Long-term seizure outcomes in patients with autoimmune encephalitis: A prospective observational registry study update

Risk of Seizure Recurrence Due to Autoimmune Encephalitis With NMDAR, LGI1, CASPR2, and GABABR Antibodies: Implications for Return to Driving

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with ongoing seizures are usually not allowed to drive. The prognosis for seizure freedom is favorable in patients with autoimmune encephalitis (AIE) with antibodies against NMDA receptor (NMDAR), leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 (LGI1), contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CASPR2), and the gamma-aminobutyric-acid B receptor (GABABR). We hypothesized that after a seizure-free period of 3 months, patients with AIE have a seizure recurrence risk of <20% during the subsequent 12 months. This would render them eligible for noncommercial driving according to driving regulations in several countries.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter cohort study analyzed follow-up data from patients aged 15 years or older with seizures resulting from NMDAR-, LGI1-, CASPR2-, or GABABR-AIE, who had been seizure-free for ≥3 months. We used Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates for the seizure recurrence risk at 12 months for each antibody group and tested for the effects of potential covariates with regression models.

RESULTS

We included 383 patients with NMDAR-, 440 with LGI1-, 114 with CASPR2-, and 44 with GABABR-AIE from 14 international centers. After being seizure-free for 3 months after an initial seizure period, we calculated the probability of remaining seizure-free for another 12 months (KM estimate) as 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.92) for NMDAR, 0.84 (CI 0.80-0.88) for LGI1, 0.82 (CI 0.75-0.90) for CASPR2, and 0.76 (CI 0.62-0.93) for GABABR.

DISCUSSION

Taking a <20% recurrence risk within 12 months as sufficient, patients with NMDAR-AIE and LGI1-AIE could be considered eligible for noncommercial driving after having been seizure-free for 3 months.

Prognostic factors underlying the development of drug-resistant epilepsy in patients with autoimmune encephalitis: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to analyze the characteristics of patients with autoimmune encephalitis (AE) to identify prognostic factors associated with the development of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE).

METHODS

In this retrospective observational cohort study, we enrolled adult patients with AE between January 2016 and December 2022. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the presence or absence of DRE at the last follow-up. The predictors of the development of DRE were investigated using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among 121 AE patients, 75.2% (n = 91) experienced acute symptomatic seizures, and 29.8% (n = 36) developed DRE at the last follow-up. On multivariate regression analysis, the factors associated with DRE were antibody negativity (OR 3.628, 95% CI 1.092-12.050, p = 0.035), focal seizure (OR 6.431, 95% CI 1.838-22.508, p = 0.004), refractory status epilepticus (OR 8.802, 95% CI 2.445-31.689, p = 0.001), interictal epileptiform discharges on EEG (OR 6.773, 95% CI 2.206-20.790, p = 0.001), and T2/FLAIR hyperintensity in the limbic system (OR 3.286, 95% CI 1.060-10.183, p = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the risk of developing DRE was mainly observed among AE patients who were negative for antibodies or had focal seizures, refractory status epilepticus, interictal epileptiform discharges on EEG, and T2/FLAIR hyperintensity in the limbic system.

MyD88-mediated signaling is critical for the generation of seizure responses and cognitive impairment in a model of anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis

OBJECTIVE

We previously demonstrated that interleukin-1 receptor-mediated immune activation contributes to seizure severity and memory loss in anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis. In the present study, we assessed the role of the myeloid differentiation primary response gene 88 (MyD88), an adaptor protein in Toll-like receptor signaling, in the key phenotypic characteristics of anti-NMDAR encephalitis.

METHODS

Monoclonal anti-NMDAR antibodies or control antibodies were infused into the lateral ventricle of MyD88 knockout mice (MyD88-/-) and control C56BL/6J mice (wild type [WT]) via osmotic minipumps for 2 weeks. Seizure responses were measured by electroencephalography. Upon completion of the infusion, the motor, anxiety, and memory functions of the mice were assessed. Astrocytic (glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP]) and microglial (ionized calcium-binding adaptor molecule 1 [Iba-1]) activation and transcriptional activation for the principal inflammatory mediators involved in seizures were determined using immunohistochemistry and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, respectively.

RESULTS

As shown before, 80% of WT mice infused with anti-NMDAR antibodies (n = 10) developed seizures (median = 11, interquartile range [IQR] = 3-25 in 2 weeks). In contrast, only three of 14 MyD88-/- mice (21.4%) had seizures (0, IQR = 0-.25, p = .01). The WT mice treated with antibodies also developed memory loss in the novel object recognition test, whereas such memory deficits were not apparent in MyD88-/- mice treated with anti-NMDAR antibodies (p = .03) or control antibodies (p = .04). Furthermore, in contrast to the WT mice exposed to anti-NMDAR antibodies, the MyD88-/- mice had a significantly lower induction of chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2) in the hippocampus (p = .0001, Sidak tests). There were no significant changes in the expression of GFAP and Iba-1 in the MyD88-/- mice treated with anti-NMDAR or control antibodies.

