Journal of Neuroinflammation (Nov 2021)

Autoantibody screening in Guillain–Barré syndrome

  • Cinta Lleixà,
  • Lorena Martín-Aguilar,
  • Elba Pascual-Goñi,
  • Teresa Franco,
  • Marta Caballero,
  • Noemí de Luna,
  • Eduard Gallardo,
  • Xavier Suárez-Calvet,
  • Laura Martínez-Martínez,
  • Jordi Diaz-Manera,
  • Ricard Rojas-García,
  • Elena Cortés-Vicente,
  • Joana Turón,
  • Carlos Casasnovas,
  • Christian Homedes,
  • Gerardo Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez,
  • María Concepción Jimeno-Montero,
  • José Berciano,
  • Maria José Sedano-Tous,
  • Tania García-Sobrino,
  • Julio Pardo-Fernández,
  • Celedonio Márquez-Infante,
  • Iñigo Rojas-Marcos,
  • Ivonne Jericó-Pascual,
  • Eugenia Martínez-Hernández,
  • Germán Morís de la Tassa,
  • Cristina Domínguez-González,
  • Cándido Juárez,
  • Isabel Illa,
  • Luis Querol

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-021-02301-0
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 18, no. 1
pp. 1 – 13

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute inflammatory neuropathy with a heterogeneous presentation. Although some evidences support the role of autoantibodies in its pathogenesis, the target antigens remain unknown in a substantial proportion of GBS patients. The objective of this study is to screen for autoantibodies targeting peripheral nerve components in Guillain–Barré syndrome. Methods Autoantibody screening was performed in serum samples from all GBS patients included in the International GBS Outcome study by 11 different Spanish centres. The screening included testing for anti-ganglioside antibodies, anti-nodo/paranodal antibodies, immunocytochemistry on neuroblastoma-derived human motor neurons and murine dorsal root ganglia (DRG) neurons, and immunohistochemistry on monkey peripheral nerve sections. We analysed the staining patterns of patients and controls. The prognostic value of anti-ganglioside antibodies was also analysed. Results None of the GBS patients (n = 100) reacted against the nodo/paranodal proteins tested, and 61 (61%) were positive for, at least, one anti-ganglioside antibody. GBS sera reacted strongly against DRG neurons more frequently than controls both with IgG (6% vs 0%; p = 0.03) and IgM (11% vs 2.2%; p = 0.02) immunodetection. No differences were observed in the proportion of patients reacting against neuroblastoma-derived human motor neurons. Reactivity against monkey nerve tissue was frequently detected both in patients and controls, but specific patterns were only detected in GBS patients: IgG from 13 (13%) patients reacted strongly against Schwann cells. Finally, we confirmed that IgG anti-GM1 antibodies are associated with poorer outcomes independently of other known prognostic factors. Conclusion Our study confirms that (1) GBS patients display a heterogeneous repertoire of autoantibodies targeting nerve cells and structures; (2) gangliosides are the most frequent antigens in GBS patients and have a prognostic value; (3) further antigen-discovery experiments may elucidate other potential antigens in GBS.

Keywords