Introduction IgG4 antibodies against neurofascin (Nfasc155 and Nfasc140/186), contactin (CNTN1) and contactin-associated protein (Caspr1) are described in specific subtypes of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). Our objective was to assess, in a real-life practice, the incidence, the clinical features and the response to treatment of these forms of CIDP. Methods 1500 sera of patients suspected of having CIDP from France, Belgium and Switzerland were prospectively tested using a flow cytometry technique. The characteristics of patients with antibodies against the node of Ranvier were compared to 100 seronegative CIDP from our department. Results IgG4 antibodies against Nfasc155, CNTN1, and Caspr1 were, respectively, detected in 15 (prevalence 1%), 10 (0.7%) and 2 (0.2%) sera. Antibodies specific of the Nfasc140/186 were not detected. All subjects with antibodies against the node of Ranvier fulfilled diagnostic criteria for CIDP. CIDP with anti-Nfasc155 were younger, had more sensory ataxia and postural tremor than seronegative CIDP. CIDP with anti-CNTN1 had more frequent subacute onset and facial paralysis, commoner renal involvement with membranous glomerulonephritis and greater disability, than seronegative CIDP. CIDP with anti-Caspr1 had more frequent respiratory failure and cranial nerve involvement but not more neuropathic pain than seronegative CIDP. Intravenous immunoglobulins were ineffective in most seropositive patients. Rituximab produced dramatic improvement in disability and decreased antibodies titres in 13 seropositive patients (8 with anti-Nfasc155 and 5 with anti-CNTN1 antibodies). Conclusions Although rare, anti-paranodal antibodies are clinically valuable, because they are associated with specific phenotypes and therapeutic response.

No abstract

No abstract

Background and purpose: Fifteen percent of patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) are refractory to conventional treatment. Case reports and a few studies show probable benefit of rituximab in these cases. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and the safety of rituximab in patients with MG, in a multicentric real-life study. Method: Inclusion criteria were: age > 18 years; MG with anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibodies, anti-muscle-specific kinase (MuSk) antibodies or significant decrement after repetitive nerve stimulation; Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) class >II; refractory or steroid-dependent MG; and treatment with rituximab. Efficacy was assessed at 6 months using the MGFA-post-intervention status (PIS) score, the myasthenic muscle score (MMS) and the number of patients receiving steroids <10 mg/day. Data on adverse events were collected. Results: Twenty-nine patients were included: 20 with anti-AChR MG, five with anti-MuSK MG and four with seronegative MG. MGFA-PIS score was improved or better (improved, minimal manifestations or remission) in 86.2% of patients after 6 months of treatment (P < 0.0001). The mean MMS increased from 68.8 to 83.1 (P < 0.0001). A decrease in steroid dosage (<10 mg/day) was effective in 57.9% of treated patients. In all, 42.8% of patients experienced adverse events: infections (21.4% of patients); infusion reaction (7%); bradycardia (3.7%); and cytopenia (7%). Conclusion: The present study demonstrates the efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with MG. Additional studies remain necessary to determine the role of rituximab in the pharmacopeia of MG treatment and to establish precise recommendations for the infusion protocol.