Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1590/0004-282X-ANP-2022-S122
A critical review and update on autoimmune encephalitis: understanding the alphabet soup
Revisão crítica e atualizações em encefalites autoimunes: entendendo a sopa de letrinhas- ABSTRACT
- RESUMO
- INTRODUCTION
- EPIDEMIOLOGY
- EVOLVING CONCEPTS: NAMING NAMES
- CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS
- ANCILLARY TESTS
- BRAIN 18FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY (18FDG-PET)
- TREATMENT
- References
ABSTRACT
Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) comprises a group of diseases mediated by antibodies against neuronal cell surface or synaptic antigens, such as ion channels or neurotransmitter receptors. New clinical syndromes and their associated antibodies were and are still being characterized over the last two decades. The fact that their main clinical features are interdisciplinary, - encompassing neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognitive dysfunction, epileptic seizures, movement and sleep disorders - has led to a surge of interest in this field. Some of these diseases present with a well-defined syndrome, being recognizable on clinical grounds. Correct diagnosis is important since AE are potentially treatable diseases, despite their severity. On the other hand, an increasing number of neuronal antibodies being described casts doubt upon the way we should utilize antibody testing and interpret results. In this article we review, summarize and update the current knowledge on antibody mediated encephalitis.
#
RESUMO
As encefalites autoimunes compreendem um grupo de doenças mediadas por anticorpos contra antígenos de superfície neuronal ou sinapse, como canais iônicos ou receptores de neurotransmissores. Novas síndromes clínicas e os anticorpos a elas associados foram e ainda estão sendo caracterizados ao longo das últimas duas décadas. Dado que suas principais características clínicas são interdisciplinares, isto é, incluem -se sintomas neuropisquiátricos, disfunção cognitiva, crises epilépticas, distúrbio do movimento e do sono, há uma grande onda de interesse sobre esse campo de conhecimento. Algumas dessas doenças apresentam-se com uma síndrome bem definida, sendo possível reconhecê-las clinicamente. Diagnosticá-las corretamente é importante uma vez que se trata de doenças potencialmente tratáveis apesar da gravidade que lhes é característica. Por outro lado, o número crescente de anticorpos sendo descritos causam dúvida frequente sobre qual o melhor teste a solicitar e como interpretá-los. Nós aqui apresentamos uma revisão atualização resumida do conhecimento atual sobre as encefalites mediadas por anticorpos.
#
Keywords:
Encephalitis - Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis - Limbic Encephalitis - Paraneoplastic Syndromes, Nervous System.Palavras-chave:
Encefalite - Encefalite Anti Receptor de N-Metil-D-Aspartato - Encefalite Límbica - Síndromes Paraneoplásicas do Sistema Nervoso.INTRODUCTION
Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is a group of recently recognized diseases where antibodies believed to be pathogenic target neuronal proteins localized in cell surface and/or synapses, disrupting their function and provoking a peculiar symptomatology. Clinically, AE usually manifest as a combination of prominent neuropsychiatric symptoms, epileptic seizures, amnesia, movement disorders, disorders of consciousness and sleep disorders. Other than autonomic dysfunction, AE are not accompanied by systemic manifestation, such as occurs in Behçet’s disease or in systemic lupus erythematosus[1].
Although rare, certain AE can be easily recognized at the bedside and confirmed by antibody testing. However, these tests are not easily available and even when access is guaranteed, results can take several weeks to be obtained[2]. Expanding discovery of neuronal antibodies associated with testing technical limitations of commercial kits also poses challenges to select testing and to interpret test results.
Recognition of autoimmune encephalitis is crucial, because AE often presents with rapidly progressive severe and debilitating symptoms which, if promptly and adequately treated, can lead to good outcomes, including full recovery in many cases. Tumor association varies depending on some factors such as antibody type, neurological syndrome and demography, influencing treatment response, relapse risk and outcomes. Future directions must address tailored treatment for each syndrome, symptomatic treatment and rehabilitation.
This review highlights updates and controversies regarding clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of the well-known antibody-mediated encephalitis syndromes.
#
EPIDEMIOLOGY
Autoimmune encephalitis is not rare: the paradigm shifts in comparison with infectious encephalitis
Data from England estimates that incidence of all types of encephalitis is 2.73 to 8.66 cases per 100,000 a year[3]. Approximately 40-50% of encephalitis cases remain without an established diagnosis[4],[5], even when patients undergo extensive testing.
Until the discovery of neuronal cell surface antibodies, infection was believed to be the main known cause of encephalitis. However, following the characterization of anti- N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor (NMDAR) antibodies in 2007[6],we learned that autoimmune etiology is not rare. The California Encephalitis Project showed that in young people individuals (aged < 30), anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) was the most common type of encephalitis, surpassing individual viral etiology[7].
In the Netherlands, annual incidence of anti-LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1) encephalitis was 0,83 per million, similar to other neurological diseases such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease and Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome[8].
In Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA, a recent population-based comparative study showed that prevalence and incidence of autoimmune encephalitis is comparable to infectious encephalitis (13.7/100,000 for autoimmune encephalitis and 11.6/100,000 for all infectious encephalitis)[9]. The same study also demonstrated that detection of autoimmune encephalitis is increasing over time: incidence increased from 0,4/100,000person-years from 1995-2005 to 1.2/100,000 person-years from 2006-2015, attributable to increased detection of autoantibodies-positive cases[9].
Growing awareness of autoimmune encephalitis has led to adaption of previously proposed criteria for encephalitis (any cause or idiopathic) that focused on infectious causes. Required diagnostic criteria include changes in level of consciousness, fever, CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) pleocytosis, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and EEG changes. Nowadays, it is well established that patients with AE without fever can present with memory deficits or behavioral changes without a decreased level of consciousness or fever, and normal CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) examination and brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)[2].
Autoimmune encephalitis can occur in individuals of all ages, some, such as anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis, predominantly affecting children and young adults.
#
EVOLVING CONCEPTS: NAMING NAMES
Terms such as autoimmune encephalitis, limbic encephalitis, paraneoplastic neurological syndromes are frequently used interchangeably. Although not synonyms, their relationship reflects the evolving knowledge in neuroimmunology.
The term paraneoplastic comes from the Greek, para=alongside or near, neo=new, and plasis=formation. It was not introduced until the mid-1950s and was not widely used in English literature until the 1970s. A broad definition of paraneoplastic syndromes (applicable to neurology and other specialties) refers to disorders caused remotely by cancer, i.e. not by a direct result of cancer invasion of the affected tissue or organ[10]. In the case of paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes, the remote effect is due to an immune-mediated mechanism.
The beginnings of autoimmune encephalitis occurred in the 1960s and 1970s with the characterization of distinct syndromes associated with cancer. Those syndromes are termed “classical” paraneoplastic syndromes ([Table 1]) and examples include: encephalomyelitis, limbic encephalitis, rapidly progressive cerebellar syndrome, Opsoclonus-myoclonus, Sensory neuronopathy, Gastrointestinal pseudo-obstruction (enteric neuropathy), Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. The finding of these specific symptoms or constellations of symptoms strongly suggest the presence of an underlying cancer.
