游离轻链指数的诊断意义及其与多发性硬化临床表现的关系

Sanja Karakatič, J. Magdič, S. Karakatič, Tomaž Omerzu, E. Modrič, Tanja Hojs Fabjan
{"title":"游离轻链指数的诊断意义及其与多发性硬化临床表现的关系","authors":"Sanja Karakatič, J. Magdič, S. Karakatič, Tomaž Omerzu, E. Modrič, Tanja Hojs Fabjan","doi":"10.18690/actabiomed.192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) free light chains (FLC) are of promising diagnostic importance in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, research is required to confirm their utility as part of the diagnostic criteria for MS. In addition, very few publications can be found addressing the relationship of FLCs to the clinical presentation at the onset of MS. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the FLC kappa and lambda indices, and explored their relationship to the number and type of functional systems (FS) involved. \nMethods: FLC indices were determined in paired CSF and serum samples from 71 patients with noninflammatory neurological diseases (non-MS, n = 29) and new-onset MS (MS, n = 42). The latter were further divided into two groups with mono- and polysymptomatic presentation. FS involvement was evaluated in accordance with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). \nResults: Using both FLC indices along with the age and sex of patients, the diagnostic accuracy of MS was higher (AUC, 0.991; sensitivity, 95.5%; specificity, 95.8%) than that observed when using either the lambda index (AUC, 0.677; sensitivity, 68.0%; specificity, 60.0%) or kappa index (AUC, 0.957; sensitivity, 88.5%; specificity, 88.0%) alone. No differences were observed in the lambda (U = 78.0; p = 0.749) or kappa indices (U = 82.0; p = 0.885) between mono- and polysymptomatic patients. Nor was a correlation found between FLC indices and EDSS scores. \nConslusion: FLC indices could be useful diagnostic markers for MS. However, such indices do not differentiate between clinical presentations at disease onset and are not correlated with baseline EDSS scores.","PeriodicalId":186880,"journal":{"name":"Acta Medico-Biotechnica","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic relevance of free light chain indices and their relation to the clinical presentation of multiple sclerosis\",\"authors\":\"Sanja Karakatič, J. Magdič, S. Karakatič, Tomaž Omerzu, E. Modrič, Tanja Hojs Fabjan\",\"doi\":\"10.18690/actabiomed.192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) free light chains (FLC) are of promising diagnostic importance in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, research is required to confirm their utility as part of the diagnostic criteria for MS. In addition, very few publications can be found addressing the relationship of FLCs to the clinical presentation at the onset of MS. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the FLC kappa and lambda indices, and explored their relationship to the number and type of functional systems (FS) involved. \\nMethods: FLC indices were determined in paired CSF and serum samples from 71 patients with noninflammatory neurological diseases (non-MS, n = 29) and new-onset MS (MS, n = 42). The latter were further divided into two groups with mono- and polysymptomatic presentation. FS involvement was evaluated in accordance with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). \\nResults: Using both FLC indices along with the age and sex of patients, the diagnostic accuracy of MS was higher (AUC, 0.991; sensitivity, 95.5%; specificity, 95.8%) than that observed when using either the lambda index (AUC, 0.677; sensitivity, 68.0%; specificity, 60.0%) or kappa index (AUC, 0.957; sensitivity, 88.5%; specificity, 88.0%) alone. No differences were observed in the lambda (U = 78.0; p = 0.749) or kappa indices (U = 82.0; p = 0.885) between mono- and polysymptomatic patients. Nor was a correlation found between FLC indices and EDSS scores. \\nConslusion: FLC indices could be useful diagnostic markers for MS. However, such indices do not differentiate between clinical presentations at disease onset and are not correlated with baseline EDSS scores.\",\"PeriodicalId\":186880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Medico-Biotechnica\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Medico-Biotechnica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18690/actabiomed.192\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Medico-Biotechnica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18690/actabiomed.192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:脑脊液(CSF)游离轻链(FLC)在多发性硬化症(MS)患者的诊断中具有重要意义。然而,需要研究来证实它们作为ms诊断标准的一部分的效用。此外,很少有出版物可以找到FLC与ms发病时临床表现的关系。我们旨在评估FLC kappa和lambda指数的诊断性能,并探讨它们与所涉及的功能系统(FS)的数量和类型的关系。方法:对71例非炎症性神经系统疾病(非多发性硬化症,n = 29)和新发多发性硬化症(MS, n = 42)患者的配对CSF和血清样本进行FLC指数测定。后者进一步分为单症状组和多症状组。根据扩展残疾状态量表(EDSS)评估FS的参与情况。结果:结合患者的年龄和性别,结合FLC两项指标对MS的诊断准确率较高(AUC, 0.991;敏感性,95.5%;特异性为95.8%),优于使用lambda指数(AUC, 0.677;敏感性,68.0%;特异性为60.0%)或kappa指数(AUC, 0.957;敏感性,88.5%;特异性为88.0%)。λ (U = 78.0;p = 0.749)或kappa指数(U = 82.0;P = 0.885)。FLC指数和EDSS评分之间也没有相关性。结论:FLC指数可能是ms的有用诊断指标,然而,这些指数不能区分疾病发病时的临床表现,也与基线EDSS评分无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic relevance of free light chain indices and their relation to the clinical presentation of multiple sclerosis
Purpose: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) free light chains (FLC) are of promising diagnostic importance in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, research is required to confirm their utility as part of the diagnostic criteria for MS. In addition, very few publications can be found addressing the relationship of FLCs to the clinical presentation at the onset of MS. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the FLC kappa and lambda indices, and explored their relationship to the number and type of functional systems (FS) involved. Methods: FLC indices were determined in paired CSF and serum samples from 71 patients with noninflammatory neurological diseases (non-MS, n = 29) and new-onset MS (MS, n = 42). The latter were further divided into two groups with mono- and polysymptomatic presentation. FS involvement was evaluated in accordance with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Results: Using both FLC indices along with the age and sex of patients, the diagnostic accuracy of MS was higher (AUC, 0.991; sensitivity, 95.5%; specificity, 95.8%) than that observed when using either the lambda index (AUC, 0.677; sensitivity, 68.0%; specificity, 60.0%) or kappa index (AUC, 0.957; sensitivity, 88.5%; specificity, 88.0%) alone. No differences were observed in the lambda (U = 78.0; p = 0.749) or kappa indices (U = 82.0; p = 0.885) between mono- and polysymptomatic patients. Nor was a correlation found between FLC indices and EDSS scores. Conslusion: FLC indices could be useful diagnostic markers for MS. However, such indices do not differentiate between clinical presentations at disease onset and are not correlated with baseline EDSS scores.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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