并比较两种国际诊断算法的表现(一种适用于任何年龄的患者,另一种适用于儿科患者),特别强调对可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者的评估,因为这种诊断表明免疫治疗应该继续或升级,但很难确定。方法:我们进行了一项前瞻性队列研究,纳入了西班牙40家医院的所有疑似自身免疫性脑炎患者(18岁),这些医院的医生每6个月提供一次临床信息,持续2年或更长时间。神经抗体检测以确认抗体阳性自身免疫性脑炎的诊断在巴塞罗那的August Pi sunyer医院Clínic进行。根据最后随访时最可能的诊断将患者分为预先指定的四类。我们使用多变量逻辑分析来评估免疫治疗与可能的抗体阴性自身免疫性脑炎患者预后之间的潜在关联。我们还对根据一般和儿科诊断算法做出的诊断之间的一致性进行了回顾性分析,用kappa指数进行了评估。在2013年6月1日至2021年5月31日期间,729名儿童(平均年龄7.1岁[SD 4.9];纳入疑似自身免疫性脑炎的383名男孩(53%)和346名女孩(47%)。中位随访36个月(IQR 26-60)后,患者根据其最可能的诊断进行分类:明确的自身免疫性脑炎或明确的炎症或自身免疫性疾病(n=230 [32%]);中枢神经系统感染(n=112 [15%]);原因不明的炎症性中枢神经系统疾病(n=81[11%],其中3例(4%)伴有新型kl ver- bucy样综合征;非炎症性疾病(306例[42%]),主要是癫痫或精神疾病(306例中177例[58%])。230例自身免疫性脑炎患者中有150例(65%)检测到神经抗体;这150人中有127人(85%)有NMDA受体或髓鞘少突胶质细胞糖蛋白(MOG)抗体。在诊断抗体阳性的儿童自身免疫性脑炎时,算法之间的一致性很好(kappa指数0.99,95% CI 0.97 - 1.00),在推荐经经验免疫治疗时,算法之间的一致性很好(0.59,0.54 - 0.65),在诊断可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎时,算法之间的一致性很差(0.29,0.21 - 0.37)。与一般算法相比,儿科算法纳入的可能抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者更多(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原因不明的中枢神经系统炎症性疾病的患者(81人中有80人采用儿科算法,81人中有31人采用一般算法),他们可能从免疫治疗中受益,以及一些在最后一次随访时被诊断为非炎症性疾病的患者(306人中有47人采用儿科算法,306人中有6人采用一般算法),他们不需要免疫治疗。大约三分之一的疑似自身免疫性脑炎的儿童最终确诊为这种诊断,或诊断为另一种明确的炎症性疾病。与自身免疫性脑炎相似的常见疾病有感染性疾病、癫痫性疾病和精神疾病。这两种算法在诊断抗体阳性的自身免疫性脑炎方面表现良好,但儿科算法没有识别出明确的自身免疫性脑炎,这种脑炎可能在没有自身抗体的情况下发生,并且可能过度诊断可能存在抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎的患者。相比之下,一般算法可能对抗体阴性的自身免疫性脑炎患者诊断不足。鉴于可能的抗体阴性自身免疫性脑炎的诊断具有治疗意义,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。资助:Salud Carlos III研究所,Fundació Clínic per la Recerca biom, Edmond J Safra基金会和la Caixa基金会。有关摘要的西班牙语翻译,请参阅补充资料部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信