Cargando…
Neurofilament light chain in blood as a diagnostic and predictive biomarker for multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Neurofilament light chain (NfL) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a biomarker of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, CSF sampling is invasive and has limited the clinical application. With the development of highly sensitive single-molecule assay, the accurate quantification of the very low...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9473405/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36103562 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274565 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Neurofilament light chain (NfL) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a biomarker of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, CSF sampling is invasive and has limited the clinical application. With the development of highly sensitive single-molecule assay, the accurate quantification of the very low NfL levels in blood become feasible. As evidence being accumulated, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic and predictive value of blood NfL in MS patients. METHODS: We performed literature search on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from inception to May 31, 2022. The blood NfL differences between MS vs. controls, MS vs. clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), progressive MS (PMS) vs. relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), and MS in relapse vs. MS in remission were estimated by standard mean difference (SMD) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95%CI were calculated to predict time to reach Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score≥4.0 and to relapse. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies comprising 6545 MS patients and 2477 controls were eligible for meta-analysis of diagnosis value, and 5 studies with 4444 patients were synthesized in analysis of predictive value. Blood NfL levels were significantly higher in MS patients vs. age-matched controls (SMD = 0.64, 95%CI 0.44–0.85, P<0.001), vs. non-matched controls (SMD = 0.76, 95%CI 0.56–0.96, P<0.001) and vs. CIS patients (SMD = 0.30, 95%CI 0.18–0.42, P<0.001), in PMS vs. RRMS (SMD = 0.56, 95%CI 0.27–0.85, P<0.001), and in relapsed patients vs. remitted patients (SMD = 0.54, 95%CI 0.16–0.92, P = 0.005). Patients with high blood NfL levels had shorter time to reach EDSS score≥4.0 (HR = 2.36, 95%CI 1.32–4.21, P = 0.004) but similar time to relapse (HR = 1.32, 95%CI 0.90–1.93, P = 0.155) compared to those with low NfL levels. CONCLUSION: As far as we know, this is the first meta-analysis evaluating the diagnosis and predictive value of blood NfL in MS. The present study indicates blood NfL may be a useful biomarker in diagnosing MS, distinguishing MS subtypes and predicting disease worsening in the future. |
---|