Apheresis therapies for NMOSD attacks : a retrospective study of 207 therapeutic interventions

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 pre
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-ab-antibodies (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.
show moreshow less

Export metadata

  • Export Bibtex
  • Export RIS
Author:Ingo Kleiter, Anna Gahlen, Nadja Borisow, Katrin Fischer, Klaus-Dieter Wernecke, Kerstin Hellwig, Florence Pache, Klemens Ruprecht, Joachim Havla, Tania Kümpfel, Orhan Aktas, Hans-Peter Hartung, Marius Ringelstein, Christian Geis, Christoph Kleinschnitz, Achim Berthele, Bernhard Hemmer, Klemens Angstwurm, Jan-Patrick Stellmann, Simon Schuster, Martin Stangel, Florian Lauda, Hayrettin Tumani, Christoph Mayer, Markus Krumbholz, Lena Zeltner, Ulf Ziemann, Ralf Linker, Matthias Schwab, Martin Marziniak, Florian Then Bergh, Ulrich Hofstadt-van Oy, Oliver Neuhaus, Uwe K. Zettl, Jürgen Hartmut Faiss, Brigitte Wildemann, Friedemann Paul, Sven Jarius, Corinna Trebst
Pubmed Id:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=30345331
Parent Title (English):Neuroimmunology and neuroinflammation
Publisher:Hongkong Partner Publ.
Place of publication:Hong Kong
Document Type:Article
Year of Completion:2018
Date of first Publication:2018/09/26
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Contributing Corporation:NEMOS (Neuromyelitis Optica Study Group)
Release Date:2018/11/20
Issue:6, e504
First Page:1
Last Page:12
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND), which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
HeBIS PPN:440895243
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Licence (German):License LogoCreative Commons - Namensnennung-Nicht kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitung 4.0

$Rev: 11761 $