No abstract

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) frequently develop acute encephalopathy and encephalitis, but whether these complications are the result from viral-induced cytokine storm syndrome or anti-neural autoimmunity is still unclear. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic role of CSF and serum biomarkers of inflammation (a wide array of cytokines, antibodies against neural antigens, and IgG oligoclonal bands), and neuroaxonal damage (14-3-3 protein and neurofilament light [NfL]) in patients with acute COVID-19 and associated neurologic manifestations (neuro-COVID). We prospectively included 60 hospitalized neuro-COVID patients, 25 (42%) of them with encephalopathy and 14 (23%) with encephalitis, and followed them for 18 months. We found that, compared to healthy controls (HC), neuro-COVID patients presented elevated levels of IL-18, IL-6, and IL-8 in both serum and CSF. MCP1 was elevated only in CSF, while IL-10, IL-1RA, IP-10, MIG and NfL were increased only in serum. Patients with COVID-associated encephalitis or encephalopathy had distinct serum and CSF cytokine profiles compared with HC, but no differences were found when both clinical groups were compared to each other. Antibodies against neural antigens were negative in both groups. While the levels of neuroaxonal damage markers, 14-3-3 and NfL, and the proinflammatory cytokines IL-18, IL-1RA and IL-8 significantly associated with acute COVID-19 severity, only the levels of 14-3-3 and NfL in CSF significantly correlated with the degree of neurologic disability in the daily activities at 18 months follow-up. Thus, the inflammatory process promoted by SARS-CoV-2 infection might include blood-brain barrier disruption in patients with neurological involvement. In conclusion, the fact that the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines do not predict the long-term functional outcome suggests that the prognosis is more related to neuronal damage than to the acute neuroinflammatory process.

Seronegative antiphospholipid syndrome (SNAPS) is an autoimmune disease present in patients with clinical manifestations highly suggestive of Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS) but with persistently negative consensus antiphospholipid antibodies (a-PL). IgA anti-β2 Glycoprotein I (aB2-GPI) antibodies are associated with APS. However, they are not currently considered to be laboratory criteria due to the heterogeneity of published works and the use of poor standardized diagnostic systems. We have aimed to assess aPL antibodies in a group of patients with clinical manifestations of APS (C-APS) to evaluate the importance of the presence of IgA aB2GPI antibodies in APS and its relation with other aPL antibodies. Only 14% of patients with C-APS were positive for any consensus antibody, whereas the presence of isolated IgA aB2GPI antibodies was found in 22% of C-APS patients. In patients with arterial thrombosis IgA aB2GPI, antibodies were the only aPL antibodies present. Serologic profile in primary APS (PAPS) is different from systemic autoimmune disorders associated APS (SAD-APS). IgA aB2GPI antibodies are more prevalent in PAPS and IgG aB2GPI antibodies are predominant in SAD-APS. The analysis of IgA aB2GPI antibodies in patients with clinical manifestations of PAPS might avoid underdiagnosed patients and provide a better diagnosis in patients with SAD-APS. Laboratory consensus criteria might consider including analysis of IgA aB2GPI for APS diagnosis.

Detection of onconeural antibodies is important because establishes a definitive diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological syndrome (PNS). The recommended method for diagnosis of onconeural antibodies is by immunohistochemistry on rodent brain sections and confirmation of results by immunoblot. However, in many diagnostic laboratories samples are only tested with commercial line blots. In this study we inquired whether this change in diagnostic methodology (line blot alone vs. combined immunohistochemistry and line blot) would affect the results. Among 439 samples examined by immunohistochemistry and a commercial line blot (Euroimmun, Lübeck, Germany) 96 (22%) were positive by line blot, and their clinical information was reviewed. Onconeural antibodies were detected by both assays in 46/96 (48%) patients (concordant group) whereas 50 (52%) were only positive by line blot (discordant group). In the concordant group 42/46 (91%) patients had a definite diagnosis of PNS whereas in the discordant group only 4/50 (8%) had PNS (p < 0.00001). None of the 14 patients with ZIC4 antibodies and 1/13 (8%) with Yo antibodies demonstrated only by line blot had PNS. These findings show a robust diagnostic value of combined diagnostic techniques, and both should be used to demonstrate onconeural antibodies, If antibody testing is performed only with line blot assay, positive bands should be confirmed by rodent brain immunohistochemistry. For ZIC4 or Yo antibody testing, line blot positivity with negative immunohistochemistry has no diagnostic significance, and for the rest of onconeural antibodies the predictive diagnostic value is low.