SIGNIFICANCE

These findings suggest that MyD88-mediated signaling contributes to the seizure and memory phenotype in anti-NMDAR encephalitis and that CCL2 activation may participate in the expression of these features. The removal of MyD88 inflammation may be protective and therapeutically relevant.

Acute Symptomatic Seizures and Risk of Seizure Recurrence in Patients with Anti-NMDAR, Anti-LGI1, and Anti-GABABR Encephalitis

AIMS

To analyze the clinical characteristics of acute symptomatic seizures and predict the risk factors for seizure recurrence in patients with anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR), anti-leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 (LGI1), and anti-gamma-aminobutyric acid B receptor (GABABR) encephalitis.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included hospitalized patients who had been diagnosed with anti-NMDAR, anti-LGI1, and anti-GABABR encephalitis between November 2014 and April 2021. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the potential risk factors for seizure recurrence.

RESULTS

In total, 262 patients with anti-NMDAR, anti-LGI1, and anti-GABABR encephalitis were included, 197 (75.2%) of whom presented with acute symptomatic seizures. During follow-up, 42 patients exhibited seizure recurrence. In anti-NMDAR encephalitis, frontal lobe abnormality on brain magnetic resonance imaging, delayed immunotherapy, early seizures, and focal motor onset were associated with seizure recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute symptomatic seizure is a common clinical feature observed in patients with anti-NMDAR, anti-LGI1, and anti-GABABR encephalitis, with 50% of patients presenting with seizures as an initial symptom. The prognosis of patients with acute symptomatic seizures can be improved after receiving immunotherapy. Nevertheless, a minority of patients will experience seizure recurrence; therefore, restarting immunotherapy is recommended.

Predictive value of persistent antibodies at 6 months for relapse in neuronal surface antibody-associated autoimmune encephalitis

BACKGROUND

For patients with neuronal surface antibody-associated autoimmune encephalitis (NSAE) whose clinical symptoms gradually improve, the recommended course of immunotherapy in China is about 6 months. We aim to explore the relationship between persistent antibody positivity when immunotherapy is discontinued at 6 months and subsequent relapse.

METHODS

Prospective inclusion of NSAE patients with clinical remission after 6-month immunotherapy. Their antibody titers and other clinical data were collected at onset and 6 months later. Based on the antibody test results at 6 months, patients were divided into an antibody-persistent group and an antibody-negative conversion group, and then the rate of relapse between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The study included 28 NSAE patients who were antibody-positive at diagnosis. After 6-month immunotherapy, there were 16 (57.1%) cases with persistent antibodies and 12 (42.9%) cases with antibody-negative conversion. In the acute phase of onset, seizures were more common in patients with persistent antibodies (87.5% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.044). During a mean follow-up period of 22 months, patients with persistent antibodies were more likely to experience relapse than those with antibody-negative conversion (37.5% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.024). There were no significant differences in antibody types, CSF findings, results of MRI and EEG, tumor combination, immunotherapy, and long-term outcome between the two groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with persistent antibodies when immunotherapy is discontinued at 6 months, persistent antibody positivity was associated with a higher relapse rate.

Anticonvulsive treatment in autoimmune encephalitis: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Epileptic seizures are a common manifestation of autoimmune encephalitis (AIE). Immunosuppression (IT) is an efficient therapeutic approach, particularly in AIE associated with antibodies against extracellular structures. The role of antiseizure medication (ASM) is less clear. However, it may be beneficial in disease refractory to IT or in chronic post-AIE epilepsy.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review assessing the PubMed and Cochrane databases to identify all reports on patients with epileptic seizures due to AIE in whom ASM was used and report it according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards. We included case series (minimum 3 eligible patients), retrospective and prospective observational studies, and randomized controlled trials. The main outcome assessed was therapeutic efficacy of ASM. Secondary outcomes comprise number, type, and adverse effects of ASM. Descriptive statistics were used. The level of evidence was assessed according to the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

RESULTS

We screened a total of 3371 studies and included 30 (7 prospective, 23 retrospective). The reports cover a total of 708 patients, the majority (72.5%) suffering from AIE with antibodies against extracellular structures. Type of AIE, seizure frequency, and number and type of ASM used were heterogenous. While most patients profited from IT and/or ASM, the effect of ASM could rarely be isolated. Nine studies report on patients who received ASM monotherapy or were on ASM for a relevant length of time before IT initiation or after IT failure. One study reports a significant association between seizure freedom and use of sodium channel inhibitors. However, levels of evidence were generally low.