Among those remarkable syndromes lies limbic encephalitis, described in 1960 by Brierley in the paper “Subacute encephalitis of later adult life. Mainly affecting the limbic areas”, characterized by subacute onset of episodic memory loss, temporal lobe seizures and behavioral abnormalities. In all three studied patients, there were marked inflammatory changes in the medial temporal lobes compared to other sites[11], supporting the first evidence of an immune-mediated mechanism. Although, inflammation is the main feature of neurological paraneoplastic syndromes, at that time this finding still lacked further supporting evidence.
It was not until the 1980s that a new surge of interest in paraneoplastic neurological syndromes occurred, with the discovery of antibodies against intracellular neuronal epitopes associated with those diseases. These antibodies are known by the terms onconeural or paraneoplastic antibodies, and examples include anti-Yo, anti-Hu, anti-Ri, and anti-Ma2. Curiously, this nomenclature began to be applied at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and refers to the initial two letters of the last name of the index patient, while the nomenclature applied at Mayo Clinic (e.g.anti-PCA-1, anti-ANNA-1) refers to the staining pattern by immunohistochemistry(10). Frequently this dual nomenclature causes confusion among clinicians.
Updated diagnostic criteria for paraneoplastic neurological syndromes have been recently published, and reappraised the three main features of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes considering recent discoveries[12]:
-
Paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes can affect any part of the central nervous system, often presenting with stereotyped clinical manifestation. Although there is no pathognomonic neurological presentation associated with paraneoplastic neurological syndrome, some are very indicative of the presence of cancer ([Table 1]). The updated nomenclature is therefore “high-risk phenotypes” instead of the previously known “classical paraneoplastic neurologic syndrome;
-
Paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes occur in association with cancer. Another important concept regarding paraneoplastic neurological syndromes is that association with cancer does not occur by chance, and generic tumor association alone should be used with caution (if not consistent with the phenotype, antigen expression in the tumor must be demonstrated). The causal association between tumor and neurological phenotype is crucial and can be suggested by (a) epidemiological associations (e.g.; rapidly progressive cerebellar syndrome on postmenopausal women is frequently paraneoplastic, associated with specific tumors such as breast and ovarian cancer); (b) antibody associations; beyond supporting diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes, antibodies are important to guide investigation of the underlying tumor type;
-
Paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes have an immune-mediated pathogenesis that is supported by the frequent finding of specific neuronal antibodies. Instead of the previously known term - onconeural antibodies - the updated recommended nomenclature “high-risk antibodies” (>70% associated with cancer) and presence of these antibodies should be demonstrated using gold standard techniques.
In his Cotzias Lecture, Dr Josep Dalmau, a prominent leading neurologist in the field of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes, reported how he came across a discovery that radically changed concepts about CNS autoimmunity[13]. Such new discoveries were made using the “clinic-to-lab” approach, the same process he had used to describe paraneoplastic syndromes and antibodies, which consists of a selection of patients with similar symptoms, recent diagnosis of cancer leading to subsequent immunological screening and identification of serum or cerebrospinal fluid antibodies against neuronal proteins also present in tumors. Studying four young women with ovarian teratoma (at that time, a tumor not very often associated with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes), prominent neuropsychiatric symptoms, hypoventilation and response to immunotherapy, and negative CSF studies for all intracellular antibodies known at that time, and by optimizing the technique, he was able to demonstrate that samples provoked a unique pattern of neuropil reactivity, indicating that the epitope was in the cell surface. Afterwards the identity of the antigen was established as the NMDAR(N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor). Following anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) syndrome and antibodies, new diseases and antibodies against cell-surface and/or synaptic proteins were and are still being described.
As a consequence, the term autoimmune encephalitis has been little by little adopted to describe those disorders associated the last class of antibodies, despite the fact that, strictly speaking, autoimmune encephalitis can refer to any given target central nervous system cell (neurons, glial cells: astrocytes, oligodendrocytes and microglia) caused by any given immune mechanism (humoral: antibodies and complement, cellular: B and T cells, innate and adaptive).
It is important to make the distinction between “classical” paraneoplastic neurological syndromes related to intracellular antigens and neurological disorders associated with cell surface antigens. While the former tends almost always to be associated with cancer, show little response to treatment, are non-pathogenic but markers of cytotoxic T-cell response, the latter can affect children and young patients, association with cancer is variable (it may occur in the absence of cancer), frequently responds to immunotherapy, and for many antibodies there is strong evidence, including animal models, to support that their pathogenic role.
However, concepts continue to expand. A recent Spanish prospective multicentre observational study in a pediatric population showed that, among encephalitic syndromes, antibodies against the glial surface protein MOG (Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein) exceeded the frequency of NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) antibodies[14]. In other words, even outside the demyelinating spectrum syndromes such as ADEM (acute disseminated encephalomyelitis), MOG antibodies are not only associated with autoimmune encephalitis in children, but also they are the most frequent biomarkers in this scenario.
Another interdisciplinary field that is gaining attention is the increased incidence of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients. Although the introduction of this form of immunotherapy enhances immune response against tumors, there is a breakthrough in oncology, and they are associated with several neurological immune-related adverse effects, some of them paraneoplastic neurologic syndrome[15].
Besides tumors, another remarkable discovery is that anti-NMDAR NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis might be triggered after herpes simplex encephalitis. A Spanish case series of 99 patients with herpes simplex encephalitis showed that approximately 25% of patients who were followed developed autoimmune encephalitis in an interval ranging from 2-16 weeks after infectious encephalitis[16]. Children aged four or younger were more likely to present with choreoathetosis, decreased level of consciousness, have a shorter interval between onset of herpes simplex encephalitis and autoimmune encephalitis and a worse outcome at one year compared with patients older than four[17].
#
CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS
General considerations
As stated before, autoimmune encephalitis is a group of diseases, some of them more frequently recognized on clinical grounds, such as anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis and limbic encephalitis ([Table 1] and [2]). However, a substantial number of individuals affected by autoimmune encephalitis do not present with a well-defined syndrome[2]. Mostly, symptoms progress rapidly, within days or weeks, although there are a few exceptions: some patients with anti-LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1) antibodies, anti-CASPR-2 antibodies and anti-DPPX may have a more insidious course[1]. In some instances, patients can present with prodromal symptoms that are characteristics of certain types of disorders - for example - diarrhea and weight loss in anti-DPPX encephalitis or faciobrachial dystonic seizures (FDBS) in LGI-1 encephalitis. However these features are not pathognomonic and might be absent in some patients[1],[2].
#
#
ANCILLARY TESTS
Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
Regarding complementary tests, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is usually normal or shows nonspecific inflammatory changes. However, in two instances MRI findings are specific markers of disease; including GABAaR (Gamma-Amino Butyric Acid type A receptor) encephalitis and limbic encephalitis ([Figure 1]).
