Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter April 12, 2018

Cerebrospinal fluid free light chains as diagnostic biomarker in neuroborreliosis

  • Harald Hegen EMAIL logo , Dejan Milosavljevic , Christine Schnabl , Andrea Manowiecka , Janette Walde , Florian Deisenhammer and Stefan Presslauer

Abstract

Background:

Free light chains (FLC) have been proposed as diagnostic biomarker in patients with inflammatory central nervous system diseases. The objective of this study was to investigate the diagnostic utility of intrathecal κ- and λ-FLC synthesis in patients with neuroborreliosis.

Methods:

κ- and λ-FLC were measured by nephelometry under blinded conditions in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and serum sample pairs of 34 patients with neuroborreliosis and compared to a cohort of 420 control patients. κ-FLC index was calculated as [CSF κ-FLC/serum κ-FLC]/[CSF albumin/serum albumin], and λ-FLC index in analogy.

Results:

κ-FLC and λ-FLC index were significantly elevated in patients with neuroborreliosis compared to the control group. At a specificity level of 95%, κ-FLC and λ-FLC index showed a diagnostic sensitivity of 88.2% and 100%. In comparison, IgM and IgG synthesis according to Reiber formula, IgG index >0.7 and OCB status reached a sensitivity of 83.9%, 44.1%, 58.8% and 64.7%.

Conclusion:

These findings support the diagnostic value of intrathecal FLC synthesis in neuroborreliosis patients and demonstrate a valid, easy and rater-independent alternative for the detection of an intrathecal immunoglobulin production.


Corresponding author: Harald Hegen, MD, PhD, Department of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria, Phone: +43 512 504 24264, Fax: +43 512 504 24266

  1. Author contributions: H. Hegen has participated in the conception and design of the study, acquisition and statistical analysis of the data, and in drafting the manuscript. D. Milosavljevic has participated in acquisition of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. C. Schnabl has participated in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. A. Manowiecka has participated in acquisition of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. J. Walde has participated in statistical analysis of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. F. Deisenhammer has participated in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. S. Presslauer has participated in the conception and design of the study and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: The study was supported by Siemens, who provided the free light chain immunoassays.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Disclosures: H. Hegen has participated in meetings sponsored by, received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Bayer Schering, Biogen, Merck Serono and Novartis, and received honoraria for acting as consultant for Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe. D. Milosavljevic reports no disclosures. C. Schnabl reports no disclosures. A. Manowiecka reports no disclosures. J. Walde reports no disclosures. F. Deisenhammer has participated in meetings sponsored by or received honoraria for acting as an advisor/speaker for Biogen, Celgene, Genzyme-Sanofi, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Teva-Ratiopharm, and received unrestricted research grants from Biogen and Genzyme-Sanofi. S. Presslauer has participated in meetings sponsored by Bayer Schering, Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, Novartis and Teva.

  6. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Franciotta D, Salvetti M, Lolli F, Serafini B, Aloisi F. B cells and multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:852–8.10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70192-3Search in Google Scholar

2. Deisenhammer F, Bartos A, Egg R, Gilhus NE, Giovannoni G, Rauer S, et al. Guidelines on routine cerebrospinal fluid analysis. Report from an EFNS task force. Eur J Neurol 2006;13:913–22.10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01493.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Djukic M, Schmidt-Samoa C, Lange P, Spreer A, Neubieser K, Eiffert H, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid findings in adults with acute Lyme neuroborreliosis. J Neurol 2012;259:630–6.10.1007/s00415-011-6221-8Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Ogrinc K, Lusa L, Lotrič-Furlan S, Bogovič P, Stupica D, Cerar T, et al. Course and outcome of early European Lyme neuroborreliosis (Bannwarth syndrome): clinical and laboratory findings. Clin Infect Dis 2016;63:346–53.10.1093/cid/ciw299Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Kaiser R. Variable CSF findings in early and late Lyme neuroborreliosis: a follow-up study in 47 patients. J Neurol 1994;242:26–36.10.1007/BF00920571Search in Google Scholar PubMed

6. Tumani H, Nölker G, Reiber H. Relevance of cerebrospinal fluid variables for early diagnosis of neuroborreliosis. Neurology 1995;45:1663–70.10.1212/WNL.45.9.1663Search in Google Scholar

7. Freedman MS, Thompson EJ, Deisenhammer F, Giovannoni G, Grimsley G, Keir G, et al. Recommended standard of cerebrospinal fluid analysis in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement. Arch Neurol. 2005;62:865–70.10.1001/archneur.62.6.865Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Sellebjerg F, Christiansen M. Qualitative assessment of intrathecal IgG synthesis by isoelectric focusing and immunodetection: interlaboratory reproducibility and interobserver agreement. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1996;56:135–43.10.3109/00365519609088600Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Ljøstad U, Mygland A. Remaining complaints 1 year after treatment for acute Lyme neuroborreliosis; frequency, pattern and risk factors. Eur J Neurol 2010;17:118–23.10.1111/j.1468-1331.2009.02756.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

10. McLean BN, Luxton RW, Thompson EJ. A study of immunoglobulin G in the cerebrospinal fluid of 1007 patients with suspected neurological disease using isoelectric focusing and the Log IgG-Index. A comparison and diagnostic applications. Brain 1990;113(Pt 5):1269–89.10.1093/brain/113.5.1269Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Nakano T, Matsui M, Inoue I, Awata T, Katayama S, Murakoshi T. Free immunoglobulin light chain: its biology and implications in diseases. Clin Chim Acta 2011;412:843–9.10.1016/j.cca.2011.03.007Search in Google Scholar

