4.7 Article

Diagnosis of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease: International MOGAD Panel proposed criteria

Journal

LANCET NEUROLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 3, Pages 268-282

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00431-8

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Serum antibodies against MOG can help diagnose MOGAD, which is distinct from multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica. The presence of MOG-IgG is a core criterion for the diagnosis. MOGAD can present with various symptoms and can be either monophasic or relapsing, and diagnostic accuracy relies on MOG-IgG cell-based assays.
Serum antibodies directed against myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) are found in patients with acquired CNS demyelinating syndromes that are distinct from multiple sclerosis and aquaporin-4-seropositive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder. Based on an extensive literature review and a structured consensus process, we propose diagnostic criteria for MOG antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) in which the presence of MOG-IgG is a core criterion. According to our proposed criteria, MOGAD is typically associated with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, optic neuritis, or transverse myelitis, and is less commonly associated with cerebral cortical encephalitis, brainstem presentations, or cerebellar presentations. MOGAD can present as either a monophasic or relapsing disease course, and MOG-IgG cell-based assays are important for diagnostic accuracy. Diagnoses such as multiple sclerosis need to be excluded, but not all patients with multiple sclerosis should undergo screening for MOG-IgG. These proposed diagnostic criteria require validation but have the potential to improve identification of individuals with MOGAD, which is essential to define long-term clinical outcomes, refine inclusion criteria for clinical trials, and identify predictors of a relapsing versus a monophasic disease course.

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