Neuroimaging of GABAaR (Gamma-Amino Butyric Acid type A receptor) encephalitis Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences show multifocal cortical and subcortical signal abnormalities, without restricted diffusion on Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) or gadolinium enhancement, mainly distributed in the frontal and temporal lobes, and less frequently in the cerebellum and basal ganglia[18]. As GABAaR (Gamma-Amino Butyric Acid type A receptor) encephalitis can affect children, it is important to be aware of this image pattern, because it may resemble ADEM (acute disseminated encephalomyelitis) ADEM or non-ADEM (acute disseminated encephalomyelitis) encephalitis associated with MOG antibodies[1],[14]. In limbic encephalitis Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) shows increased signal in T2 and Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences in the medial aspects of the temporal lobes, frequently unilateral, but images can even be normal.
In addition to the few conditions where imaging findings are very specific and relatively frequent in certain clinical scenarios, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is also important to help exclude alternative diagnoses such as stroke, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) and infectious causes. Lesions affecting mesial temporal lobes and beyond (non-mesial temporal lobes, orbitofrontal cortex) associated with parenchymal hemorrhage on susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) or with T2*-weighted gradient echo (GRE) should promptly raise suspicions of herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis[19].
#
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) examination
Examination of Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is abnormal in most patients, mostly showing mild lymphocytic pleocytosis (<100 cells per mm[3]), presence of oligoclonal bands (OCB) or increased IgG index and/or IgG synthesis rate. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), however, can also be normal and absence of pleocytosis does not rule out diagnosis. Anti-LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1) encephalitis, for example, frequently presents with normal Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) findings: cell and protein counts may be unremarkable in up 75% of patients[8].
#
Electroencephalogram (EEG)
Despite widespread use of electroencephalogram (EEG) to assess patients with suspected autoimmune encephalitis, EEG usually shows non-specific abnormalities. In anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis, electroencephalogram (EEG) is abnormal in more than 90% of cases, although findings are usually non-specific and include: diffuse slowing in (91% of patients), focal slowing (34% of patients), diffuse excessive beta-activity (52-71% of patients, probably medication related), and Generalized Rhythmic Delta Activity (GRDA) (51% of patients)[20]-[22]. A more specific non-epileptic pattern is extreme delta-brush (EDB). characterized by rhythmic delta activity at 1-3 Hz with superimposed bursts of rhythmic 20-30 Hz beta frequency activity “riding” on each delta wave, and resembling a preterm neonatal EEG pattern known as delta brush[20]. Extreme delta brush (EDB) can be seen in 13%-58% of cases, according to the study, and is not a sensitive finding.
Data from a French Study with anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis showed that non-epileptic EEG patterns follow a chronological organization in the disease’s course: the first finding in order of appearance is excessive beta activity (EBA, median time of 10 days), followed by Extreme delta brush (EDB, median time of 16.5 days) and, lastly, Generalized Rhythmic Delta Activity (GRDA, median time of 21.5 days)[22]. The same study also underscores the importance of distinguishing seizures from movement disorders in anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis. Presence of Generalized Rhythmic Delta Activity (GRDA), a non-epileptic pattern, strongly associated with abnormal movements, may lead to misinterpretation of this finding as seizure related or status epilepticus, which may result in aggressive and unnecessary anti seizure treatment[22]. In other autoimmune encephalitis, such as anti-GABAaR (Gamma-Amino Butyric Acid type A receptor), lateralized periodic discharges (LPDs, previously called periodic lateralized epileptiform discharges - PLEDS) also found in Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) encephalitis or other acute destructive lesions can also occur[23].
Although electroencephalogram (EEG) sensitivity is high, normal EEG does not exclude autoimmune encephalitis. For example; in anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis electroencephalogram (EEG) is normal in 4% of patients, and in LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1), EEG usually shows no eletroencephaloraphic correlate with faciobrachial dystonic seizures (FDBS)[8].
Some findings in electroencephalogram EEG may have prognostic value. Extreme Delta Brush (EDB) in anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis is associated with more prolonged illness and increased number of days of electroencephalogram (EEG) monitoring[20]. Presence of normal posterior rhythm in the initial electroencephalogram (EEG) recording is associated with a better modified Rankin Scale on final outcome[21].
#
#
BRAIN 18FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY (18FDG-PET)
Although there is a potential use of Brain 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) in the diagnosis and treatment of autoimmune encephalitis, the lack of specificity and limited availability limits FDG-PET use in the diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis[19].
In anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis, a pattern of decreased occipital lobe metabolism by 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) can occur, correlating with disease severity[24],[25]. Bilateral temporal hypermetabolism also favors diagnosis of limbic encephalitis[19].
However, indiscriminate use of 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) frequently leads to confusion. In clinical practice it is not uncommon that a 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET ) report turns out as “suggestive of autoimmune encephalitis”. Hitherto, there are no data validating 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) positive and negative predictive values to diagnose autoimmune encephalitis, nor to differentiate autoimmune encephalitis from neurodegenerative and infectious etiologies. Awareness of some caveats are crucial in interpreting 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) results. All encephalitis, infectious and non-infectious, are frequently associated with seizures and inflammation. In addition, effects of antibodies and medications (e.g., anesthetics, anti seizures, immunosuppressants) might also alter metabolic findings on positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) imaging, potentially limiting this method’s specificity in establishing the etiology of the disorder[19],[26]. One could draw a parallel with the role of 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) in gliomas. Regardless of the extensive literature on 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET) in gliomas, it has not been incorporated into most widely accepted criteria to assess response of therapy[26].
Clinical Scenarios
#
Clinical scenarios and controversies
Over the past years, ongoing discovery of novel disorders associated with antibodies against cell surface or synapsis has become of high interest for practicing neurologists because of the opportunity to diagnose and treat previously unknown or mischaracterized conditions. Given the potential treatability of many of these disorders, a high index of suspicion is compelling for low threshold for antibody testing, or labeling patients with an “autoimmune” neurological condition in the absence of strong data that supports the hypothesis.
Neuroimmunology is not immune to the reproducibility crisis, a current hot topic in science. A Nature survey showed that over 70% of researchers were unable to reproduce the findings of other scientists and approximately 60% could not reproduce their own findings[27]. Among shortcomings that impact reproducibility in the field of autoimmune encephalitis, we can find publications regarding neuronal autoantibodies that show important methodological flaws.
Unfortunately, because of the amount of misinformation, we are letting complementary tests override clinical assessment or labeling patients with autoimmune disease in circumstances where specific biomarkers, distinctive syndromes or neuropathological findings are lacking. In the following topics we will discuss some caveats and pitfalls in autoimmune encephalitis.
#
Autoimmune psychosis and first episode psychosis (FEP)
Diagnosis of anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis in mental health research is challenging for several reasons. In the first place, almost 80% of patients with anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) initially present with prominent psychiatric symptoms, including psychosis mimicking a primary psychiatric illness. Another reason is that patients’ antibodies are pathogenic and cause hypofunction of NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor), a key role in pathophysiology of schizophrenia. Consequently is its imperative to ask: When should we suspect autoimmune encephalitis in patients with first episode psychosis (FEP)? Should we test every patient with first episode of psychosis (FEP) for neuronal antibodies? Is schizophrenia a primary psychiatric disorder or could it have an underlying autoimmune basis?
