IgM anti-GM2 antibodies in patients with multifocal motor neuropathy target Schwann cells and are associated with early onset

BACKGROUND

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, chronic immune-mediated polyneuropathy characterized by asymmetric distal limb weakness. An important feature of MMN is the presence of IgM antibodies against gangliosides, in particular GM1 and less often GM2. Antibodies against GM1 bind to motor neurons (MNs) and cause damage through complement activation. The involvement of Schwann cells (SCs), expressing GM1 and GM2, in the pathogenesis of MMN is unknown.

METHODS

Combining the data of our 2007 and 2015 combined cross-sectional and follow-up studies in Dutch patients with MMN, we evaluated the presence of IgM antibodies against GM1 and GM2 in serum from 124 patients with MMN and investigated their binding to SCs and complement-activating properties. We also assessed the relation of IgM binding and complement deposition with clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Thirteen out of 124 patients (10%) had a positive ELISA titer for IgM anti-GM2. Age at onset of symptoms was significantly lower in MMN patients with anti-GM2 IgM. IgM binding to SCs correlated with IgM anti-GM2 titers. We found no correlation between IgM anti-GM2 titers and MN binding or with IgM anti-GM1 titers. IgM binding to SCs decreased upon pre-incubation of serum with soluble GM2, but not with soluble GM1. IgM anti-GM2 binding to SCs correlated with complement activation, as reflected by increased C3 fixation on SCs and C5a formation in the supernatant.

CONCLUSION

Circulating IgM anti-GM2 antibodies define a subgroup of patients with MMN that has an earlier onset of disease. These antibodies probably target SCs specifically and activate complement, similarly as IgM anti-GM1 on MNs. Our data indicate that complement activation by IgM antibodies bound to SCs and MNs underlies MMN pathology.

Plexus MRI helps distinguish the immune-mediated neuropathies MADSAM and MMN

BACKGROUND

Among immune-mediated neuropathies, clinical-electrophysiological overlap exists between multifocal acquired demyelinating sensory and motor neuropathy (MADSAM) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN). Divergent immune pathogenesis, immunotherapy response, and prognosis exist between these two disorders. MRI reports have not shown distinction of these disorders, but biopsy confirmation is lacking in earlier reports. MADSAM nerves are hypertrophic with onion bulbs, inflammation, and edema, whereas MMN findings are limited to multifocal axonal atrophy.

OBJECTIVES

To understand if plexus MRI can distinguish MADSAM from MMN among pathologically (nerve biopsy) confirmed cases.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review and blinded plexus MRI review of biopsy-confirmed MADSAM and MMN cases at Mayo Clinic.

RESULTS

Nine brachial plexuses (MADSAM-5, MMN-4) and 6 lumbosacral plexuses (MADSAM-4, MMN-2) had fascicular biopsies of varied nerves. Median follow-up in MADSAM was 93 months (range: 7-180) and 27 (range: 12-109) in MMN (p = 0.34). MRI hypertrophy occurred solely in MADSAM (89%, 8/9) with T2-hyperintensity in both. There was no correlation between time to imaging for hypertrophy, symptom onset age, or motor neuropathy impairments (mNIS). At last follow-up, on diverse immunotherapies mNIS improved in MADSAM (median - 4, range: -22 to 0), whereas MMN worsened (median 3, range: 0 to 6, p = 0.03) on largely IVIG.

CONCLUSION

Nerve hypertrophy on plexus MRI helps distinguish MMN from MADSAM, where better immunotherapy treatment outcomes were observed. These findings are consistent with the immune pathogenesis seen on biopsies. Radiologic distinction is possible independent of time to imaging and extent of motor deficits, suggesting MRI is helpful in patients with uncertain clinical-electrophysiologic diagnosis, especially motor-onset MADSAM.

