| 1. |
- Petzold, Axel, et al.
(författare)
-
Diagnosis and classification of optic neuritis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 1474-4422 .- 1474-4465. ; 21:12, s. 1120-1134
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- There is no consensus regarding the classification of optic neuritis, and precise diagnostic criteria are not available. This reality means that the diagnosis of disorders that have optic neuritis as the first manifestation can be challenging. Accurate diagnosis of optic neuritis at presentation can facilitate the timely treatment of individuals with multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder, or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease. Epidemiological data show that, cumulatively, optic neuritis is most frequently caused by many conditions other than multiple sclerosis. Worldwide, the cause and management of optic neuritis varies with geographical location, treatment availability, and ethnic background. We have developed diagnostic criteria for optic neuritis and a classification of optic neuritis subgroups. Our diagnostic criteria are based on clinical features that permit a diagnosis of possible optic neuritis; further paraclinical tests, utilising brain, orbital, and retinal imaging, together with antibody and other protein biomarker data, can lead to a diagnosis of definite optic neuritis. Paraclinical tests can also be applied retrospectively on stored samples and historical brain or retinal scans, which will be useful for future validation studies. Our criteria have the potential to reduce the risk of misdiagnosis, provide information on optic neuritis disease course that can guide future treatment trial design, and enable physicians to judge the likelihood of a need for long-term pharmacological management, which might differ according to optic neuritis subgroups.
|
|
| 2. |
- Gonzalez, Maria Camila, et al.
(författare)
-
Cognitive and motor decline in dementia with lewy bodies and Parkinson's disease dementia
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Movement Disorders Clinical Practice. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2330-1619. ; 10:6, s. 980-986
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: There is a need to better understand the rate of cognitive and motor decline of Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease Dementia (PDD).Objectives: To compare the rate of cognitive and motor decline in patients with DLB and PDD from the E-DLB Consortium and the Parkinson's Incidence Cohorts Collaboration (PICC) Cohorts.Methods: The annual change in MMSE and MDS-UPDRS part III was estimated using linear mixed regression models in patients with at least one follow-up (DLB n = 837 and PDD n = 157).Results: When adjusting for confounders, we found no difference in the annual change in MMSE between DLB and PDD (−1.8 [95% CI −2.3, −1.3] vs. −1.9 [95% CI −2.6, −1.2] [P = 0.74]). MDS-UPDRS part III showed nearly identical annual changes (DLB 4.8 [95% CI 2.1, 7.5]) (PDD 4.8 [95% CI 2.7, 6.9], [P = 0.98]).Conclusions: DLB and PDD showed similar rates of cognitive and motor decline. This is relevant for future clinical trial designs.
|
|
| 3. |
- Petzold, Axel, et al.
(författare)
-
Neurofilament ELISA validation
- 2010
-
Ingår i: JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS. - 0022-1759. ; 352:1-2, s. 23-31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 4. |
- Petzold, Axel, et al.
(författare)
-
Neurofilament ELISA validation
- 2010
-
Ingår i: JIM - Journal of Immunological Methods. - : Elsevier BV. - 0022-1759 .- 1872-7905. ; 352:1-2, s. 23-31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Neurofilament proteins (Nf) are highly specific biomarkers for neuronal death and axonal degeneration. As these markers become more widely used, an inter-laboratory validation study is required to identify assay criteria for high quality performance. METHODS: The UmanDiagnostics NF-light (R)enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assays (ELISA) for the neurofilament light chain (NfL, 68kDa) was used to test the intra-assay and inter-laboratory coefficient of variation (CV) between 35 laboratories worldwide on 15 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples. Critical factors, such as sample transport and storage, analytical delays, reaction temperature and time, the laboratories' accuracy and preparation of standards were documented and used for the statistical analyses. RESULTS: The intra-laboratory CV averaged 3.3% and the inter-laboratory CV 59%. The results from the test laboratories correlated with those from the reference laboratory (R=0.60, p<0.0001). Correcting for critical factors improved the strength of the correlation. Differences in the accuracy of standard preparation were identified as the most critical factor. Correcting for the error introduced by variation in the protein standards improved the correlation to R=0.98, p<0.0001 with an averaged inter-laboratory CV of 14%. The corrected overall inter-rater agreement was subtantial (0.6) according to Fleiss' multi-rater kappa and Gwet's AC1 statistics. CONCLUSION: This multi-center validation study identified the lack of preparation of accurate and consistent protein standards as the main reason for a poor inter-laboratory CV. This issue is also relevant to other protein biomarkers based on this type of assay and will need to be solved in order to achieve an acceptable level of analytical accuracy. The raw data of this study is available online.
|
|
