Cargando…

Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is currently based solely on clinical and magnetic resonance imaging features. However, histopathological studies have revealed four different patterns of lesion pathology in patients diagnosed with MS, suggesting that MS may be a pathologically h...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jarius, S., König, F.B., Metz, I., Ruprecht, K., Paul, F., Brück, W., Wildemann, B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5576197/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28851393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12974-017-0929-z
_version_ 1783260155565047808
author Jarius, S.
König, F.B.
Metz, I.
Ruprecht, K.
Paul, F.
Brück, W.
Wildemann, B.
author_facet Jarius, S.
König, F.B.
Metz, I.
Ruprecht, K.
Paul, F.
Brück, W.
Wildemann, B.
author_sort Jarius, S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is currently based solely on clinical and magnetic resonance imaging features. However, histopathological studies have revealed four different patterns of lesion pathology in patients diagnosed with MS, suggesting that MS may be a pathologically heterogeneous syndrome rather than a single disease entity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether patients with pattern I MS differ from patients with pattern II or III MS with regard to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) findings, especially with reference to intrathecal IgG synthesis, which is found in most patients with MS but is frequently missing in MS mimics such as aquaporin-4-IgG-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-IgG-positive encephalomyelitis. METHODS: Findings from 68 lumbar punctures in patients who underwent brain biopsy as part of their diagnostic work-up and who could be unequivocally classified as having pattern I, pattern II or pattern III MS were analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Oligoclonal bands (OCBs) were present in 88.2% of samples from pattern I MS patients but in only 27% of samples from patients with pattern II or pattern III MS (P < 0.00004); moreover, OCBs were present only transiently in some of the latter patients. A polyspecific intrathecal IgG response to measles, rubella and/or varicella zoster virus (so-called MRZ reaction) was previously reported in 60–80% of MS patients, but was absent in all pattern II or III MS patients tested (P < 0.00001 vs. previous cohorts). In contrast, the albumin CSF/serum ratio (QAlb), a marker of blood–CSF barrier function, was more frequently elevated in samples from pattern II and III MS patients (P < 0.002). Accordingly, QAlb values and albumin and total protein levels were higher in pattern II and III MS samples than in pattern I MS samples (P < 0.005, P < 0.009 and P < 0.006, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pattern II or pattern III MS differ significantly from patients with pattern I MS as well as from previous, histologically non-classified MS cohorts with regard to both intrathecal IgG synthesis and blood–CSF barrier function. Our findings strongly corroborate the notion that pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5576197
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55761972017-08-30 Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis Jarius, S. König, F.B. Metz, I. Ruprecht, K. Paul, F. Brück, W. Wildemann, B. J Neuroinflammation Research BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is currently based solely on clinical and magnetic resonance imaging features. However, histopathological studies have revealed four different patterns of lesion pathology in patients diagnosed with MS, suggesting that MS may be a pathologically heterogeneous syndrome rather than a single disease entity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether patients with pattern I MS differ from patients with pattern II or III MS with regard to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) findings, especially with reference to intrathecal IgG synthesis, which is found in most patients with MS but is frequently missing in MS mimics such as aquaporin-4-IgG-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-IgG-positive encephalomyelitis. METHODS: Findings from 68 lumbar punctures in patients who underwent brain biopsy as part of their diagnostic work-up and who could be unequivocally classified as having pattern I, pattern II or pattern III MS were analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Oligoclonal bands (OCBs) were present in 88.2% of samples from pattern I MS patients but in only 27% of samples from patients with pattern II or pattern III MS (P < 0.00004); moreover, OCBs were present only transiently in some of the latter patients. A polyspecific intrathecal IgG response to measles, rubella and/or varicella zoster virus (so-called MRZ reaction) was previously reported in 60–80% of MS patients, but was absent in all pattern II or III MS patients tested (P < 0.00001 vs. previous cohorts). In contrast, the albumin CSF/serum ratio (QAlb), a marker of blood–CSF barrier function, was more frequently elevated in samples from pattern II and III MS patients (P < 0.002). Accordingly, QAlb values and albumin and total protein levels were higher in pattern II and III MS samples than in pattern I MS samples (P < 0.005, P < 0.009 and P < 0.006, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pattern II or pattern III MS differ significantly from patients with pattern I MS as well as from previous, histologically non-classified MS cohorts with regard to both intrathecal IgG synthesis and blood–CSF barrier function. Our findings strongly corroborate the notion that pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS. BioMed Central 2017-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5576197/ /pubmed/28851393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12974-017-0929-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Jarius, S.
König, F.B.
Metz, I.
Ruprecht, K.
Paul, F.
Brück, W.
Wildemann, B.
Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
title Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
title_full Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
title_fullStr Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
title_full_unstemmed Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
title_short Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
title_sort pattern ii and pattern iii ms are entities distinct from pattern i ms: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5576197/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28851393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12974-017-0929-z
work_keys_str_mv AT jariuss patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis
AT konigfb patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis
AT metzi patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis
AT ruprechtk patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis
AT paulf patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis
AT bruckw patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis
AT wildemannb patterniiandpatterniiimsareentitiesdistinctfrompatternimsevidencefromcerebrospinalfluidanalysis