TY - JOUR
T1 - International multicenter examination of MOG antibody assays
AU - Reindl, Markus
AU - Schanda, Kathrin
AU - Woodhall, Mark
AU - Tea, Fiona
AU - Ramanathan, Sudarshini
AU - Sagen, Jessica
AU - Fryer, James P.
AU - Mills, John
AU - Teegen, Bianca
AU - Mindorf, Swantje
AU - Ritter, Nora
AU - Krummrei, Ulrike
AU - Stöcker, Winfried
AU - Eggert, Juliane
AU - Flanagan, Eoin P.
AU - Ramberger, Melanie
AU - Hegen, Harald
AU - Rostasy, Kevin
AU - Berger, Thomas
AU - Leite, Maria Isabel
AU - Palace, Jacqueline
AU - Irani, Sarosh R.
AU - Dale, Russell C.
AU - Probst, Christian
AU - Probst, Monika
AU - Brilot, Fabienne
AU - Pittock, Sean J.
AU - Waters, Patrick
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.
PY - 2020/3/5
Y1 - 2020/3/5
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare the reproducibility of 11 antibody assays for immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgM myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies (MOG-IgG and MOG-IgM) from 5 international centers. METHODS: The following samples were analyzed: MOG-IgG clearly positive sera (n = 39), MOG-IgG low positive sera (n = 39), borderline negative sera (n = 13), clearly negative sera (n = 40), and healthy blood donors (n = 30). As technical controls, 18 replicates (9 MOG-IgG positive and 9 negative) were included. All samples and controls were recoded, aliquoted, and distributed to the 5 testing centers, which performed the following antibody assays: 5 live and 1 fixed immunofluorescence cell-based assays (CBA-IF, 5 MOG-IgG, and 1 MOG-IgM), 3 live flow cytometry cell-based assays (CBA-FACS, all MOG-IgG), and 2 ELISAs (both MOG-IgG). RESULTS: We found excellent agreement (96%) between the live CBAs for MOG-IgG for samples previously identified as clearly positive or negative from 4 different national testing centers. The agreement was lower with fixed CBA-IF (90%), and the ELISA showed no concordance with CBAs for detection of human MOG-IgG. All CBAs showed excellent interassay reproducibility. The agreement of MOG-IgG CBAs for borderline negative (77%) and particularly low positive (33%) samples was less good. Finally, most samples from healthy blood donors (97%) were negative for MOG-IgG in all CBAs. CONCLUSIONS: Live MOG-IgG CBAs showed excellent agreement for high positive and negative samples at 3 international testing centers. Low positive samples were more frequently discordant than in a similar comparison of aquaporin-4 antibody assays. Further research is needed to improve international standardization for clinical care.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To compare the reproducibility of 11 antibody assays for immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgM myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies (MOG-IgG and MOG-IgM) from 5 international centers. METHODS: The following samples were analyzed: MOG-IgG clearly positive sera (n = 39), MOG-IgG low positive sera (n = 39), borderline negative sera (n = 13), clearly negative sera (n = 40), and healthy blood donors (n = 30). As technical controls, 18 replicates (9 MOG-IgG positive and 9 negative) were included. All samples and controls were recoded, aliquoted, and distributed to the 5 testing centers, which performed the following antibody assays: 5 live and 1 fixed immunofluorescence cell-based assays (CBA-IF, 5 MOG-IgG, and 1 MOG-IgM), 3 live flow cytometry cell-based assays (CBA-FACS, all MOG-IgG), and 2 ELISAs (both MOG-IgG). RESULTS: We found excellent agreement (96%) between the live CBAs for MOG-IgG for samples previously identified as clearly positive or negative from 4 different national testing centers. The agreement was lower with fixed CBA-IF (90%), and the ELISA showed no concordance with CBAs for detection of human MOG-IgG. All CBAs showed excellent interassay reproducibility. The agreement of MOG-IgG CBAs for borderline negative (77%) and particularly low positive (33%) samples was less good. Finally, most samples from healthy blood donors (97%) were negative for MOG-IgG in all CBAs. CONCLUSIONS: Live MOG-IgG CBAs showed excellent agreement for high positive and negative samples at 3 international testing centers. Low positive samples were more frequently discordant than in a similar comparison of aquaporin-4 antibody assays. Further research is needed to improve international standardization for clinical care.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85079042481&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85079042481&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000674
DO - 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000674
M3 - Article
C2 - 32024795
AN - SCOPUS:85079042481
SN - 2332-7812
VL - 7
JO - Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation
JF - Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation
IS - 2
ER -