To start answering this question it is crucial to keep in mind that anti- NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) rarely presents with isolated isolated psychiatric manifestations (approximately 4%, most of patients during diseases relapses) . the disease usually presents with a marked constellation of syndrome that clinically suggests the diagnosis ([Table 3]). Moreover in anti- NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor), antibodies specific to the GluN1 subunit present in CSF cerebrospinal fluid) are of immunoglobulin G (IgG) class, detectable by techniques that preserve the native conformation of epitopes., namely: the cell-based assays (used by most clinical laboratories), immunohistochemistry of brain sections (commercially available; sometimes used as a confirmatory test), and immunocytochemistry of cultures of dissociated rodent live hippocampal neurons (only used in research laboratories)[2].
A considerable number of publications postulating that the same antibodies that are associated with anti- NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor also occur in primary psychiatric diseases have been published. The term autoimmune psychosis, emulating the term autoimmune encephalitis, was coined to refer to schizophrenic patients or patients with the first episode of psychosis (FEP) suspected of being autoimmune in origin, leading to proposed immunotherapy treatment. Unfortunately, many of these publications have important methodological flaws[28],[29]. There is a very low prevalence (approximately 1%) of NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) -antibodies and other neuronal antibodies in the serum of patients with schizophrenia and other psychiatric diseases. If CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) is examined, it is remarkably negative[29]. As mentioned above, most studies of neuronal antibodies’ prevalence in these patients were performed in serum using techniques with suboptimal specificity, that were not validated. Moreover, in some papers, the Ig class against NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) was IgA and IgM which are not clinically relevant, errouneously indicating a prevalence of clinically relevant antibodies. So far, no study has been able to demonstrate a diagnostic relevance or therapeutic meaning in a well-defined group of autoimmune psychosis or NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) detection in the serum of patients with schizophrenia or first episode of psychosis (FEP).
Because of fear of misdiagnosing (and consequently, delaying treatment) patients with emerging psychiatric symptoms, a practicing neurologist’s assessment is often requested in this scenario. It is important to keep in mind that even though the majority (>85%) of patients with anti-NMDARE (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor encephalitis) present with behavior changes, agitation, hallucinations, delusions or catatonia, most of which (>90%) will progress to neurological symptoms. Furthermore, 95% of patients have abnormal EEG (electroencephalogram) findings, 55% have abnormal MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and 80% show CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) changes, making the diagnostic process easier[30]. Arguing that it would facilitate diagnosis of psychosis of autoimmune origin in patients with isolated or predominant psychiatric symptoms, some authors have recycled the typical neurological and paraclinical findings present in autoimmune encephalitis to propose diagnostic criteria for the so-called autoimmune psychosis [31]. These criteria profoundly depend on the presence of neurological symptoms, and they work better when they are less needed: in clinical settings where patients present with conspicuous features of autoimmune encephalitis. On the contrary; those criteria are fallible in the rare instances of pure psychiatric manifestations, when they would be truly needed[28]. To illustrate, a recent study with 103 patients with first episode psychosis (FEP) found that 34 (32%) and 39 (37%) patients fulfilled two sets of warning signs of autoimmune psychosis and 21 (20%) fulfilled the criteria for possible or probable autoimmune psychosis, despite none of these patients had psychosis of autoimmune origin. Notably, the same criteria missed diagnosis of two out of three patients with anti-NMDAR encephalitis who were the only ones with psychosis of autoimmune origin(28). Such findings call into question the ability to identify patients with first episode due to autoimmune encephalitis by the autoimmune psychosis [31] criteria alone[32].
The same study tried to shed light on the selection of at-risk patients for lumbar puncture, a procedure that may be difficult in psychiatric patients with agitation. By this approach, lumbar puncture would be indicated in only 27% of patients with first episode psychosis[28]. So, how should patients with recent (<6 months) first episode psychosis (FEP) without neurological features or findings be assessed? The authors elaborated an algorithm[28]:
-
All patients with first episode psychosis (FEP) with accompanying neurological symptoms and abnormal paraclinical tests such as EEG (electroencephalogram) and Brain MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) or unclear etiology should undergo lumbar puncture;
-
Patients without neurological changes, serum antibody testing, EEG electroencephalogram) and Brain MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) should be ordered. If any test is abnormal, CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) is warranted, including cell-count, oligoclonal bands and NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) -antibodies testing;
-
If serum is negative for NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) - antibodies, presence of any features associated with NMDARE (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor encephalitis), namely: abnormal EEG (electroencephalogram) and/or Brain MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) findings, resistance or adverse reactions to neuroleptics, subsequent development of neurological symptoms and presence comorbid conditions such as prodromal viral-like illness, tumor), CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) testing is also warranted. This is necessary because approximately 15% of patients have absent anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) in serum. However, the absence of antibodies in CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) excludes antibody mediated first episode psychosis (FEP);
-
In first episode psychosis (FEP) with isolated psychiatric features detection of other antibodies in CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) other than anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) is extremely rare. Testing for other antibodies should be considered if they are found in serum or if CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) are negative.
However, this study has several limitations, mainly because it is modest in size, so larger studies and meta-analyses are required to establish the prevalence of anti-NMDARE (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor encephalitis) and optimize the selection of patients for CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) sampling[32]. In our experience of managing such cases in a clinical scenario where antibody testing is limited or the results may take several weeks to be available, close and thorough observation together with psychiatrists periodically assessing for the emergence of neurological features is very useful in not misdiagnosing AE.
#
Autoimmune encephalitis resembling dementia syndromes
Autoimmune encephalitis can mimic neurodegenerative dementia syndromes, as patients may not always present with encephalitis biomarkers (e.g.: brain imaging or cerebrospinal fluids suggestive of inflammation).
The majority of patients with cognitive decline associated with autoimmune encephalitis fulfill diagnostic criteria for autoimmune encephalitis that requires subacute deterioration of cognition, altered mental status or psychiatric features. Other distinctive neurological manifestations such as seizures, new focal neurological signs along with biomarkers of central nervous system inflammation, such as CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) pleocytosis or brain MRI (magnetic brain imaging) changes may also aid in raising suspicion of an autoimmune cause.
However, there are some instances where encephalitis signs may be more inconspicuous, resembling neurodegenerative dementia syndromes, leading to misdiagnosis or delay in treatment, that may result in worse outcomes.
In order to address the question of autoimmune encephalitis resembling dementia syndromes, a nationwide observational cohort study in middle-aged and older patients (>45 year-old) with anti-LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1), anti-NMDAR, anti-GABAbR (Gamma-Amino Butyric Acid type A receptor), and anti-CASPR2 encephalitis was conducted in the Netherlands, with interesting findings and lessons to be drawn[33].
