Negative commercial screening test for paraneoplastic antibodies in a case of opsoclonus
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments

The diagnosis of a paraneoplastic syndrome (PNS) is challenging as it comprises a group of clinically heterogeneous entities, all related to a coexistent, but sometimes occult, malignancy.1 The detection of paraneoplastic antibodies aids the clinician to establish the diagnosis of a PNS.2 Paraneoplastic antibodies are screened for by means of immunohistochemistry or indirect immunofluorescence on cerebellar slices.2 Cerebellar substrates that can be used for screening for paraneoplastic antibodies are commercially available.3
Such commercial screening was applied to screen the serum and CSF of a 48-year-old woman presenting with a subacute onset of oscillopsia and diplopia. No family history of neurologic diseases was present. Two months before, she experienced the initial symptoms of anorexia, nausea, and balancing problems. Two weeks before admission, she experienced the first signs of multidirectional binocular diplopia and oscillopsia. Neurologic examination revealed a normal mental and cognitive status. Ocular motility showed full-range eye movements. The patient mentioned binocular diplopia on lateral gaze and downgaze. Initially, bursts of ocular flutter were noticed, confirmed by video-oculography, which evolved over time into a constant opsoclonus. This opsoclonus caused significant visual impairment with a drop of visual acuity to logMAR 0.7. She had a normal motor and sensory examination. The osteotendinous reflexes were brisk without pathologic reflexes. Gait was broad-based ataxic, without overt appendicular ataxia. In a later phase, she mentioned infrequent shock-like movements of arms and head, reminiscent of myoclonus. Logopedic examination revealed prolonged oral processing with delayed initiation of swallowing and incomplete elevation of the larynx, without further objective abnormalities during deglutition. CT and MRI of the brain and brainstem and peripheral otovestibular tests revealed no abnormalities.
An autoimmune screening was negative in the serum (table). The positive findings of an extensive biochemical, microbiological, and cytologic examination of the CSF are presented in the table. Initial screening for paraneoplastic antibodies on admission and the next day was negative in the serum and in the CSF (table). Negativity was independently confirmed using the same commercial assay (table). Serum tests for anti–NMDA receptor antibody, anti–voltage-gated calcium channels antibody, anti-ganglioside/sulfatide antibodies, and anti–glutamic acid decarboxylase I/II antibody were negative as well.
Serum and CSF results of interest for the case
A 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose PET confirmed a suspicious mammography, revealing a strong hypermetabolic region in the right breast, without further evidence of hypermetabolic lymph nodes or distant metastasis. Histologic examination of a broadly excised breast tumor section showed a grade 2 moderately differentiated invasive ductal adenocarcinoma and 3 negative sentinel nodes. A seronegative PNS with ocular opsoclonus and gait ataxia was diagnosed. Oral methylprednisolone and IV plasmapheresis had no significant effect.1 Clonazepam and gabapentin relieved some of the oscillopsia. Tamoxifen was started 2 weeks after surgery. Adjuvant radiotherapy (daily fractions of 2.66 Gy to a total dose of 42.56 Gy) and chemotherapy, consisting of 4 cycles of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by 12 cycles of Taxotere, was started 7 and 13 weeks after surgery, respectively. Opsoclonus completely disappeared, and hence visual acuity improved accordingly (logMAR 0.1). Gait ataxia improved significantly, allowing her to walk without walking aids again.
Given the negative test results for antibodies contrasting with a clear PNS, the serum and the CSF samples taken at admission were reassessed for paraneoplastic antibodies by a noncommercial immunohistochemical screening using rat brain tissue.2 This screening suggested the presence of anti-Ri antibodies (table). The latter was confirmed using an immunoblot of recombinant protein similar to the one published before2 and a commercial immunodot assay as well (table).
Here, we report that a commercial screening for paraneoplastic antibodies, which is applied worldwide,3 failed to detect anti-Ri antibody in the serum and in the CSF of a patient with a PNS. Only one relatively small study addressed the sensitivity of a commercial screening test before, and that results were positive in 2/2 Ri, 6/6 Hu, 3/5 Yo, and 0/2 Ma2 patients' serum, without, unlike our case, any CSF antibodies status available.3 A screening for the sake of cost-efficiency requires a high sensitivity to avoid false-negative results as the presence of a paraneoplastic antibody directs the clinician toward the diagnosis of a PNS, especially in clinically doubtful cases.4 Providing clinical information along with the laboratory request enables the clinical pathologist to direct testing as proposed by international guidelines, which might avoid false-negative results when clinical suspicion is high.4 Our case illustrates that screening for paraneoplastic antibodies by commercially available tissue-based assay might miss individual cases that are detected by other methods.5
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgment: The authors thank Prof. Dr. Dalmau (Service of Neurology, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona; Adjunct Professor Neurology, University of Pennsylvania) and his team for supplying the data of the screening using rat brain tissue and the data of the immunoblot, and for critically revising the manuscript.
Footnotes
Author contributions: Nicolas Vandenbussche: sample collection, design and conceptualization of the study, data generation, data interpretation, and drafting of the manuscript. Catherine Cassiman: design and conceptualization of the study, data generation, data interpretation, and revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Maarten Schrooten: sample collection, data generation, data interpretation, and revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Benjamin Gille: sample collection and revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Xavier Bossuyt and Thierry Vincent: data generation, data interpretation, and revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Philip Van Damme: sample collection, design and conceptualization of the study, data generation, data interpretation, and revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Koen Poesen: design and conceptualization of the study, data generation, data interpretation, and drafting of the manuscript.
Study funding: No targeted funding.
Disclosure: N. Vandenbussche, C. Cassiman, M. Schrooten, B. Gille, X. Bossuyt, and T. Vincent report no disclosures. P. Van Damme received research support from FWO-Vlaanderen. K. Poesen reports no disclosures. Go to Neurology.org/nn for full disclosure forms. The Article Processing Charge was paid by the authors.
- Received October 11, 2016.
- Accepted in final form December 13, 2016.
- Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND), which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
References
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Hastening the Diagnosis of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Dr. Brian Callaghan and Dr. Kellen Quigg
► Watch
Related Articles
- No related articles found.
Topics Discussed
Alert Me
Recommended articles
-
Brief Communications
Response to cancer therapy in a patient with a paraneoplastic choreiform disorderDavid Croteau, Alaa Owainati, Josep Dalmau et al.Neurology, August 28, 2001 -
Articles
GABAB receptor antibodies in limbic encephalitis and anti-GAD–associated neurologic disordersA. Boronat, L. Sabater, A. Saiz et al.Neurology, February 28, 2011 -
Article
Clinical spectrum and diagnostic pitfalls of neurologic syndromes with Ri antibodiesClaire Simard, Alberto Vogrig, Bastien Joubert et al.Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, March 13, 2020 -
Resident & Fellow Section
Clinical Reasoning: A 16-year-old girl with ataxia, oscillopsia, and behavioral changesAndrew Silverman, Chindhuri Selvadurai, John Picard et al.Neurology, March 31, 2020