12. Presslauer S, Milosavljevic D, Huebl W, Aboulenein-Djamshidian F, Krugluger W, Deisenhammer F, et al. Validation of kappa free light chains as a diagnostic biomarker in multiple sclerosis and clinically isolated syndrome: a multicenter study. Mult Scler 2016;22:502–10.10.1177/1352458515594044Search in Google Scholar

13. Presslauer S, Milosavljevic D, Huebl W, Parigger S, Schneider-Koch G, Bruecke T. Kappa free light chains: diagnostic and prognostic relevance in MS and CIS. PLoS One 2014;9:e89945.10.1371/journal.pone.0089945Search in Google Scholar

14. Senel M, Tumani H, Lauda F, Presslauer S, Mojib-Yezdani R, Otto M, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid immunoglobulin kappa light chain in clinically isolated syndrome and multiple sclerosis. PLoS One 2014;9:e88680.10.1371/journal.pone.0088680Search in Google Scholar

15. Rudick RA, French CA, Breton D, Williams GW. Relative diagnostic value of cerebrospinal fluid kappa chains in MS: comparison with other immunoglobulin tests. Neurology 1989;39:964–8.10.1212/WNL.39.7.964Search in Google Scholar

16. Mygland A, Ljøstad U, Fingerle V, Rupprecht T, Schmutzhard E, Steiner I, et al. EFNS guidelines on the diagnosis and management of European Lyme neuroborreliosis. Eur J Neurol 2010;17:8–16, e1–4.10.1111/j.1468-1331.2009.02862.xSearch in Google Scholar

17. Keir G, Luxton RW, Thompson EJ. Isoelectric focusing of cerebrospinal fluid immunoglobulin G: an annotated update. Ann Clin Biochem 1990;27(Pt 5):436–43.10.1177/000456329002700504Search in Google Scholar

18. Auer M, Hegen H, Zeileis A, Deisenhammer F. Quantitation of intrathecal immunoglobulin synthesis – a new empirical formula. Eur J Neurol 2016;23:713–21.10.1111/ene.12924Search in Google Scholar

19. Reiber H. Flow rate of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) – a concept common to normal blood-CSF barrier function and to dysfunction in neurological diseases. J Neurol Sci 1994;122:189–203.10.1016/0022-510X(94)90298-4Search in Google Scholar

20. Blennow K, Fredman P, Wallin A, Gottfries CG, Frey H, Pirttilä T, et al. Formulas for the quantitation of intrathecal IgG production. Their validity in the presence of blood-brain barrier damage and their utility in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 1994;121:90–6.10.1016/0022-510X(94)90161-9Search in Google Scholar

21. Hoedemakers RM, Pruijt JF, Hol S, Teunissen E, Martens H, Stam P, et al. Clinical comparison of new monoclonal antibody-based nephelometric assays for free light chain kappa and lambda to polyclonal antibody-based assays and immunofixation electrophoresis. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011;50:489–95.10.1515/cclm.2011.793Search in Google Scholar

22. Te Velthuis H, Knop I, Stam P, van den Broek M, Bos HK, Hol S, et al. N Latex FLC – new monoclonal high-performance assays for the determination of free light chain kappa and lambda. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011;49:1323–32.10.1515/CCLM.2011.624Search in Google Scholar

23. Koenker R. Quantile regression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.10.1017/CBO9780511754098Search in Google Scholar

24. Reiber H, Peter JB. Cerebrospinal fluid analysis: disease-related data patterns and evaluation programs. J Neurol Sci 2001;184:101–22.10.1016/S0022-510X(00)00501-3Search in Google Scholar

25. Presslauer S, Milosavljevic D, Brücke T, Bayer P, Hübl W, Hübl W. Elevated levels of kappa free light chains in CSF support the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2008;255:1508–14.10.1007/s00415-008-0954-zSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

26. Kim H-S, Kim HS, Shin K-S, Song W, Kim HJ, Kim HS, et al. Clinical comparisons of two free light chain assays to immunofixation electrophoresis for detecting monoclonal gammopathy. BioMed Res Int 2014;2014:647238.10.1155/2014/647238Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

27. Lock RJ, Saleem R, Roberts EG, Wallage MJ, Pesce TJ, Rowbottom A, et al. A multicentre study comparing two methods for serum free light chain analysis. Ann Clin Biochem 2013;50(Pt 3):255–61.10.1177/0004563212473447Search in Google Scholar PubMed

28. White-Al Habeeb NM, Earle T, Spencer M, Blasutig IM. Evaluation of the N-latex serum free light chain assay on the Siemens BNII analyzer and agreement with The Binding Site FreeLite assay on the SPAPlus. Clin Biochem 2018;51:90–6.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2017.05.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed

29. Messiaen A-S, De Sloovere MM, Claus P-E, Vercammen M, Van Hoovels L, Heylen O, et al. Performance evaluation of serum free light chain analysis: nephelometry vs turbidimetry, monoclonal vs polyclonal reagents. Am J Clin Pathol 2017;147:611–22.10.1093/ajcp/aqx037Search in Google Scholar PubMed


Supplementary Material:

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0028).


Received: 2018-01-09
Accepted: 2018-02-26
Published Online: 2018-04-12
Published in Print: 2018-07-26

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 26.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2018-0028/html
Scroll to top button