Prevalence and clinical implications of diabetes mellitus in autoimmune nodopathies: A systematic review.

Autoimmune nodopathy CNTN1 Caspr1 Diabetes mellitus NF155 Peripheral neuropathy

Journal

Journal of diabetes and its complications
ISSN: 1873-460X
Titre abrégé: J Diabetes Complications
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9204583

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 Oct 2024
Historique:
received: 24 04 2024
revised: 26 09 2024
accepted: 17 10 2024
medline: 27 10 2024
pubmed: 27 10 2024
entrez: 26 10 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Autoimmune nodopathies comprise a newly-established subtype of immune-mediated peripheral neuropathies, characterized by circulating autoantibodies that target nodal-paranodal proteins, including contactin-1 (CNTN1), contactin-associated protein-1 (Caspr1), neurofascin-155 (NF155) and neurofascin-isoforms (NF140 and NF186). Emerging evidence suggests that diabetes mellitus (DM) may confer increased risk for autoimmune nodopathies. A systematic search was performed including studies reporting on patients harboring nodal/paranodal antibodies (CNTN1, Caspr1, NF155, NF140 and NF186). We sought to evaluate: (1) the prevalence of DM among patients with autoimmune nodopathies; (2) the phenotype of DM-patients harboring different types of nodal/paranodal antibodies; (3) clinical features that allow distinction of autoimmune nodopathies from diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Five cohort studies, 3 case-reports and one case-series study were identified comprising 114 patients with autoimmune nodopathies. DM prevalence was documented to range between 10.5 % and 60 %. DM-patients harbored mostly paranodal antibodies; CNTN1: 58.3 %, followed by pan-neurofascin: 33.3 %, and Caspr1: 25 % antibodies. No significant differences in clinical phenotype were uncovered between DM-patients and their non-DM counterparts. Overall, DM patients were refractory to intravenous-immunoglobulins (IVIG), but responded well to escalation immunotherapies. Compared to DPN, distinctive features of autoimmune nodopathy comprised: (i) severe ataxia, tremor, and cranial nerve involvement; (ii) neurophysiological findings indicative of nodal-paranodal pathology, including (reversible) conduction failure and conduction velocity slowing, often accompanied by reduced compound muscle and sensory nerve action potentials; and (iii) marked protein-elevation or albuminocytological dissociation in cerebrospinal fluid analysis. DM patients fall under the typical clinical phenotype of autoimmune nodopathy, displaying predominantly paranodal antibodies. Early suspicion is crucial, as unlike DPN, diagnosis of autoimmune nodopathy unfolds therapeutic perspectives.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OBJECTIVE
Autoimmune nodopathies comprise a newly-established subtype of immune-mediated peripheral neuropathies, characterized by circulating autoantibodies that target nodal-paranodal proteins, including contactin-1 (CNTN1), contactin-associated protein-1 (Caspr1), neurofascin-155 (NF155) and neurofascin-isoforms (NF140 and NF186). Emerging evidence suggests that diabetes mellitus (DM) may confer increased risk for autoimmune nodopathies.
METHODS METHODS
A systematic search was performed including studies reporting on patients harboring nodal/paranodal antibodies (CNTN1, Caspr1, NF155, NF140 and NF186). We sought to evaluate: (1) the prevalence of DM among patients with autoimmune nodopathies; (2) the phenotype of DM-patients harboring different types of nodal/paranodal antibodies; (3) clinical features that allow distinction of autoimmune nodopathies from diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN).
RESULTS RESULTS
Five cohort studies, 3 case-reports and one case-series study were identified comprising 114 patients with autoimmune nodopathies. DM prevalence was documented to range between 10.5 % and 60 %. DM-patients harbored mostly paranodal antibodies; CNTN1: 58.3 %, followed by pan-neurofascin: 33.3 %, and Caspr1: 25 % antibodies. No significant differences in clinical phenotype were uncovered between DM-patients and their non-DM counterparts. Overall, DM patients were refractory to intravenous-immunoglobulins (IVIG), but responded well to escalation immunotherapies. Compared to DPN, distinctive features of autoimmune nodopathy comprised: (i) severe ataxia, tremor, and cranial nerve involvement; (ii) neurophysiological findings indicative of nodal-paranodal pathology, including (reversible) conduction failure and conduction velocity slowing, often accompanied by reduced compound muscle and sensory nerve action potentials; and (iii) marked protein-elevation or albuminocytological dissociation in cerebrospinal fluid analysis.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
DM patients fall under the typical clinical phenotype of autoimmune nodopathy, displaying predominantly paranodal antibodies. Early suspicion is crucial, as unlike DPN, diagnosis of autoimmune nodopathy unfolds therapeutic perspectives.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39461229
pii: S1056-8727(24)00209-5
doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2024.108883
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

108883

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this article.

Auteurs

Anastasios Tentolouris (A)

First Department of Propaedeutic Internal Medicine and Diabetes Center, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laiko General Hospital, Athens, Greece. Electronic address: antentol@med.uoa.gr.

Maria-Ioanna Stefanou (MI)

Second Department of Neurology, "Attikon" University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Anastasia V Vrettou (AV)

First Department of Propaedeutic Internal Medicine and Diabetes Center, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laiko General Hospital, Athens, Greece.

Lina Palaiodimou (L)

Second Department of Neurology, "Attikon" University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Christos Moschovos (C)

Second Department of Neurology, "Attikon" University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Marianna Papadopoulou (M)

Second Department of Neurology, "Attikon" University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Panagiotis Kokotis (P)

First Department of Neurology, "Eginition" University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Ioanna Eleftheriadou (I)

First Department of Propaedeutic Internal Medicine and Diabetes Center, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laiko General Hospital, Athens, Greece.

Nikolaos Tentolouris (N)

First Department of Propaedeutic Internal Medicine and Diabetes Center, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laiko General Hospital, Athens, Greece.

Georgios Tsivgoulis (G)

Second Department of Neurology, "Attikon" University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Classifications MeSH