Immunoglobulin for multifocal motor neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, probably immune-mediated disorder characterised by slowly progressive, asymmetric, distal weakness of one or more limbs with no objective loss of sensation. It may cause prolonged periods of disability. Treatment options for MMN are few. People with MMN do not usually respond to steroids or plasma exchange. Uncontrolled studies have suggested a beneficial effect of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005, with an amendment in 2007. We updated the review to incorporate new evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous and subcutaneous immunoglobulin in people with MMN.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 20 April 2021: the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, and checked the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered RCTs and quasi-RCTs examining the effects of any dose of IVIg and subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) in people with definite or probable MMN for inclusion in the review. Eligible studies had to have measured at least one of the following outcomes: disability, muscle strength, or electrophysiological conduction block. We used studies that reported the frequency of adverse effects to assess safety.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed the literature searches to identify potentially relevant trials, assessed risk of bias of included studies, and extracted data. We followed standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

Six cross-over RCTs including a total of 90 participants were suitable for inclusion in the review. Five RCTs compared IVIg to placebo, and one compared IVIg to SCIg. Four of the trials comparing IVIg versus placebo involved IVIg-naive participants (induction treatment). In the other two trials, participants were known IVIg responders receiving maintencance IVIg at baseline and were then randomised to maintenance treatment with IVIg or placebo in one trial, and IVIg or SCIg in the other. Risk of bias was variable in the included studies, with three studies at high risk of bias in at least one risk of bias domain. IVIg versus placebo (induction treatment): three RCTs including IVIg-naive participants reported a disability measure. Disability improved in seven out of 18 (39%) participants after IVIg treatment and in two out of 18 (11%) participants after placebo (risk ratio (RR) 3.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 10.12; 3 RCTs, 18 participants; low-certainty evidence). The proportion of participants with an improvement in disability at 12 months was not reported. Strength improved in 21 out of 27 (78%) IVIg-naive participants treated with IVIg and one out of 27 (4%) participants who received placebo (RR 11.00, 95% CI 2.86 to 42.25; 3 RCTs, 27 participants; low-certainty evidence). IVIg treatment may increase the proportion of people with resolution of at least one conduction block; however, the results were also consistent with no effect (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 51.70; 4 RCTs, 28 participants; low-certainty evidence). IVIg versus placebo (maintenance treatment): a trial that included participants on maintenance IVIg treatment reported an increase in disability in 17 out of 42 (40%) people switching to placebo and seven out of 42 (17%) remaining on IVIg (RR 2.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.24; 1 RCT, 42 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and a decrease in grip strength in 20 out of 42 (48%) participants after a switch to placebo treatment compared to four out of 42 (10%) remaining on IVIg (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.54; 1 RCT, 42 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, IVIg versus placebo (induction or maintenance): four trials comparing IVIg and placebo reported adverse events, of which data from two studies could be meta-analysed. Transient side effects were reported in 71% of IVIg-treated participants versus 4.8% of placebo-treated participants in these studies. The pooled RR for the development of side effects was 10.33 (95% CI 2.15 to 49.77; 2 RCTs, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was only one serious side effect (pulmonary embolism) during IVIg treatment. IVIg versus SCIg (maintenance treatment): the trial that compared continuation of IVIg maintenance versus SCIg maintenance did not measure disability. The evidence was very uncertain for muscle strength (standardised mean difference 0.08, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.00; 1 RCT, 9 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for the number of people with side effects attributable to treatment (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.40; 1 RCT, 9 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence from three small RCTs shows that IVIg may improve muscle strength in people with MMN, and low-certainty evidence indicates that it may improve disability; the estimate of the magnitude of improvement of disability has wide CIs and needs further studies to secure its significance. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, it is probable that most IVIg responders deteriorate in disability and muscle strength after IVIg withdrawal. SCIg might be an alternative treatment to IVIg, but the evidence is very uncertain. More research is needed to identify people in whom IVIg withdrawal is possible and to confirm efficacy of SCIg as an alternative maintenance treatment.

Nerve Pathology Distinguishes Focal Motor Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyradiculoneuropathy From Multifocal Motor Neuropathy

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study is to distinguish the mechanisms of disease for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN), which we believe to be fundamentally different. However, distinguishing the mechanisms is more difficult when the presentation of CIDP is motor-predominant, focal, or asymmetric.

METHODS

We describe 3 focal, motor-predominant, representative cases that could be interpreted on clinical and/or electrophysiological grounds as either MMN or focal CIDP, and present pathological findings.

RESULTS

We highlight pathological differences in these cases, and provide an argument that CIDP and MMN are distinct entities with different pathophysiological mechanisms-chronic demyelination for CIDP, and an immune-mediated attack on paranodal motor axons for MMN.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on clinical evaluation, electrophysiology, and nerve biopsy pathology, we can divide the conditions into inflammatory demyelinating neuropathy (focal CIDP) versus chronic axonal neuropathy (MMN). The divergent pathological findings provide further evidence that CIDP and MMN are fundamentally different disorders.