CONCLUSION

Few robust data exist on the particular efficacy of ASM in autoimmune epileptic seizures. While these patients generally seem to respond less well to ASM or surgical interventions, sodium channel blockers may have an additional benefit compared to other substances. However, levels of evidence are low and early IT remains the mainstay of AIE therapy. Future trials should address optimal ASM selection and dosing in AIE.

Autoimmune and paraneoplastic seizures

Seizures are a common feature of autoimmune encephalitis and are especially prevalent in patients with the commonest autoantibodies, against LGI1, CASPR2 and the NMDA, GABAB, and GABAA receptors. In this chapter, we discuss the classification, clinical, investigation, and treatment aspects of patients with these, and other autoantibody-mediated and -associated, illnesses. We highlight distinctive and common seizure semiologies which, often alongside other features we outline, can help the clinical diagnosis of an autoantibody-associated syndrome. Next, we classify these syndromes by either focusing on whether they represent underlying causative autoantibodies or T-cell-mediated syndromes and on the distinction between acute symptomatic seizures and a more enduring tendency to autoimmune-associated epilepsy, a practical and valuable distinction for both patients and clinicians which relates to the pathogenesis. We emphasize the more effective immunotherapy response in patients with causative autoantibodies, and discuss the emerging evidence for various first-, second-, and third-line immunotherapies. Finally, we highlight available clinical rating scales which can guide autoantibody testing and immunotherapy in patients with seizures of unknown etiology. Throughout, we relate the clinical and therapeutic observations to the immunobiology and neuroscience which drive these seizures.

Steps to Improve Precision Medicine in Epilepsy

Precision medicine is an old concept, but it is not widely applied across human health conditions as yet. Numerous attempts have been made to apply precision medicine in epilepsy, this has been based on a better understanding of aetiological mechanisms and deconstructing disease into multiple biological subsets. The scope of precision medicine is to provide effective strategies for treating individual patients with specific agent(s) that are likely to work best based on the causal biological make-up. We provide an overview of the main applications of precision medicine in epilepsy, including the current limitations and pitfalls, and propose potential strategies for implementation and to achieve a higher rate of success in patient care. Such strategies include establishing a definition of precision medicine and its outcomes; learning from past experiences, from failures and from other fields (e.g. oncology); using appropriate precision medicine strategies (e.g. drug repurposing versus traditional drug discovery process); and using adequate methods to assess efficacy (e.g. randomised controlled trials versus alternative trial designs). Although the progress of diagnostic techniques now allows comprehensive characterisation of each individual epilepsy condition from a molecular, biological, structural and clinical perspective, there remain challenges in the integration of individual data in clinical practice to achieve effective applications of precision medicine in this domain.

What is autoimmune encephalitis-associated epilepsy? Proposal of a practical definition

Seizures resulting from cerebral autoimmunity are either acutely symptomatic in the context of autoimmune encephalitis (AIE) with neural surface antibodies, or they are indicative of an enduring predisposition to seizures, that is, epilepsy. Here, we propose a practical definition for autoimmune encephalitis-associated epilepsy (AEAE): Seizures associated with antibodies against glutamic acid decarboxylase, paraneoplastic syndromes, or Rasmussen encephalitis are classified as AEAE. AEAE secondary to AIE with antibodies against the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor, leucine-rich glioma inactivated protein 1, contactin-associated protein-2, or γ-aminobutyric acid-B receptor can be diagnosed if the following criteria are met: seizures persist for at least 2 years after immunotherapy initiation; no signs of encephalitis on magnetic resonance imaging and no fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography hypermetabolism; normal cerebrospinal fluid cell count; and a substantial decrease in antibody titers. This classification corresponds to different disease mechanisms. While AIE results from the pathogenic effects of neural antibodies, AEAE is probably the consequence of encephalitis-related tissue damage and thereby mainly structurally mediated. The distinction between AIE and AEAE also has practical consequences: In AIE, immunotherapy is usually highly beneficial, whereas anti-seizure medication has little effect. In AEAE, immunotherapy is less promising and the usual anti-seizure interventions are preferable. In addition, the diagnosis of AEAE has social consequences in terms of driving and professional limitations.

