4.5 Article

Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein and aquaporin-4 antibodies are highly specific in children with acquired demyelinating syndromes

Journal

DEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE AND CHILD NEUROLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 9, Pages 958-+

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.13703

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AIM Our objectives were to evaluate the utility of measuring myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) and aquaporin-4 (AQP4) antibodies (Ab) in clinical practice and describe their associated neurological phenotypes in children. METHOD Between 2012 and 2017, 371 children with suspected acquired demyelinating syndromes (ADS) seen in three tertiary centres were tested for MOG-Ab and AQP4-Ab. Medical notes were retrospectively reviewed, and clinical and demographic data compiled. Clinical phenotyping was performed blinded to the antibody results. RESULTS After review, 237 of the 371 were diagnosed with ADS. Of these, 76 out of 237 (32.1%) were MOG-Ab positive and 14 out of 237 (5.9%) were AQP4-Ab positive. None were positive for both autoantibodies. All 134 patients with non-ADS were negative for MOG-Ab. MOG-Ab were identified in 45 out of 70 (64.3%) patients presenting with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) and in 24 out of 25 patients with relapsing ADEM. Thirty-six out of 75 (48%) MOG-Ab positive patients relapsed. Of the 33 children with neuromyelitis optic spectrum disorder, 14 were AQP4-Ab positive, 13 were MOG-Ab positive, and 6 were seronegative. Of the children with longitudinal samples, 8 out of 13 AQP4-Ab remained positive during the disease course compared to 35 out of 43 MOG-Ab (13/16 monophasic and 22/27 relapsing). INTERPRETATION Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies were identified in a third of children with ADS. Almost half of the MOG-Ab positive children relapsed and the majority of them remained antibody positive over 4-years follow-up.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available