Comparison of commercial tests for detecting multiple anti-ganglioside autoantibodies in patients with well-characterized immune-mediated peripheral neuropathies.

BACKGROUND: To assess the performance of commercial anti-ganglioside antibody assays, we determined anti-ganglioside antibody IgG and IgM isotype profiles of patients with acute and chronic well-characterized immune-mediated peripheral neuropathies by one immunodot assays (Zentec/Ingen: Dotzen Ganglio Profile Ab, Euroimmun/BioAdvance: Euroline ganglioprofile), two line-immuno assay (GA Generic Assays/Labodia: Anti-Gangli osid Dot, Euroimmun/BioAdvance: Euroline ganglioprofile), and one enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Bühlmann: GanglioCombi). Specific antibody profiles were compared with those obtained by our validated standard in-house immunodot assay (IDA). METHODS: We selected 33 sera with high levels of IgG and IgM anti-ganglioside antibodies from 15 patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) subtypes and variants, 12 patients with CANOMAD syndrome (chronic ataxic neuropathy with ophthalmoplegia, M-paraprotein, cold agglutinins, disialosyl antibodies), 5 patients with chronic motor peripheral neuropathies, and 1 patient with sensory neuropathy and a control group composed of 10 patients with non-autoimmune neuropathy. RESULTS: The 3 commercial IDAs employing hydrophobic membranes and the ELISA demonstrated different carbohydrate epitopes on 6 to 12 glycolipid antigens used for anti-ganglioside antibody detection. Comparison with the validated in-house IDA showed large variations in sensitivity between tests and a more diverse reactivity to gangliosides than expected. The test with the largest panel of glycolipids detecting 11 anti-ganglioside antibody reactivities (GM1, GM2, GM3, GM4, GD1a, GD1b, GD2, GD3, GT1a, GT1b, GQ1b, and sulfatide) revealed the best concordance with our in-house assay. However, even with this test, differences were observed in the immunoreactivity against some gangliosides and weakly stained bands were not easy to interpret. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest an urgent need for standardization of commercial anti-ganglioside assays and the introduction of international anti-ganglioside antibody reference standards.

Preceding infections and anti-ganglioside antibody profiles assessed by a dot immunoassay in 306 French Guillain-Barré syndrome patients.

We describe by an in-house dot immunoassay, specific anti-ganglioside and sulfatide antibodies, by comparing the results from a large group of 134 infected French GBS patients and those from 172 noninfected French GBS and 142 control groups. A recent infection was identified in 134/306 (43.8%) GBS patients: Campylobacter jejuni (24.6%) was the most common agent, followed by cytomegalovirus (12.4%), Mycoplasma pneumoniae (3.2%) and Epstein-Barr virus (1.3%). Anti-ganglioside antibodies were detected in 97/306 (31.7%) of total GBS patients, 82/134 (61.2%) of GBS patients with a recent identified infection and 15/172 (8.7%) of the patients without identified infection. According to the specificities and antibody classes, four specific IgG antibody profiles were individualised against the two major GM1 and GD1a gangliosides in motor axonal C. jejuni-associated GBS variants, against GQ1b and disialylated gangliosides in Miller Fisher syndrome and its variants. One specific IgM profile against GM2 was found in 16/38 (42%) of severe sensory demyelinating CMV-associated GBS and in 8/17 (47%) of subjects with recent CMV infection with no neurological disease. IgG or IgM antibodies to GM1 were found in 5/10 M. pneumoniae-infected patients. IgM antibodies to GM1 were observed in the control groups, 15% of the 74 patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, 19% of the 51 patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, and 9% of the 21 healthy control subjects. The fine specificity of the four IgG antibody profiles and the IgM anti-GM2 profile is closely related to the nature of the preceding infections and the pattern of clinical features.