Real-world clinical experience with serum MOG and AQP4 antibody testing by live versus fixed cell-based assay.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Yana Said, Angeliki Filippatou, Conlan Tran, LuAnn Rezavi, Kai Guo, Matthew D Smith, Yasmin Resto, John J Chen, Peter A Calabresi, Patrizio Caturegli, Sean J Pittock, Eoin P Flanagan, Elias S Sotirchos
{"title":"Real-world clinical experience with serum MOG and AQP4 antibody testing by live versus fixed cell-based assay.","authors":"Yana Said, Angeliki Filippatou, Conlan Tran, LuAnn Rezavi, Kai Guo, Matthew D Smith, Yasmin Resto, John J Chen, Peter A Calabresi, Patrizio Caturegli, Sean J Pittock, Eoin P Flanagan, Elias S Sotirchos","doi":"10.1002/acn3.52310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the real-world performance of a live (LCBA) versus a fixed (FCBA) cell-based assay for the detection of serum antibodies directed against myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG-IgG) and aquaporin-4 (AQP4-IgG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective study of patients evaluated at a single tertiary academic referral center, with serum testing performed clinically for AQP4-IgG and/or MOG-IgG by FCBA and LCBA on the same day. Additionally, frozen banked sera from the same day for patients tested only by one assay were retrieved and tested by the other assay. FCBA was performed by the Johns Hopkins Immunology Laboratory using Euroimmun kits with detection by indirect immunofluorescence (FCBA-IF), whereas LCBA was performed by the Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory with detection by flow cytometry (LCBA-FACS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 594 specimens with paired MOG-IgG testing, 500 were negative by both assays, 33 were positive by both assays, 56 were positive exclusively by LCBA-FACS, and 5 were only positive by FCBA-IF. Overall, MOG-IgG LCBA-FACS exhibited 95.1% sensitivity and 97.7% specificity, whereas MOG-IgG FCBA-IF had 45.7% sensitivity and 99.8% specificity. Of 577 specimens with paired AQP4-IgG testing, 503 were negative by both assays, 51 were positive by both assays, 21 were positive exclusively by LCBA-FACS, and 2 were only positive by FCBA-IF. Overall, AQP4-IgG LCBA-FACS exhibited 97.3% sensitivity and 100% specificity, whereas AQP4-IgG FCBA-IF had 71.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>LCBA-FACS for both MOG-IgG and AQP4-IgG had markedly better sensitivity than FCBA-IF, with similar specificity. The use of FCBA-IF may result in underrecognition of both MOG antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) and AQP4-IgG seropositive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD).</p>","PeriodicalId":126,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.52310","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the real-world performance of a live (LCBA) versus a fixed (FCBA) cell-based assay for the detection of serum antibodies directed against myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG-IgG) and aquaporin-4 (AQP4-IgG).

Methods: This was a retrospective study of patients evaluated at a single tertiary academic referral center, with serum testing performed clinically for AQP4-IgG and/or MOG-IgG by FCBA and LCBA on the same day. Additionally, frozen banked sera from the same day for patients tested only by one assay were retrieved and tested by the other assay. FCBA was performed by the Johns Hopkins Immunology Laboratory using Euroimmun kits with detection by indirect immunofluorescence (FCBA-IF), whereas LCBA was performed by the Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory with detection by flow cytometry (LCBA-FACS).

Results: Of 594 specimens with paired MOG-IgG testing, 500 were negative by both assays, 33 were positive by both assays, 56 were positive exclusively by LCBA-FACS, and 5 were only positive by FCBA-IF. Overall, MOG-IgG LCBA-FACS exhibited 95.1% sensitivity and 97.7% specificity, whereas MOG-IgG FCBA-IF had 45.7% sensitivity and 99.8% specificity. Of 577 specimens with paired AQP4-IgG testing, 503 were negative by both assays, 51 were positive by both assays, 21 were positive exclusively by LCBA-FACS, and 2 were only positive by FCBA-IF. Overall, AQP4-IgG LCBA-FACS exhibited 97.3% sensitivity and 100% specificity, whereas AQP4-IgG FCBA-IF had 71.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity.

Interpretation: LCBA-FACS for both MOG-IgG and AQP4-IgG had markedly better sensitivity than FCBA-IF, with similar specificity. The use of FCBA-IF may result in underrecognition of both MOG antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) and AQP4-IgG seropositive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
1.90%
发文量
218
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology is a peer-reviewed journal for rapid dissemination of high-quality research related to all areas of neurology. The journal publishes original research and scholarly reviews focused on the mechanisms and treatments of diseases of the nervous system; high-impact topics in neurologic education; and other topics of interest to the clinical neuroscience community.
×
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