TY - JOUR
T1 - Apheresis therapies for NMOSD attacks A retrospective study of 207 therapeutic interventions
AU - Kleiter, Ingo
AU - Gahlen, Anna
AU - Borisow, Nadja
AU - Fischer, Katrin
AU - Wernecke, Klaus Dieter
AU - Hellwig, Kerstin
AU - Pache, Florence
AU - Ruprecht, Klemens
AU - Havla, Joachim
AU - Kumpfel, Tania
AU - Aktas, Orhan
AU - Hartung, Hans Peter
AU - Ringelstein, Marius
AU - Geis, Christian
AU - Kleinschnitz, Christoph
AU - Berthele, Achim
AU - Hemmer, Bernhard
AU - Angstwurm, Klemens
AU - Stellmann, Jan Patrick
AU - Schuster, Simon
AU - Stangel, Martin
AU - Lauda, Florian
AU - Tumani, Hayrettin
AU - Mayer, Christoph
AU - Krumbholz, Markus
AU - Zeltner, Lena
AU - Ziemann, Ulf
AU - Linker, Ralf
AU - Schwab, Matthias
AU - Marziniak, Martin
AU - Bergh, Florian Then
AU - Oy, Ulrich Hofstadt Van
AU - Neuhaus, Oliver
AU - Zettl, Uwe K.
AU - Faiss, Jurgen
AU - Wildemann, Brigitte
AU - Paul, Friedemann
AU - Jarius, Sven
AU - Trebst, Corinna
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Author(s).
PY - 2018/11/1
Y1 - 2018/11/1
N2 - Objective To analyze whether 1 of the 2 apheresis techniques, therapeutic plasma exchange (PE) or immunoadsorption (IA), is superior in treating neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) attacks and to identify predictive factors for complete remission (CR). Methods This retrospective cohort study was based on the registry of the German Neuromyelitis Optica Study Group, a nationwide network established in 2008. It recruited patients with neuromyelitis optica diagnosed according to the 2006 Wingerchuk criteria or with aquaporin-4 (AQP4-ab)-antibody-seropositive NMOSD treated at 6 regional hospitals and 16 tertiary referral centers until March 2013. Besides descriptive data analysis of patient and attack characteristics, generalized estimation equation (GEE) analyses were applied to compare the effectiveness of the 2 apheresis techniques. A GEE model was generated to assess predictors of outcome. Results Two hundred and seven attacks in 105 patients (87% AQP4-ab-antibody seropositive) were treated with at least 1 apheresis therapy. Neither PE nor IA was proven superior in the therapy of NMOSD attacks. CR was only achieved with early apheresis therapy. Strong predictors for CR were the use of apheresis therapy as first-line therapy (OR 12.27, 95% CI: 1.04-144.91, p = 0.047), time from onset of attack to start of therapy in days (OR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99, p = 0.014), the presence of AQP4-abantibodies (OR 33.34, 95% CI: 1.76-631.17, p = 0.019), and monofocal attack manifestation (OR 4.71, 95% CI: 1.03-21.62, p = 0.046). Conclusions Our findings suggest early use of an apheresis therapy in NMOSD attacks, particularly in AQP4-ab-seropositive patients. No superiority was shown for one of the 2 apheresis techniques. Classification of evidence This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with NMOSD, neither PE nor IA is superior in the treatment of attacks.
AB - Objective To analyze whether 1 of the 2 apheresis techniques, therapeutic plasma exchange (PE) or immunoadsorption (IA), is superior in treating neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) attacks and to identify predictive factors for complete remission (CR). Methods This retrospective cohort study was based on the registry of the German Neuromyelitis Optica Study Group, a nationwide network established in 2008. It recruited patients with neuromyelitis optica diagnosed according to the 2006 Wingerchuk criteria or with aquaporin-4 (AQP4-ab)-antibody-seropositive NMOSD treated at 6 regional hospitals and 16 tertiary referral centers until March 2013. Besides descriptive data analysis of patient and attack characteristics, generalized estimation equation (GEE) analyses were applied to compare the effectiveness of the 2 apheresis techniques. A GEE model was generated to assess predictors of outcome. Results Two hundred and seven attacks in 105 patients (87% AQP4-ab-antibody seropositive) were treated with at least 1 apheresis therapy. Neither PE nor IA was proven superior in the therapy of NMOSD attacks. CR was only achieved with early apheresis therapy. Strong predictors for CR were the use of apheresis therapy as first-line therapy (OR 12.27, 95% CI: 1.04-144.91, p = 0.047), time from onset of attack to start of therapy in days (OR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99, p = 0.014), the presence of AQP4-abantibodies (OR 33.34, 95% CI: 1.76-631.17, p = 0.019), and monofocal attack manifestation (OR 4.71, 95% CI: 1.03-21.62, p = 0.046). Conclusions Our findings suggest early use of an apheresis therapy in NMOSD attacks, particularly in AQP4-ab-seropositive patients. No superiority was shown for one of the 2 apheresis techniques. Classification of evidence This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with NMOSD, neither PE nor IA is superior in the treatment of attacks.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055792936&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000504
DO - 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000504
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85055792936
SN - 2332-7812
VL - 5
JO - Neurology: Neuroimmunology and NeuroInflammation
JF - Neurology: Neuroimmunology and NeuroInflammation
IS - 6
M1 - e504
ER -