Small Fibre Involvement in Multifocal Motor Neuropathy Explored with Sudoscan: A Single-Centre Experience

Objective: Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare inflammatory neuropathy, clinically characterized by exclusive motor involvement. We wished to evaluate the possible presence of sensory dysfunction, including the evaluation of small fibres, after a long-term disease course. Patients and methods: seven MMN patients, regularly followed in our Neurology Department, underwent clinical evaluation, neurophysiological examination by nerve conduction studies (NCSs), and Sudoscan. We compared neurophysiological data with a group of patients with other disorders of the peripheral nervous system. Results: NCSs showed a reduction of sensory nerve action potential amplitude in 2/7 MMN patients. Sudoscan showed borderline electrochemical skin conductance (ESC) values in 3/7 MMN patients (two of them with abnormal sensory NCSs). Conclusions: Our results confirm that sensory involvement may be found in some MMN after a long-term disease course, and it could also involve the small fibres.

Clinical outcomes in multifocal motor neuropathy: A combined cross-sectional and follow-up study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical course of multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) in a large cohort of patients and to identify predictive factors of a progressive disease course.

METHODS

Between May 2015 and February 2016, we collected clinical data from 100 patients with MMN, of whom 60 had participated in a nationwide cross-sectional cohort study in 2007. We documented clinical characteristics using standardized questionnaires and performed a standardized neurologic examination. We used multiple linear regression analysis to identify factors that correlated with worse outcome.

RESULTS

We found that age at diagnosis (45.2 vs 48.6 years, p < 0.02) was significantly increased between 2007 and 2015-2016, whereas diagnostic delay decreased by 15 months. Seven out of 10 outcome measures deteriorated over time (all p < 0.01). Patients who had a lower Medical Research Council (MRC) sumscore and absence of 1 or more reflexes at the baseline visit showed a greater functional loss at follow-up (p = 0.007 and p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that MMN is a progressive disease. Although 87% of patients received maintenance treatment, muscle strength, reflexes, vibration sense, and the Self-Evaluation Scale score significantly deteriorated over time. Lower MRC sumscore and absence of reflexes predicted a more progressive disease course.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class II evidence that lower MRC sumscore and the absence of reflexes predict a more progressive disease course in patients with MMN.

Immune-mediated neuropathies

Since the discovery of an acute monophasic paralysis, later coined Guillain-Barré syndrome, almost 100 years ago, and the discovery of chronic, steroid-responsive polyneuropathy 50 years ago, the spectrum of immune-mediated polyneuropathies has broadened, with various subtypes continuing to be identified, including chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN). In general, these disorders are speculated to be caused by autoimmunity to proteins located at the node of Ranvier or components of myelin of peripheral nerves, although disease-associated autoantibodies have not been identified for all disorders. Owing to the numerous subtypes of the immune-mediated neuropathies, making the right diagnosis in daily clinical practice is complicated. Moreover, treating these disorders, particularly their chronic variants, such as CIDP and MMN, poses a challenge. In general, management of these disorders includes immunotherapies, such as corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin or plasma exchange. Improvements in clinical criteria and the emergence of more disease-specific immunotherapies should broaden the therapeutic options for these disabling diseases.

Corneal confocal microscopy in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy

Objective

There is an unmet need for better diagnostic tools to further delineate clinical subsets of heterogeneous chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) to facilitate treatment decisions. Corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) is a noninvasive and reproducible nerve imaging technique. This study evaluates the potential of CCM as a diagnostic surrogate in CIDP and MMN.

Methods

In a cross‐sectional prospective approach, 182 patients and healthy controls were studied using CCM to quantify corneal nerve damage and immune cell infiltration.

Results

Patients with CIDP and MMN had a reduction in corneal nerve fiber (CNF) measures and an increase in corneal immune cell infiltrates. In CIDP, CNF parameters decreased with increasing duration of disease. The number of dendritic cells in proximity to CNFs was increased in patients with early disease and correlated with the degree of motor affection. A further reduction in CNF parameters and an increase in nondendritic cells were observed in patients with painful neuropathy. In CIDP patients with antineuronal antibodies the number of nondendritic cells was increased.

