Analysis of Clinical Features, Diagnostic Tests, and Biomarkers in Patients With Suspected Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, 2014-2021.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 08 2022
01 08 2022
Historique:
entrez:
3
8
2022
pubmed:
4
8
2022
medline:
6
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Detection of prion proteins in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) using real-time quaking-induced conversion (RT-QuIC) assays has transformed the diagnostic approach to sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), facilitating earlier and more complete recognition of affected patients. It is unclear how expanded recognition of affected patients may affect the diagnostic and prognostic relevance of clinical features and diagnostic tests historically associated with CJD. To evaluate clinical features and diagnostic testing in patients presenting with CJD and determine the associations of these features with prognosis. This cohort study incorporated data from electronic medical records of patients with CJD treated at Mayo Clinic Enterprise tertiary care centers in Rochester, Minnesota; Jacksonville, Florida; and Scottsdale, Arizona. Participants included patients with definite or probable CJD assessed from 2014 to 2021. Data were analyzed October 2021 to January 2022. Dominant presentation, clinical features, and diagnostic tests associated with CJD. The outcomes of interest were the sensitivity and prognostic value of clinical features and accessible diagnostic tests at presentation with possible CJD. A total of 115 patients were identified, including 40 patients (35%) with definite CJD. Mean (SD) age at symptom onset was 64.8 (9.4) years, and 68 patients were women (59%). The sensitivity of clinical markers (myoclonus) and tests historically considered in patients with suspected CJD was poor (eg, stereotyped electroencephalography anomalies: 17 of 105 patients [16%]; elevated CSF protein 14-3-3 levels: 54 of 90 patients [60%]). By comparison, biomarkers with good diagnostic sensitivity at presentation included RT-QuIC (66 of 71 patients [93%]), CSF total tau (T-tau) level greater than 1149 pg/mL (81 of 92 patients [88%]), and characteristic signal anomalies on magnetic resonance imaging (88 of 115 patients [77%]). Multivariable linear regression confirmed shorter survival in patients with myoclonus (difference, -125.9 [95% CI, -236.3 to -15.5] days; P = .03), visual or cerebellar signs (difference, -180.2 [95% CI, -282.2 to -78.2] days; P < .001), elevated CSF protein 14-3-3 levels (difference, -193 [95% CI, -304.9 to -82.9] days; P < .001), and elevated T-tau level (difference for every 1000 pg/mL elevation, -9.1 [95% CI, -17.7 to -1.0] days; P = .04). These findings suggest that CSF RT-QuIC, elevated CSF T-tau level, and stereotyped magnetic resonance imaging anomalies were associated with the diagnosis of CJD, while other clinical findings (eg, myoclonus), stereotyped electroencephalography anomalies, and CSF protein 14-3-3 levels offered less diagnostic value. Visual or cerebellar features, myoclonus, and CSF 14-3-3 and T-tau levels may be associated with disease duration, justifying continued inclusion in the evaluation of patients suspected to have CJD.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35921110
pii: 2794883
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.25098
pmc: PMC9350714
doi:
Substances chimiques
14-3-3 Proteins
0
Biomarkers
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2225098Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : K23 AG064029
Pays : United States
Références
Acta Neuropathol. 2017 Apr;133(4):559-578
pubmed: 28205010
Cerebrospinal Fluid Res. 2008 Aug 27;5:14
pubmed: 18727840
Brain. 2004 Oct;127(Pt 10):2348-59
pubmed: 15361416
Brain. 2005 Sep;128(Pt 9):2026-33
pubmed: 15958503
Neurology. 2020 Aug 25;95(8):e1017-e1026
pubmed: 32571851
Brain. 2006 Sep;129(Pt 9):2278-87
pubmed: 16816392
N Engl J Med. 1997 Dec 18;337(25):1821-8
pubmed: 9400041
Neurology. 2000 Nov 14;55(9):1396-7
pubmed: 11087791
Neurology. 2006 Aug 22;67(4):637-43
pubmed: 16924018
Brain. 2012 Oct;135(Pt 10):3051-61
pubmed: 23012332
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Mar 1;5(3):e221556
pubmed: 35262719
Neurology. 2012 Oct 2;79(14):1499-506
pubmed: 22993290
Ann Neurol. 2004 Nov;56(5):702-8
pubmed: 15449324
Lancet Neurol. 2021 Mar;20(3):235-246
pubmed: 33609480
Neurology. 2013 May 28;80(22):2081
pubmed: 23713090
Neurology. 2018 Jul 24;91(4):e331-e338
pubmed: 29934424
Cells. 2021 Dec 13;10(12):
pubmed: 34944022
Pract Neurol. 2019 Feb;19(1):49-55
pubmed: 30282760
Biomed Pharmacother. 1994;48(7):287-95
pubmed: 7858159
Neurology. 2004 Aug 10;63(3):443-9
pubmed: 15304574
Ann Neurol. 1998 Jan;43(1):32-40
pubmed: 9450766
Acta Neurol Belg. 2021 Apr;121(2):341-349
pubmed: 33486717
Arch Neurol. 2003 Jun;60(6):813-6
pubmed: 12810484
Arch Neurol. 2009 Feb;66(2):208-15
pubmed: 19204157
Neurology. 2011 May 17;76(20):1711-9
pubmed: 21471469
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007 Jul;78(7):664-70
pubmed: 17135459
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Aug 01;76(8):969-977
pubmed: 31058916
Nat Rev Neurol. 2018 Oct;14(10):577-589
pubmed: 30171200
Neuroimage Clin. 2021;30:102523
pubmed: 33636540
J Neurol. 2019 Dec;266(12):3136-3143
pubmed: 31541342
Mol Psychiatry. 2021 Oct;26(10):5955-5966
pubmed: 33674752
JAMA Neurol. 2020 Sep 1;77(9):1141-1149
pubmed: 32478816
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005 Jun-Jul;26(6):1551-62
pubmed: 15956529
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Jan 4;5(1):e2146319
pubmed: 35099544