First, autoimmune encephalitis frequently resembles dementia, especially in the presentation of rapidly progressive dementia. Cognitive decline was the presenting symptom in most patients > 45 years old with antibody mediated encephalitis (75%), in half of these cases, a neurodegenerative dementia syndrome was suspected by the treating physician. Remarkably, cognitive domains are affected in different manners according to the antibody associated syndrome. Visuospatial and executive functions were more prominently affected in LGI-1(leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1) and GABAbR (gamma-aminobutyric acid B receptor) encephalitis, while patients with anti-NMDARE (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor encephalitis) show more frequently language function impairment and behavioral changes.
Second, seizures are an important red flag to differentiate between a possible autoimmune encephalitis, when patients present with dementia symptoms. Seizures can be subtle and can appear late in the course of the disease. Early and overt seizures in patients with dementia promptly raise the suspicion of a non-degenerative cause, although 10-22% of patients with Alzheimer’s Disease may develop seizures during the course of the disease. Even with the exclusion of patients with prominent seizures within the first four weeks of symptoms presentation (that is, a scenario where autoimmune encephalitis is more easily considered), the study showed that two-thirds of patients developed seizures later on and they were often overlooked in a quarter of patients because seizures were subtle. Seizures were more frequently, and almost exclusively, seen in anti-LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1) encephalitis, and were consisted of faciobrachial dystonic seizures (FBDS) and nonmotor focal subtle seizures[33]. Faciobrachial dystonic seizures (FBDS) is a very specific finding for anti-LGI1 encephalitis, defined by some authors as pathognomonic[34] ,. and characterized as frequent (it is not rare for patients to present more than 100 episodes a day), brief events with posturing of the ipsilateral face and arm, that also involve the leg[35]. Seizures usually do not respond to antiseizure medication, frequently ictal EEG (electroencephalogram) shows no ictal correlates, and seizures are responsive to immunotherapy.
Recently, ancillary testing has been found to be deceptively normal in many cases. Normal routine CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) and brain MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) were found in more than 50% of patients, and neither CSF pleocytosis nor MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) inflammatory changes were found in 25% of patients. Electroencephalograms (EEG) was also frequently normal or only showed some encephalopathy, similar to patients with neurodegenerative dementia. Interestingly, the study demonstrated that dementia biomarkers can be “falsely” positive in AE patients. In almost half of patients with autoimmune encephalitis tested with biomarkers (among whom Aβ42 was also tested), the combination fitted a profile of neurodegenerative dementia. A few cases of autoimmune encephalitis had a positive 14-3-3. Samples analyzed by RT-QuIC - a more specific marker for prion disease - were all negative.
#
#
TREATMENT
There are three mainstays in treating patients with autoimmune encephalitis: 01) immunotherapy; 02) removal of the immunological trigger, i.e.: tumor when applicable; and 03) symptomatic treatment and rehabilitation.
Regarding immunotherapy, recommendations are largely drawn from retrospective series and expert opinions. This involves escalation of immunotherapy, beginning with first line therapies (corticosteroids, intravenous gamma globulins, or plasma exchange), second-line therapies (rituximab and or cyclophosphamide). Intravenous gamma globulin and plasma exchange act by removing circulating blood antibodies, while rituximab would eliminate B cells, reducing their role as antigen presenting cells, reducing antibody production and preventing subsequent development of plasma cells. In turn, corticosteroids and cyclophosphamide have a role in decreasing inflammatory infiltrates and production of pro-inflammatory cytokines.
One important concept is that the immune targets of autoimmune encephalitis are located beyond the blood brain-barrier, and that many patients have compartmentalization of the autoimmune process with intrathecal synthesis of antibodies by plasma cell within brain and meninges[36], which in part explains limited effectiveness of plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin in comparison to systemic antibody mediated diseases as myasthenia or immune thrombocytopenic purpura[1].
Other factors dictating immunotherapy strategy, such as response to corticosteroids, speed of recovery, degree of residual deficits and risk of relapse varies according to the antibody associated with disease, and further data are needed to tailor immunotherapy. For example: patients with anti-LGI1 (leucine-rich, glioma-inactivated 1) encephalitis seem to respond better to corticosteroids, have a faster recovery, although they tend to remain with significant residual cognitive deficits[8],[37] in comparison to patients with anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis, who have a poorer response to first line therapy, longer ICU and hospital stay, and time to recovery, but with majority of patients achieving good outcomes[30].
Anti- NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis is more frequent and more studied than antibody-associated encephalitis. Approach to anti-NMDAR encephalitis is based on a study of 472 patients that showed that no improvement at four weeks of first-line therapy; which is frequent and occurs in about 50% of patients. Among non responders, patients who received second-line therapies had a better outcome after 24 months, compared with patients that did not receive second-line treatment[30]. Because anti-NMDAR encephalitis occurs more commonly in women with child-bearing potential, we prefer rituximab over cyclophosphamide, to avoid the risk of cyclophosphamide induced gonadal toxicity.
In general, patients are observed at two week intervals, and if there is minimal or no response, treatment is escalated to second-line therapy[35]. Because patients who receive rituximab have a lower chance of relapse, some authors consider this drug in initial therapy, although there are no studies to support this use.
Approximately in 10% of patients with anti-NMDAR (N-methyl-d-aspartate-receptor) encephalitis, disease will be refractory to first and second-line therapy[30]. For these patients some authors have suggested treatment with bortezomib (a proteasome with anti-plasma cell activity)[38]-[40], tocilizumab (an interleukin-6 receptor agonist)[41] and intrathecal or oral methotrexate[42],[43]. However, studies supporting such an approach have important limitations: small number of patients, use of other immunotherapies and short period considered to define failure to second-line therapy, and these studies should be interpreted with caution.
An ongoing trial, ExTINGUISH (The ExTINGUISH Trial of Inebilizumab in NMDAR Encephalitis) will randomize 116 participants with moderate-to-severe NMDAR encephalitis to receive either inebilizumab or placebo in addition to first-line therapies[44]. Inebilizumabe is a monoclonal antibody against the B-cell surface antigen CD19, created to treat neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder. Compared to other therapies targeting B-cell depletion (e.g.: rituximab), inebilizumab depletes CD 20+ and CD20- plasma cells and plasma blasts, that may play a role in refractory anti-NMDAR encephalitis.
In conclusion, the discovery of this new class of autoimmune encephalitis has dramatically changed the diagnostic approach and treatment of many neurological syndromes, some of which remain completely unknown.
Unfortunately, despite clinical advances, many studies have important limitations, and there is an urgent need for rigorous clinical and immunological criteria to diagnose autoimmune encephalitis, to minimize misdiagnosis. In addition a better comprehension of each antibody associated with encephalitis is needed to tailor immunotherapy. Development of new therapeutic strategies are needed to improve outcomes and to speed recovery rate.
#
#
Conflict of interest:
There is no conflict of interest to declare.
Authors’ contributions:
MMS: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-original draft, writing-review & editing; GDS: conceptualization, formal analysis, methodology, validation, visualization; LHMC: conceptualization, formal analysis, methodology, validation, reviewing and editing; LTL: conceptualization, validation, visualization.