Autoimmune encephalitis: Epidemiology, pathophysiology and clinical spectrum (part 2)

Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) represents a growing number of severe autoimmune-inflammatory diseases affecting both the white and grey matter of the brain. In part 1 of this series we focused on the epidemiology, pathophysiology and clinical presentation of this condition, with two illustrative cases. In this part, we will introduce the clinical criteria for AE, particularly for the diagnosis of anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor encephalitis, which were developed to facilitate immune treatment in suspected cases before antibody results are available. We subsequently discuss the work up, differential diagnosis and treatment options for patients with this disease.  

Limitations on knowledge of autoimmune encephalitis and barriers to its treatment among neurologists: a survey from western China

BACKGROUND

Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is a group of severe antibody-mediated brain diseases. The understanding of clinical management of AE has developed rapidly. However, the knowledge level of AE and barriers to effective treatment among neurologists remains unstudied.

METHODS

We conducted a questionnaire survey among neurologist in western China on knowledge of AE, treatment practices, and perspectives on barriers to treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 1113 neurologists were invited and 690 neurologists from 103 hospitals completed the questionnaire with a response rate of 61.9%. Respondents correctly answered 68.3% of medical questions about AE. Some respondents (12.4%) never assayed for diagnostic antibodies if patients had suspected AE. Half (52.3%) never prescribed immunosuppressants for AE patients, while another 7.6% did not know whether they should do so. Neurologists who never prescribed immunosuppressants were more likely to have less education, a less senior job title, and to practice in a smaller setting. Neurologists who did not know whether to prescribe immunosuppressants were associated with less AE knowledge. The most frequent barrier to treatment, according to respondents, was financial cost. Other barriers to treatment included patient refusal, insufficient AE knowledge, lack of access to AE guidelines, drugs or diagnostic test, etc. CONCLUSION: Neurologists in western China lack AE knowledge. Medical education around AE is urgent needed and should be more targeted to individuals with less educated level or working in non-academic hospitals. Policies should be developed to increase the availability of AE related antibody testing or drugs and reduce the economic burden of disease.

Safety of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in autoimmune encephalitis: A real-world cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To assess safety data of the inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in a real-world sample of people with autoimmune encephalitis (pwAE).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed between 1 March and 30 April 2022. We invited pwAE from our previous ONE-WC (Outcome of Autoimmune Encephalitis Study in Western China) registration study database, to attend neurological clinics, at West China Hospital to participate in a face-to-face survey using a custom-designed questionnaire for this study. The ONE-WC study began in October 2011 and prospectively enrolled pwAE from four large comprehensive neurological centers in Sichuan province, China.

RESULTS

Of the 387 pwAE, 240 (62.0%) completed the questionnaire. Half the 240 participants (121, 50.4%) reported receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, which in all but two patients received inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. Among vaccinated pwAE, the median age was 35 years (range 15-69) and 57.8% of them were women. The most frequent reasons that unvaccinated individuals reported for not receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were concern about vaccine-induced relapse of AE (50.4%) and advice from a physician to delay vaccination (21.0%). Small proportions of vaccinated individuals reported adverse events after the first dose (11.5%) or the second dose (10.2%), and none of the adverse events was serious. Across the entire sample, one individual reported relapsing within 30 days after the first dose and three individuals reported relapsing more than 120 days after the first dose.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world survey indicates an overall favorable safety profile of the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine for pwAE.

Use of anti-seizure medications in different types of autoimmune encephalitis: A narrative review

Seizures are the main manifestation of the acute phase of autoimmune encephalitis (AE). Anti-seizure medications (ASMs) play an important role in controlling seizures in AE patients, but there is currently a lack of consensus regarding the selection, application, and discontinuation of ASMs. This narrative review focuses on the use of ASMs in patients with AE driven by different antibodies. The PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were searched up until 30 October 2022 using prespecified search terms. We identified 2,580 studies; 23 retrospective studies, 2 prospective studies and 9 case reports were evaluated based on our inclusion criteria. Anti-N-methyl-D-aspartic-acid-receptor (anti-NMDAR) encephalitis is the type of AE that responds best to ASMs, and long-term or combined use of ASMs may be not required in most patients with seizures; these results apply to both adults and children. Sodium channel blockers may be the best option for seizures in anti-leucine-rich-glioma-inactivated-1 (anti-LGI1) encephalitis, but patients with anti-LGI1 encephalitis are prone to side effects when using ASMs. Cell surface antibody-mediated AE patients are more likely to use ASMs for a long period than patients with intracellular antibody-mediated AE. Clinicians can score AE patients' clinical characteristics on a scale to identify those who may require long-or short-term use of ASMs in the early stage. This review provides some recommendations for the rational use of ASMs in encephalitis mediated by different antibodies with the aim of controlling seizures and avoiding overtreatment.

