4.3 Article

Oligoclonal bands predict multiple sclerosis after optic neuritis: a literature survey

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages 404-410

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458510391340

Keywords

cerebrospinal fluid; meta-analysis; monosymptomatic optic neuritis; multiple sclerosis; oligoclonal bands; prognosis; review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disease resulting in inflammation and demyelination of neurones in the central nervous system (CNS). The first sign of MS is often monosymptomatic optic neuritis (MON). Cerebrospinal fluid from a patient with MS analysed by electrophoresis often shows a split to form so called oligoclonal bands (OCBs). OCBs consist of proteins from activated lymphocytes and plasma cell clones. Objectives: The aim of this study was to review the published literature on OCBs in MON patients and perform a meta-analysis of the studies in order to assess the utility of OCB determination in patients with MON in the prediction of their risk of MS. Methods: Review and meta-analysis of the results of 10 published studies. Results: OCBs as a predictive test had a sensitivity of 73-100% (mean 88.5%), a specificity of 41-90% (mean 57%) and OR-values between 2.75 and 171 (mean 34.2). The areal under the summary receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.89 (unweighted) and 0.82 (weighted). The studies showed large heterogeneity in the diagnostic accuracy. Conclusion: This literature-based meta-analysis provides evidence that OCBs may have a high predictive value for the development of MS in patients with MON. Standardization of laboratory methods and diagnostic criteria would help bring out the full clinical potential of the test. To elucidate the predictive value of OCBs versus MRI, we recommend that a similar meta-analysis of studies of MRI in MON be performed.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available