-
References
- 1 Dalmau J, Graus F. Antibody-mediated encephalitis. N Engl J Med 2018; 378 (09) 840-851 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1708712
- 2 Graus F, Titulaer MJ, Balu R, Benseler S, Bien CG, Cellucci T. et al. A clinical approach to diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15 (04) P391-P404 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00401-9
- 3 Granerod J, Cousens S, Davies NW, Crowcroft NS, Thomas SL. New estimates of incidence of encephalitis in England. Emerg Infect Dis 2013; 19 (09) 1455-1462 https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1909.130064
- 4 Granerod J, Ambrose HE, Davies NW, Clewley JP, Walsh AL, Morgan D. et al. Causes of encephalitis and differences in their clinical presentations in England: a multicentre, population-based prospective study. Lancet Infect Dis 2010; 10 (12) P835-P844 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70222-X
- 5 Vora NM, Holman RC, Mehal JM, Steiner CA, Blanton J, Sejvar J. Burden of encephalitis-associated hospitalizations in the United States, 1998-2010. Neurology 2014; 82 (05) 443-451 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1220086
- 6 Dalmau J, Tüzün E, Wu H, Masjuan J, Rossi JE, Voloschin A. et al. Paraneoplastic anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis associated with ovarian teratoma. Ann Neurol 2007; 61 (01) 25-36 https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21050
- 7 Gable MS, Sheriff H, Dalmau J, Tilley DH, Glaser CA. The frequency of autoimmune N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis surpasses that of individual viral etiologies in young individuals enrolled in the California Encephalitis Project. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 54 (07) 899-904 https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cir1038
- 8 van Sonderen A, Thijs RD, Coenders EC, Jiskoot LC, Sanchez E, de Bruijn MAAM. et al. Anti-LGI1 encephalitis: clinical syndrome and long-term follow-up. Neurology 2016; 87 (14) 1449-1456 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223173
- 9 Dubey D, Pittock SJ, Kelly CR, McKeon A, Lopez-Chiriboga AS, Lennon VA. et al. Autoimmune encephalitis epidemiology and a comparison to infectious encephalitis: autoimmune encephalitis. Ann Neurol 2018; 83 (01) 166-177 https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25131
- 10 Darnell RB, Posner JB. Paraneoplastic Syndromes. 1. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2011: 496-496
- 11 Brierley JB, Corsellis JAN, Hierons R, Nevin S. Subacute encephalitis of later adult life. Mainly affecting the limbic areas. Brain 1960; 83 (03) 357-368 https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/83.3.357
- 12 Graus F, Vogrig A, Muñiz-Castrillo S, Antoine J-CG, Desestret V, Dubey D. et al. Updated diagnostic criteria for paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021; 8 (04) e1014 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1221014
- 13 Dalmau J. NMDA receptor encephalitis and other antibody-mediated disorders of the synapse: the 2016 Cotzias Lecture. Neurology 2016; 87 (23) 2471-2482 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223414
- 14 Armangue T, Olivé-Cirera G, Martínez-Hernandez E, Sepulveda M, Ruiz-Garcia R, Muñoz-Batista M. et al. Associations of paediatric demyelinating and encephalitic syndromes with myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies: a multicentre observational study. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19 (03) P234-P246 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30488-0
- 15 Graus F, Dalmau J. Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes in the era of immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2019; 16 (09) 535-548 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-019-0194-4
- 16 Armangue T, Spatola M, Vlagea A, Mattozzi S, Cárceles-Cordon M, Martinez-Heras E. et al. Frequency, symptoms, risk factors, and outcomes of autoimmune encephalitis after herpes simplex encephalitis: a prospective observational study and retrospective analysis. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17 (09) 760-772 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30244-8
- 17 Armangue T, Spatola M, Vlagea A, Mattozzi S, Cárceles-Cordon M, Martinez-Heras E. et al. Frequency, symptoms, risk factors, and outcomes of autoimmune encephalitis after herpes simplex encephalitis: a prospective observational study and retrospective analysis. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17 (09) 760-772 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30244-8
- 18 Spatola M, Petit-Pedrol M, Simabukuro MM, Armangue T, Castro FJ, Artigues MIB. et al. Investigations in GABAAreceptor antibody-associated encephalitis. Neurology 2017; 88 (11) 1012-1020 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223713
- 19 Abboud H, Probasco JC, Irani S, Ances B, Benavides DR, Bradshaw M. et al. Autoimmune encephalitis: proposed best practice recommendations for diagnosis and acute management. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2021; 92 (07) 757-768 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2020-325300
- 20 Schmitt SE, Pargeon K, Frechette ES, Hirsch LJ, Dalmau J, Friedman D. Extreme delta brush A unique EEG pattern in adults with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Neurology 2012; 79 (11) 1094-1100 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182698cd8
- 21 van Sonderen A, Arends S, Tavy DLJ, Bastiaansen AEM, Bruijn MAAM, Schreurs MWJ. et al. Predictive value of electroencephalography in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2018; 89 (10) 1101-1106 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2018-318376
- 22 Jeannin-Mayer S, André-Obadia N, Rosenberg S, Boutet C, Honnorat J, Antoine JC. et al. EEG analysis in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis: description of typical patterns. Clin Neurophysiol 2019; 130 (02) 289-296 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2018.10.017
- 23 Simabukuro MM, Petit-Pedrol M, Castro LH, Nitrini R, Lucato L, Zambon AA. et al. GABAA receptor and LGI1 antibody encephalitis in a patient with thymoma. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2015; 2 (02) e73 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1220073
- 24 Leypoldt F, Buchert R, Kleiter I, Marienhagen J, Gelderblom M, Magnus T. et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis: distinct pattern of disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2012; 83 (07) 681-686 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2011-301969
- 25 Probasco JC, Solnes L, Nalluri A, Cohen J, Jones KM, Zan E. et al. Decreased occipital lobe metabolism by FDG-PET/CT. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2018; 5 (01) e413 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1220413
- 26 Graus F, Dalmau J. Role of 18F-FDG-PET imaging in the diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis - Authors’ reply. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15 (10) 1010 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(16)30130-2
- 27 Nature Portfolio. Six factors affecting reproducibility in life science research and how to handle them [Internet]. 2022 Mar 15 Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/d42473-019-00004-y
- 28 Guasp M, Giné-Servén E, Maudes E, Rosa-Justicia M, Martínez-Hernández E, Boix-Quintana E. et al. Clinical, neuroimmunologic, and CSF investigations in first episode psychosis. Neurology 2021; 97 (01) e61-e75 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1220000012191
- 29 Graus F, Dalmau J. Autoimmune encephalitis or autoimmune psychosis?. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2021; 50: 112-114 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2021.05.004