Early predictors of new-onset immune-related seizures: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Approximately 60% of patients with autoimmune encephalitis (AE) exhibit secondary acute symptomatic seizures and showed highly sensitive to immunotherapy. However, it is difficult for many patients to receive early immunotherapy since the early identification of the cause in AE is more complex. This study aimed to investigate the early predictors of initial immune-related seizures and to guide the evaluation of treatment and prognosis.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-four patients with new-onset "unknown etiology" seizures with a course of disease less than 6 months were included. Serum and/or cerebrospinal fluid neuron-specific autoantibodies (NSAbs), including N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR), α-amino-3-hydroxy-5- Methyl-4-isoxazole propionic acid receptor 1 (AMPAR1), AMPAR2, anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 antibody (LGI1), anti-gamma-aminobutyric acid type B receptor (GABABR), anti-contact protein-related protein-2 (CASPR2) were used to screen for immune etiology of the seizures. In addition, patients with epilepsy and encephalopathy were also examined via brain MRI, long-term video EEG, antibody prevalence in epilepsy and encephalopathy (APE2) score, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS). A logistic regression model was used to analyze the early predictors of immune etiology.

RESULTS

Thirty-four cases (22.1%) were positive for NSAbs. Among all 154 patients, 23 cases of autoimmune encephalitis (AE) (21 cases of NSAbs positive), 1 case of ganglionic glioma (NSAbs positive), 130 cases of epilepsy or seizures (12 cases of NSAbs positive) were recorded. Also, there were 17 patients (11.0%) with APE2 ≥ 4 points, and all of them met the clinical diagnosis of AE. The sensitivity and specificity of APE2 ≥ 4 points for predicting AE were 73.9% and 100%. The results of multivariate analysis showed that the NSAbs and APE2 scores independently influenced the early prediction of initial immune-related seizures (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

NSAbs and APE2 scores could act as early predictors of initial immune-related seizures.

Seizure outcome-related factors in autoimmune encephalitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Identifying the predictors for seizure outcome in autoimmune encephalitis (AE) and investigating how to prevent persistent seizures would have major clinical benefits effectively. Thus, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine seizure outcome-related factors in AE patients.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched from inception to 10 June 2022 for studies investigating seizure outcome-related factors in AE. The pooled effect estimates, including standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated to estimate the effect of each included factor on the seizure outcome.

Results

A total of 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Our pooled results of this meta-analysis showed that five factors were found to increase the risk of persistent seizures in AE patients, including onset with seizures (OR = 2.106, 95% CI = 1.262–3.514, p = 0.004), status epilepticus (OR = 3.017, 95% CI = 1.995–4.563, p &lt; 0.001), EEG abnormalities (OR = 1.581, 95% CI = 1.016–2.46, p = 0.042), MRI abnormalities (OR = 1.554, 95% CI = 1.044–2.283, p = 0.03), and longer time from clinical onset to immunotherapy (SMD = 1.887, 95% CI = 0.598–3.156, p = 0.004).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis indicated that onset with seizures, status epilepticus, EEG abnormalities, MRI abnormalities, and longer time from clinical onset to immunotherapy were risk factors for persistent seizures in AE patients.

When Encephalitis Burns Out, Are You Left With a Spark?

[Box: see text]

Role of responsive neurostimulation and immunotherapy in refractory epilepsy due to autoimmune encephalitis: A case report

Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) frequently presents with seizures in the acute setting. Seizures are often refractory to anti-seizure medications (ASM) but have been shown to be responsive to immunomodulatory therapies. A subset of patients with AE continues to have refractory epilepsy, recently named "autoimmune-associated epilepsy (AAE)," for years after the acute AE presentation. Optimal treatment for AAE has not been determined. Furthermore, the efficacy of neuromodulation and immunotherapy has not been well established in AAE. Here, we report a patient with probable autoantibody negative AE who initially presented with new onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE). After his acute presentation, he continued to have frequent seizures that were refractory to four ASMs at therapeutic doses. A responsive neurostimulation (RNS^®, NeuroPace) system was implanted for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, with minimal change in seizure frequency. Due to continued frequent seizures despite ASMs and neurostimulation, he underwent a trial of immunotherapy consisting of high-dose intravenous (IV) corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). Despite the addition of immunotherapy to his treatment regimen, the patient experienced no significant clinical or electrographic change in seizure frequency. This case does not support the use of immunotherapy for treatment of AAE and illustrates the need for consensus guidelines in the management of patients with AAE. Further, the use of electrocorticography (ECoG) data provided an objective surrogate measure of seizure frequency; this may support the role for early neuromodulation in the management of AAE.