Clinical features which predict neuronal surface autoantibodies in new-onset focal epilepsy: implications for immunotherapies

Objective To generate a score which clinically identifies surface-directed autoantibodies in adults with new-onset focal epilepsy, and evaluate the value of immunotherapy in this clinical setting. Methods Prospective clinical and autoantibody evaluations in a cohort of 219 consecutive patients with new-onset focal epilepsy. Results 10.5% (23/219) of people with new-onset focal epilepsy had detectable serum autoantibodies to known or novel cell surface antigenic targets. 9/23 with autoantibodies were diagnosed with encephalitis, by contrast to 0/196 without autoantibodies (p<0.0001). Multivariate analysis identified six features which predicted autoantibody positivity (area under the curve=0.83): age ≥54 years, ictal piloerection, lowered self-reported mood, reduced attention, MRI limbic system changes and the absence of conventional epilepsy risk factors. 11/14 (79%) patients with detectable autoantibodies, but without encephalitis, showed excellent long-term outcomes (modified Rankin Score=0) despite no immunotherapy. These outcomes were superior to those of immunotherapy-treated patients with confirmed autoantibody-mediated encephalitis (p<0.05). Conclusions Seizure semiology, cognitive and mood phenotypes, alongside inflammatory investigation findings, aid the identification of surface autoantibodies among unselected people with new-onset focal epilepsy. The excellent immunotherapy-independent outcomes of autoantibody-positive patients without encephalitis suggests immunotherapy administration should be guided by clinical features of encephalitis, rather than autoantibody positivity. Our findings suggest that, in this cohort, immunotherapy-responsive seizure syndromes with autoantibodies largely fall under the umbrella of autoimmune encephalitis.

[1]  J. Britton,et al.  Acute symptomatic seizures secondary to autoimmune encephalitis and autoimmune‐associated epilepsy: Conceptual definitions , 2020, Epilepsia.

[2]  Arjune Sen,et al.  Distinctive binding properties of human monoclonal LGI1 autoantibodies determine pathogenic mechanisms , 2020, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[3]  C. V. van Donselaar,et al.  Evaluation of seizure treatment in anti-LGI1, anti-NMDAR, and anti-GABABR encephalitis , 2019, Neurology.

[4]  C. Geis,et al.  Autoimmune seizures and epilepsy. , 2019, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[5]  J. Britton,et al.  Predictors of neural-specific autoantibodies and immunotherapy response in patients with cognitive dysfunction , 2018, Journal of Neuroimmunology.

[6]  Darren J. Fowler,et al.  N‐methyl‐D‐aspartate receptor antibody production from germinal center reactions: Therapeutic implications , 2018, Annals of neurology.

[7]  G. Widman,et al.  The importance of early immunotherapy in patients with faciobrachial dystonic seizures , 2017, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[8]  C. Kessler,et al.  Prevalence and outcome of late‐onset seizures due to autoimmune etiology: A prospective observational population‐based cohort study , 2017, Epilepsia.

[9]  Edouard Hirsch,et al.  ILAE classification of the epilepsies: Position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology , 2017, Epilepsia.

[10]  K. Ding,et al.  Neurological Autoantibody Prevalence in Epilepsy of Unknown Etiology , 2017, JAMA neurology.

[11]  A. Venkatesan,et al.  A clinical approach to diagnosis of autoimmune encephalitis , 2016, The Lancet Neurology.

[12]  R. Rocamora,et al.  Pilomotor seizures: An autonomic semiology of limbic encephalitis? , 2014, Seizure.

[13]  M. Brodie,et al.  Prevalence of neurologic autoantibodies in cohorts of patients with new and established epilepsy , 2013, Epilepsia.

[14]  J. Britton,et al.  Autoimmune epilepsy: clinical characteristics and response to immunotherapy. , 2012, Archives of neurology.

[15]  J. Schott,et al.  Faciobrachial dystonic seizures precede Lgi1 antibody limbic encephalitis , 2011, Annals of neurology.