- 30 Titulaer MJ, McCracken L, Gabilondo I, Armangué T, Glaser C, Iizuka T. et al. Treatment and prognostic factors for long-term outcome in patients with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis: an observational cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2013; 12 (02) 157-165 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70310-1
- 31 Pollak TA, Lennox BR, Müller S, Benros ME, Prüss H, van Elst LT. et al. Autoimmune psychosis: an international consensus on an approach to the diagnosis and management of psychosis of suspected autoimmune origin. Lancet Psychiatry 2020; 7 (01) 93-108 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30290-1
- 32 Titulaer MJ, Day GS. Autoimmune encephalitis in first episode psychoses: all smoke and no fire?. Neurology 2021; 97 (01) 16-17 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1220000012195
- 33 Bastiaansen AEM, van Steenhoven RW, Bruijn MAAM, Crijnen YS, van Sonderen A, van Coevorden-Hameete MH. et al. Autoimmune encephalitis resembling dementia syndromes. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021; 8 (05) e1039 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1221039
- 34 Schmerler DA, Roller S, Espay AJ. Teaching video neuroimages: faciobrachial dystonic seizures pathognomonic phenomenology. Neurology 2016; 86 (06) e60-e61 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1222359
- 35 Uy CE, Binks S, Irani SR. Autoimmune encephalitis: clinical spectrum and management. Pract Neurol 2021; 21 (05) 412-423 https://doi.org/10.1136/practneurol-2020-002567
- 36 Martinez-Hernandez E, Horvath J, Shiloh-Malawsky Y, Sangha N, Martinez-Lage M, Dalmau J. Analysis of complement and plasma cells in the brain of patients with anti-NMDAR encephalitis. Neurology 2011; 77 (06) 589-593 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e318228c136
- 37 Ariño H, Armangué T, Petit-Pedrol M, Sabater L, Martinez-Hernandez E, Hara M. et al. Anti-LGI1-associated cognitive impairment: presentation and long-term outcome. Neurology 2016; 87 (08) 759-765 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223009
- 38 Scheibe F, Prüss H, Mengel AM, Kohler S, Nümann A, Köhnlein M. et al. Bortezomib for treatment of therapy-refractory anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Neurology 2017; 88 (04) 366-370 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223536
- 39 Shin Y-W, Lee S-T, Kim T-J, Jun J-S, Chu K. Bortezomib treatment for severe refractory anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2018; 5 (05) 598-605 https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.557
- 40 Behrendt V, Krogias C, Reinacher-Schick A, Gold R, Kleiter I. Bortezomib treatment for patients with Anti- N -Methyl- D -aspartate receptor encephalitis. JAMA Neurol 2016; 73 (10) 1251-1253 https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.2588
- 41 Lee W-J, Lee S-T, Moon J, Sunwoo J-S, Byun J-I, Lim J-A. et al. Tocilizumab in autoimmune encephalitis refractory to rituximab: an institutional cohort study. Neurotherapeutics 2016; 13 (04) 824-832 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-016-0442-6
- 42 Bravo-Oro A, Abud-Mendoza C, Quezada-Corona A, Dalmau J, Campos-Guevara V. Encefalitis por anticuerpos contra el receptor de NMDA: experiencia con seis pacientes pediátricos. Potencial eficacia del metotrexato. Rev Neurol 2013; 57 (09) 405-410
- 43 Tatencloux S, Chretien P, Rogemond V, Honnorat J, Tardieu M, Deiva K. Intrathecal treatment of anti-N-Methyl-d-aspartate receptor encephalitis in children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2015; 57 (01) 95-99 https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12545
- 44 Clinical Trials. The ExTINGUISH Trial of Inebilizumab in NMDAR Encephalitis (ExTINGUISH) [Internet]. ClinicalTrials.gov. 2020 2022 Mar 29 Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04372615
Address for correspondence
Publication History
Received: 30 March 2022
Accepted: 29 April 2022
Article published online:
06 February 2023
© 2022. Academia Brasileira de Neurologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil
-
References
- 1 Dalmau J, Graus F. Antibody-mediated encephalitis. N Engl J Med 2018; 378 (09) 840-851 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1708712
- 2 Graus F, Titulaer MJ, Balu R, Benseler S, Bien CG, Cellucci T. et al. A clinical approach to diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15 (04) P391-P404 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00401-9
- 3 Granerod J, Cousens S, Davies NW, Crowcroft NS, Thomas SL. New estimates of incidence of encephalitis in England. Emerg Infect Dis 2013; 19 (09) 1455-1462 https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1909.130064
- 4 Granerod J, Ambrose HE, Davies NW, Clewley JP, Walsh AL, Morgan D. et al. Causes of encephalitis and differences in their clinical presentations in England: a multicentre, population-based prospective study. Lancet Infect Dis 2010; 10 (12) P835-P844 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70222-X
- 5 Vora NM, Holman RC, Mehal JM, Steiner CA, Blanton J, Sejvar J. Burden of encephalitis-associated hospitalizations in the United States, 1998-2010. Neurology 2014; 82 (05) 443-451 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1220086
- 6 Dalmau J, Tüzün E, Wu H, Masjuan J, Rossi JE, Voloschin A. et al. Paraneoplastic anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis associated with ovarian teratoma. Ann Neurol 2007; 61 (01) 25-36 https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21050
- 7 Gable MS, Sheriff H, Dalmau J, Tilley DH, Glaser CA. The frequency of autoimmune N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis surpasses that of individual viral etiologies in young individuals enrolled in the California Encephalitis Project. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 54 (07) 899-904 https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cir1038
- 8 van Sonderen A, Thijs RD, Coenders EC, Jiskoot LC, Sanchez E, de Bruijn MAAM. et al. Anti-LGI1 encephalitis: clinical syndrome and long-term follow-up. Neurology 2016; 87 (14) 1449-1456 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223173
- 9 Dubey D, Pittock SJ, Kelly CR, McKeon A, Lopez-Chiriboga AS, Lennon VA. et al. Autoimmune encephalitis epidemiology and a comparison to infectious encephalitis: autoimmune encephalitis. Ann Neurol 2018; 83 (01) 166-177 https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25131
- 10 Darnell RB, Posner JB. Paraneoplastic Syndromes. 1. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2011: 496-496
- 11 Brierley JB, Corsellis JAN, Hierons R, Nevin S. Subacute encephalitis of later adult life. Mainly affecting the limbic areas. Brain 1960; 83 (03) 357-368 https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/83.3.357
- 12 Graus F, Vogrig A, Muñiz-Castrillo S, Antoine J-CG, Desestret V, Dubey D. et al. Updated diagnostic criteria for paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021; 8 (04) e1014 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1221014
- 13 Dalmau J. NMDA receptor encephalitis and other antibody-mediated disorders of the synapse: the 2016 Cotzias Lecture. Neurology 2016; 87 (23) 2471-2482 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223414
- 14 Armangue T, Olivé-Cirera G, Martínez-Hernandez E, Sepulveda M, Ruiz-Garcia R, Muñoz-Batista M. et al. Associations of paediatric demyelinating and encephalitic syndromes with myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies: a multicentre observational study. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19 (03) P234-P246 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30488-0
- 15 Graus F, Dalmau J. Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes in the era of immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2019; 16 (09) 535-548 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-019-0194-4
