 |
 |

Diagnosis of Neuromyelitis Spectrum DisordersComparative Sensitivities and Specificities of Immunohistochemical and Immunoprecipitation Assays
Andrew McKeon, MB, MRCPI;
James P. Fryer, MS;
Metha Apiwattanakul, MD;
Vanda A. Lennon, MD, PhD;
Shannon R. Hinson, PhD;
Thomas J. Kryzer, AS;
Claudia F. Lucchinetti, MD;
Brian G. Weinshenker, MD;
Dean M. Wingerchuk, MD;
Elizabeth A. Shuster, MD;
Sean J. Pittock, MD
Arch Neurol. 2009;66(9):1134-1138.
Objective To compare the sensitivity and specificity of immunofluorescence (IF) and immunoprecipitation (IP) assays using green fluorescent protein–tagged aquaporin-4 (AQP4) in 6335 patients for whom serological evaluation was requested on a service basis.
Design Case-control study.
Setting Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory (Rochester, Minnesota) and Departments of Neurology (Rochester, Minnesota; Scottsdale, Arizona; and Jacksonville, Florida).
Patients Group 1, 835 Mayo Clinic patients, 100 with a neuromyelitis optica (NMO) spectrum disorder diagnosis and 735 without NMO spectrum disorder; group 2, 5500 non–Mayo Clinic patients.
Main Outcome Measure Sensitivity and specificity of each assay for NMO or NMO spectrum disorder, individually and combined.
Results In group 1, the sensitivity rates for NMO were IF, 58%; IP, 33%; and combined assays, 63%. The sensitivity rates for relapsing longitudinally extensive transverse myelitis were IF, 29%; IP, 6%; and combined assays, 29%. The specificity rates for NMO and relapsing longitudinally extensive transverse myelitis were IF, 99.6%; IP, 99.3%; and combined assays, 99.2%. In group 2, NMO-IgG was detected by IF in 498 of 5500 patients (9.1%) and by IP in 331 patients (6.0%); 76 of the 331 patients seropositive by IP (23%) were negative by IF. Clinical information was available for 124 patients (including 16 of those seropositive by IP only); 123 had a definite NMO spectrum disorder and 1 was at risk for NMO (monophasic optic neuritis).
Conclusions In this large, clinical practice-based study, NMO-IgG detected by IF or IP was highly specific for NMO spectrum disorders. The IP assay was significantly less sensitive than IF. Combined testing improved sensitivity by 5%.
Author Affiliations: Departments of Neurology (Drs McKeon, Lennon, Lucchinetti, Weinshenker, and Pittock), Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (Messrs Fryer and Kryzer and Drs Lennon, Apiwattanakul, Hinson, and Pittock), and Immunology (Dr Lennon), Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona (Dr Wingerchuk); and Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida (Dr Shuster).
CiteULike Connotea Delicious Digg Facebook Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
This Month in Archives of Neurology
Arch Neurol. 2009;66(9):1056-1057.
FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Illuminating neuromyelitis optica pathogenesis
Ransohoff
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012;109:1001-1002.
FULL TEXT
Low Serum Vitamin D Levels and Recurrent Inflammatory Spinal Cord Disease
Mealy et al.
Arch Neurol 2011;0:archneurol.2011.1974v1-5.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Brain Involvement in Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders
Chan et al.
Arch Neurol 2011;68:1432-1439.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Quantification and Functional Characterization of Antibodies to Native Aquaporin 4 in Neuromyelitis Optica
Kalluri et al.
Arch Neurol 2010;67:1201-1208.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
CSF GFAP: Volcanic ash from anti-aquaporin-4 antibody-mediated destruction of astrocytes
Giovannoni
Neurology 2010;75:200-201.
FULL TEXT
|