4.7 Article

Elevated levels of kappa free light chains in CSF support the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 255, Issue 10, Pages 1508-1514

Publisher

DR DIETRICH STEINKOPFF VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-008-0954-z

Keywords

multiple sclerosis; CSF; oligoclonal IgG; kappa free light chain; kappa free light chain index

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Numerous studies have demonstrated elevated kappa free light chains (KFLCs) in CSF of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. However, so far only small cohorts have been examined, and generally only through qualitative KFLCs analysis. Using a recently developed free light chain (FLC) immunoassay, it is now possible to quantitatively measure KFLCs by automated nephelometry. Our objective was to determine the extent to which KFLC levels in CSF correlated with the diagnosis of MS and CISSMS (clinically isolated syndrome suggestive of MS) compared to oligoclonal banding (OCB) and the immunoglobulin G (IgG) index. CSF and serum samples from 438 unselected patients, including a MS group of 70 patients (41 MS, 29 CISSMS), were analysed using nephelometry and isoelectric focusing. We then retrospectively correlated results with patients' diagnoses. Of the MS group (n = 70), 67 patients had elevated KFLCs using the KFLC index (>= 5.9), 64 patients showed OCB and 56 patients presented with an elevated IgG index (>= 0.6). Sensitivities were 0.96 for the KFLC index, 0.91 for OCB and 0.80 for the IgG index. The specificity of the KFLC index for the MS group (0.86) was lower than that of OCB (0.92) but distinctly higher compared to the IgG index (0.77). In this study, an elevated KFLC-index represented the most sensitive and specific quantitative diagnostic parameter for MS. As it is measured by automated, routinely available laboratory methods, KFLC quantitation can provide a rapid and reproduceable indication of intrathecal immunological processes supporting current MS diagnostic criteria.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available