Evaluation of the Updated Diagnostic Criteria for Paraneoplastic Neurologic Syndromes in China

Encephalitis is a severe inflammatory disorder of the brain with many possible causes and a complex differential diagnosis. Advances in autoimmune encephalitis research in the past 10 years have led to the identification of new syndromes and biomarkers that have transformed the diagnostic approach to these disorders. However, existing criteria for autoimmune encephalitis are too reliant on antibody testing and response to immunotherapy, which might delay the diagnosis. We reviewed the literature and gathered the experience of a team of experts with the aims of developing a practical, syndrome-based diagnostic approach to autoimmune encephalitis and providing guidelines to navigate through the differential diagnosis. Because autoantibody test results and response to therapy are not available at disease onset, we based the initial diagnostic approach on neurological assessment and conventional tests that are accessible to most clinicians. Through logical differential diagnosis, levels of evidence for autoimmune encephalitis (possible, probable, or definite) are achieved, which can lead to prompt immunotherapy.

Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes (PNS) are defined by the presence of cancer and exclusion of other known causes of the neurological symptoms, but this criterion does not separate "true" PNS from neurological syndromes that are coincidental with a cancer. To provide more rigorous diagnostic criteria for PNS. An international panel of neurologists interested in PNS identified those defined as "classical" in previous studies. The panel reviewed the existing diagnostic criteria and recommended new criteria for those in whom no clinical consensus was reached in the past. The panel reviewed all reported onconeural antibodies and established the conditions to identify those that would be labelled as "well characterised". The antibody information was obtained from published work and from unpublished data from the different laboratories involved in the study. The panel suggest two levels of evidence to define a neurological syndrome as paraneoplastic: "definite" and "possible". Each level can be reached combining a set of criteria based on the presence or absence of cancer and the definitions of "classical" syndrome and "well characterised" onconeural antibody. The proposed criteria should help clinicians in the classification of their patients and the prospective and retrospective analysis of PNS cases.

Objective The contemporary diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes (PNSs) requires an increasing understanding of their clinical, immunologic, and oncologic heterogeneity. The 2004 PNS criteria are partially outdated due to advances in PNS research in the last 16 years leading to the identification of new phenotypes and antibodies that have transformed the diagnostic approach to PNS. Here, we propose updated diagnostic criteria for PNS. Methods A panel of experts developed by consensus a modified set of diagnostic PNS criteria for clinical decision making and research purposes. The panel reappraised the 2004 criteria alongside new knowledge on PNS obtained from published and unpublished data generated by the different laboratories involved in the project. Results The panel proposed to substitute “classical syndromes” with the term “high-risk phenotypes” for cancer and introduce the concept of “intermediate-risk phenotypes.” The term “onconeural antibody” was replaced by “high risk” (>70% associated with cancer) and “intermediate risk” (30%–70% associated with cancer) antibodies. The panel classified 3 levels of evidence for PNS: definite, probable, and possible. Each level can be reached by using the PNS-Care Score, which combines clinical phenotype, antibody type, the presence or absence of cancer, and time of follow-up. With the exception of opsoclonus-myoclonus, the diagnosis of definite PNS requires the presence of high- or intermediate-risk antibodies. Specific recommendations for similar syndromes triggered by immune checkpoint inhibitors are also provided. Conclusions The proposed criteria and recommendations should be used to enhance the clinical care of patients with PNS and to encourage standardization of research initiatives addressing PNS.