Interpretation

Our findings suggest that CNF loss may reflect severity of neuropathy and quantification of distinct cells around the CNF plexus may help in stratifying CIDP subtypes, clinical course, and disease activity. However, further longitudinal studies are required before CCM can be considered as a valid surrogate endpoint for patients with CIDP and MMN.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic acquired demyelinating polyneuropathies

Chronic neuropathies are operationally classified as primarily demyelinating or axonal, on the basis of electrodiagnostic or pathological criteria. Demyelinating neuropathies are further classified as hereditary or acquired-this distinction is important, because the acquired neuropathies are immune-mediated and, thus, amenable to treatment. The acquired chronic demyelinating neuropathies include chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), neuropathy associated with monoclonal IgM antibodies to myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG; anti-MAG neuropathy), multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN), and POEMS syndrome. They have characteristic--though overlapping--clinical presentations, are mediated by distinct immune mechanisms, and respond to different therapies. CIDP is the default diagnosis if the neuropathy is demyelinating and no other cause is found. Anti-MAG neuropathy is diagnosed on the basis of the presence of anti-MAG antibodies, MMN is characterized by multifocal weakness and motor conduction blocks, and POEMS syndrome is associated with IgG or IgA λ-type monoclonal gammopathy and osteosclerotic myeloma. The correct diagnosis, however, can be difficult to make in patients with atypical or overlapping presentations, or nondefinitive laboratory studies. First-line treatments include intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), corticosteroids or plasmapheresis for CIDP; IVIg for MMN; rituximab for anti-MAG neuropathy; and irradiation or chemotherapy for POEMS syndrome. A correct diagnosis is required for choosing the appropriate treatment, with the aim of preventing progressive neuropathy.

Multifocal motor neuropathy: a review of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is an uncommon, purely motor neuropathy associated with asymmetric deficits with predilection for upper limb involvement. Even in the early descriptions of MMN, the associations of anti-GM1 antibodies and robust response to immunomodulatory treatment were recognized. These features highlight the likelihood of an underlying autoimmune etiology of MMN. The clinical presentation of MMN can closely mimic several neurological conditions including those with more malignant prognoses such as motor neuron disease. Therefore early and rapid recognition of MMN is critical. Serological evidence of anti GM-1 antibodies and electrodiagnostic findings of conduction block are helpful diagnostic clues for MMN. Importantly, these diagnostic features are not universally present, and patients lacking these characteristic findings can demonstrate similar robust response to immunodulatory treatment. In the current review, recent research in the areas of diagnosis, pathogenesis, and treatment of MMN and needs for the future are discussed. The characteristic findings of MMN and treatment implications are reviewed and contrasted with other mimicking disorders.

Multifocal motor neuropathy, multifocal acquired demyelinating sensory and motor neuropathy, and other chronic acquired demyelinating polyneuropathy variants

Chronic acquired demyelinating neuropathies (CADP) constitute an important group of immune neuromuscular disorders affecting myelin. This article discusses CADP with emphasis on multifocal motor neuropathy, multifocal acquired demyelinating sensory and motor neuropathy, distal acquired demyelinating symmetric neuropathy, and less common variants. Although each of these entities has distinctive laboratory and electrodiagnostic features that aid in their diagnosis, clinical characteristics are of paramount importance in diagnosing specific conditions and determining the most appropriate therapies. Knowledge regarding pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of these disorders continues to expand, resulting in improved opportunities for identification and treatment.

Multifocal motor neuropathy

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare disorder in which the symptoms are caused by persistent conduction block lesions. The mononeuropathy multiplex progresses over time with increasing axonal loss. The cause of the conduction blocks and axonal loss are not completely understood but immune mechanisms are involved and response to intravenous immunoglobulin has been established. The importance of MMN goes beyond its clinical incidence as the increasing understanding of the pathogenesis of this disorder has implications for other peripheral nerve diseases and for our knowledge of peripheral nerve biology.

What's in the Literature?

Peripheral neuropathies are among the most common disorders seen by neuromuscular specialists. Several of the articles in this issue's review focus on diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of disorders of peripheral nerve, including some which address important issues relating to chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. Motor neuron diseases continue to be somewhat disproportionately represented, likely due to the devastating nature of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The TAR DNA-binding protein-43 (TDP-43) story as outlined in 2 of the articles is fascinating, particularly with regard to etiopathogenesis, whereas other articles focus on epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, and symptom management, including some insights into Kennedy disease. Myotonic dystrophy and other muscle diseases are presented with some welcome news on treatment and management.