- 16 Armangue T, Spatola M, Vlagea A, Mattozzi S, Cárceles-Cordon M, Martinez-Heras E. et al. Frequency, symptoms, risk factors, and outcomes of autoimmune encephalitis after herpes simplex encephalitis: a prospective observational study and retrospective analysis. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17 (09) 760-772 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30244-8
- 17 Armangue T, Spatola M, Vlagea A, Mattozzi S, Cárceles-Cordon M, Martinez-Heras E. et al. Frequency, symptoms, risk factors, and outcomes of autoimmune encephalitis after herpes simplex encephalitis: a prospective observational study and retrospective analysis. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17 (09) 760-772 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30244-8
- 18 Spatola M, Petit-Pedrol M, Simabukuro MM, Armangue T, Castro FJ, Artigues MIB. et al. Investigations in GABAAreceptor antibody-associated encephalitis. Neurology 2017; 88 (11) 1012-1020 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223713
- 19 Abboud H, Probasco JC, Irani S, Ances B, Benavides DR, Bradshaw M. et al. Autoimmune encephalitis: proposed best practice recommendations for diagnosis and acute management. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2021; 92 (07) 757-768 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2020-325300
- 20 Schmitt SE, Pargeon K, Frechette ES, Hirsch LJ, Dalmau J, Friedman D. Extreme delta brush A unique EEG pattern in adults with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Neurology 2012; 79 (11) 1094-1100 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182698cd8
- 21 van Sonderen A, Arends S, Tavy DLJ, Bastiaansen AEM, Bruijn MAAM, Schreurs MWJ. et al. Predictive value of electroencephalography in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2018; 89 (10) 1101-1106 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2018-318376
- 22 Jeannin-Mayer S, André-Obadia N, Rosenberg S, Boutet C, Honnorat J, Antoine JC. et al. EEG analysis in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis: description of typical patterns. Clin Neurophysiol 2019; 130 (02) 289-296 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2018.10.017
- 23 Simabukuro MM, Petit-Pedrol M, Castro LH, Nitrini R, Lucato L, Zambon AA. et al. GABAA receptor and LGI1 antibody encephalitis in a patient with thymoma. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2015; 2 (02) e73 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1220073
- 24 Leypoldt F, Buchert R, Kleiter I, Marienhagen J, Gelderblom M, Magnus T. et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis: distinct pattern of disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2012; 83 (07) 681-686 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2011-301969
- 25 Probasco JC, Solnes L, Nalluri A, Cohen J, Jones KM, Zan E. et al. Decreased occipital lobe metabolism by FDG-PET/CT. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2018; 5 (01) e413 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1220413
- 26 Graus F, Dalmau J. Role of 18F-FDG-PET imaging in the diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis - Authors’ reply. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15 (10) 1010 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(16)30130-2
- 27 Nature Portfolio. Six factors affecting reproducibility in life science research and how to handle them [Internet]. 2022 Mar 15 Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/d42473-019-00004-y
- 28 Guasp M, Giné-Servén E, Maudes E, Rosa-Justicia M, Martínez-Hernández E, Boix-Quintana E. et al. Clinical, neuroimmunologic, and CSF investigations in first episode psychosis. Neurology 2021; 97 (01) e61-e75 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1220000012191
- 29 Graus F, Dalmau J. Autoimmune encephalitis or autoimmune psychosis?. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2021; 50: 112-114 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2021.05.004
- 30 Titulaer MJ, McCracken L, Gabilondo I, Armangué T, Glaser C, Iizuka T. et al. Treatment and prognostic factors for long-term outcome in patients with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis: an observational cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2013; 12 (02) 157-165 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70310-1
- 31 Pollak TA, Lennox BR, Müller S, Benros ME, Prüss H, van Elst LT. et al. Autoimmune psychosis: an international consensus on an approach to the diagnosis and management of psychosis of suspected autoimmune origin. Lancet Psychiatry 2020; 7 (01) 93-108 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30290-1
- 32 Titulaer MJ, Day GS. Autoimmune encephalitis in first episode psychoses: all smoke and no fire?. Neurology 2021; 97 (01) 16-17 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1220000012195
- 33 Bastiaansen AEM, van Steenhoven RW, Bruijn MAAM, Crijnen YS, van Sonderen A, van Coevorden-Hameete MH. et al. Autoimmune encephalitis resembling dementia syndromes. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021; 8 (05) e1039 https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.2022s1222022s1221039
- 34 Schmerler DA, Roller S, Espay AJ. Teaching video neuroimages: faciobrachial dystonic seizures pathognomonic phenomenology. Neurology 2016; 86 (06) e60-e61 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1222359
- 35 Uy CE, Binks S, Irani SR. Autoimmune encephalitis: clinical spectrum and management. Pract Neurol 2021; 21 (05) 412-423 https://doi.org/10.1136/practneurol-2020-002567
- 36 Martinez-Hernandez E, Horvath J, Shiloh-Malawsky Y, Sangha N, Martinez-Lage M, Dalmau J. Analysis of complement and plasma cells in the brain of patients with anti-NMDAR encephalitis. Neurology 2011; 77 (06) 589-593 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e318228c136
- 37 Ariño H, Armangué T, Petit-Pedrol M, Sabater L, Martinez-Hernandez E, Hara M. et al. Anti-LGI1-associated cognitive impairment: presentation and long-term outcome. Neurology 2016; 87 (08) 759-765 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223009
- 38 Scheibe F, Prüss H, Mengel AM, Kohler S, Nümann A, Köhnlein M. et al. Bortezomib for treatment of therapy-refractory anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Neurology 2017; 88 (04) 366-370 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.2022s1222022s1223536
- 39 Shin Y-W, Lee S-T, Kim T-J, Jun J-S, Chu K. Bortezomib treatment for severe refractory anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2018; 5 (05) 598-605 https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.557
- 40 Behrendt V, Krogias C, Reinacher-Schick A, Gold R, Kleiter I. Bortezomib treatment for patients with Anti- N -Methyl- D -aspartate receptor encephalitis. JAMA Neurol 2016; 73 (10) 1251-1253 https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.2588
- 41 Lee W-J, Lee S-T, Moon J, Sunwoo J-S, Byun J-I, Lim J-A. et al. Tocilizumab in autoimmune encephalitis refractory to rituximab: an institutional cohort study. Neurotherapeutics 2016; 13 (04) 824-832 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-016-0442-6
- 42 Bravo-Oro A, Abud-Mendoza C, Quezada-Corona A, Dalmau J, Campos-Guevara V. Encefalitis por anticuerpos contra el receptor de NMDA: experiencia con seis pacientes pediátricos. Potencial eficacia del metotrexato. Rev Neurol 2013; 57 (09) 405-410
- 43 Tatencloux S, Chretien P, Rogemond V, Honnorat J, Tardieu M, Deiva K. Intrathecal treatment of anti-N-Methyl-d-aspartate receptor encephalitis in children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2015; 57 (01) 95-99 https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12545
- 44 Clinical Trials. The ExTINGUISH Trial of Inebilizumab in NMDAR Encephalitis (ExTINGUISH) [Internet]. ClinicalTrials.gov. 2020 2022 Mar 29 Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04372615