Chen, John J.

Abstract Objective To assess the real‐world performance of a live (LCBA) versus a fixed (FCBA) cell‐based assay for the detection of serum antibodies directed against myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG‐IgG) and aquaporin‐4 (AQP4‐IgG). Methods This was a retrospective study of patients evaluated at a single tertiary academic referral center, with serum testing performed clinically for AQP4‐IgG and/or MOG‐IgG by FCBA and LCBA on the same day. Additionally, frozen banked sera from the same day for patients tested only by one assay were retrieved and tested by the other assay. FCBA was performed by the Johns Hopkins Immunology Laboratory using Euroimmun kits with detection by indirect immunofluorescence (FCBA‐IF), whereas LCBA was performed by the Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory with detection by flow cytometry (LCBA‐FACS). Results Of 594 specimens with paired MOG‐IgG testing, 500 were negative by both assays, 33 were positive by both assays, 56 were positive exclusively by LCBA‐FACS, and 5 were only positive by FCBA‐IF. Overall, MOG‐IgG LCBA‐FACS exhibited 95.1% sensitivity and 97.7% specificity, whereas MOG‐IgG FCBA‐IF had 45.7% sensitivity and 99.8% specificity. Of 577 specimens with paired AQP4‐IgG testing, 503 were negative by both assays, 51 were positive by both assays, 21 were positive exclusively by LCBA‐FACS, and 2 were only positive by FCBA‐IF. Overall, AQP4‐IgG LCBA‐FACS exhibited 97.3% sensitivity and 100% specificity, whereas AQP4‐IgG FCBA‐IF had 71.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Interpretation LCBA‐FACS for both MOG‐IgG and AQP4‐IgG had markedly better sensitivity than FCBA‐IF, with similar specificity. The use of FCBA‐IF may result in underrecognition of both MOG antibody‐associated disease (MOGAD) and AQP4‐IgG seropositive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD).

This review article represents a collaborative effort across continents, bringing together the latest developments in neuro-ophthalmology with a focus on innovative diagnostic and therapeutic modalities that are shaping the future of the field. Among the most significant advancements is the rise of optical coherence tomography (OCT), now recognized as an indispensable tool in neuro-ophthalmological research, providing unparalleled insights into optic nerve and central nervous system pathologies. Gene therapy, particularly for conditions such as Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy, marks a new frontier in personalized medicine, offering hope for previously untreatable conditions. The article also examines the transformative role of telemedicine and artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical practice, which are revolutionizing patient care and enhancing diagnostic precision. Furthermore, it highlights the impact of novel serological biomarkers on the understanding and management of immune-mediated optic neuritis, and discusses the introduction of new therapeutic agents like Tocilizumab and Teprotumumab, which are redefining treatment paradigms. Collectively, these advancements reflect the profound influence of modern medicine on neuro-ophthalmology, paving the way for improved patient outcomes and fostering new avenues for research and clinical practice.

Rosai–Dorfman Disease (RDD), also known as sinus histiocytosis with massive lymphadenopathy, is a rare non-Langerhans cell histiocytic neoplasm. Although the disease classically presents as massive painless lymphadenopathy in young adults, RDD can also involve the central nervous system in some patients. CNS lesions, can cause headaches, neurologic deficits, and even neurologic deficits. The imaging appearance of CNS RDD typically mimics that of meningiomas: well-circumscribed dural-based lesions that often have dural tails. However, some imaging clues also exist that might help a radiologist recognize RDD, even before histopathologic confirmation. This radiology-pathology report of a patient with CNS RDD highlights the most pertinent clinical, imaging, and pathologic features of CNS RDD, and discusses what the neuroradiologist needs to know about the disease.

Purpose of review The purpose of this article is to provide a review of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD), with a focus on what renders optic neuritis “atypical” in these two conditions. Clinical features, diagnostic criteria, and epidemiology are outlined. Acute treatments for optic neuritis, as well as immunotherapy for NMOSD and MOGAD are discussed. Recent findings Updates in NMOSD and MOGAD are highlighted, with an emphasis on novel work including the new 2023 MOGAD diagnostic criteria, our evolving understanding on the epidemiology of these conditions, and recently FDA-approved NMOSD treatments. Pipeline therapies are also discussed. Summary A thorough history and examination, supported by ancillary testing, continues to be the mainstay of optic neuritis diagnosis. Stratifying typical versus atypical optic neuritis is paramount. Within the atypical category, NMOSD and MOGAD are important considerations. Clues can point towards these diagnoses and guide steps for treatment, which is increasingly becoming targeted to individual diseases, as the pathophysiology is different for these disorders.

AbstractObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dried blood spot (DBS) compared with conventional serum Aquaporin‐4‐IgG (AQP4‐IgG) testing.MethodsProspective multicenter diagnostic study was conducted between April 2018 and October 2023 across medical centers in the United States, Uganda, and the Republic of Guinea. Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) patients and controls collected blood on filter paper cards along with concurrent serum samples. These samples underwent analysis using flow cytometric live‐cell‐based assays (CBA) and enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to determine AQP4 serostatus. The accuracy of AQP4‐IgG detection between DBS and serum (gold standard) was compared.ResultsAmong 150 participants (47 cases, 103 controls), there was a strong correlation between DBS and serum samples (Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.82). The AUC was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92–0.99). AQP4‐IgG detection through DBS showed 87.0% sensitivity (95% CI: 0.74–0.95) and 100% specificity (95% CI: 0.96–1.00) using CBA, and 65.2% sensitivity (95% CI: 0.43–0.84) and 95.2% specificity (95% CI: 0.76–0.99) using ELISA. Serum ELISA demonstrated 69.6% sensitivity (95% CI: 0.47–0.87) and 98.4% specificity (95% CI: 0.91–0.99). The stability of DBS in detecting AQP4‐IgG persisted over 24 months for most cases.InterpretationThe DBS represents a viable alternative for detecting AQP4‐IgG in resource‐limited settings to diagnose NMOSD, offering high sensitivity and specificity comparable to serum testing. Moreover, DBS has low shipping costs, is easy to administer, and is suitable for point‐of‐care testing.