Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Greaves, Ronda / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 3.638

CiteScore 2018: 2.44

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 1.191
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.205

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 57, Issue 10

Issues

Free light chains in the cerebrospinal fluid. Comparison of different methods to determine intrathecal synthesis

Harald Hegen / Janette Walde
  • Department of Statistics, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Dejan Milosavljevic / Fahmy Aboulenein-Djamshidian
  • Department of Neurology, SMZ-Ost Donauspital, Karl Landsteiner Institute for Neuroimmunological and Neurodegenerative Disorders, Vienna, Austria
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Makbule Senel / Hayrettin Tumani
  • Department of Neurology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
  • Specialty Clinic of Neurology Dietenbronn, Schwendi, Germany
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Florian Deisenhammer / Stefan Presslauer
Published Online: 2019-05-21 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-1300

Abstract

Background

Free light chains (FLC) have been proposed as diagnostic biomarkers in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients with inflammatory central nervous system (CNS) diseases. However, which method to use for determining an intrathecal FLC synthesis has not yet been clarified. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of CSF FLC concentration, FLC quotient (QFLC), FLC index and FLC intrathecal fraction (FLCIF).

Methods

κ- and λ-FLC were measured by nephelometry under blinded conditions in CSF and serum sample pairs of patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS; n = 60), multiple sclerosis (MS; n = 60) and other neurological diseases (n = 60) from four different MS centers. QFLC was calculated as the ratio of CSF/serum FLC concentration, the FLC index as QFLC/albumin quotient and the percentage FLCIF by comparing QFLC to a previously empirically determined, albumin quotient-dependent reference limit.

Results

CSF FLC concentration, QFLC, FLC index and FLCIF of both the κ- and λ-isotype were significantly higher in patients with CIS and MS than in the control group, as well as in oligoclonal bands (OCB) positive than in OCB negative patients. Each parameter was able to identify MS/CIS patients and OCB positivity, however, diagnostic performance determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses differed and revealed superiority of FLC index and FLCIF.

Conclusions

These findings support the diagnostic value of FLC measures that correct for serum FLC levels and albumin quotient, i.e. blood-CSF barrier function.

Keywords: cerebrospinal fluid; clinically isolated syndrome; free light chain; index; intrathecal fraction; intrathecal synthesis; multiple sclerosis; oligoclonal bands

References

  • 1.

    Franciotta D, Salvetti M, Lolli F, Serafini B, Aloisi F. B cells and multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:852–8.PubMedCrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 2.

    Phares TW, Stohlman SA, Bergmann CC. Intrathecal humoral immunity to encephalitic RNA viruses. Viruses 2013;5:732–52.Web of SciencePubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 3.

    Griffin DE. Immune responses to RNA-virus infections of the CNS. Nat Rev Immunol 2003;3:493–502.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 4.

    Deisenhammer F, Bartos A, Egg R, Gilhus NE, Giovannoni G, Rauer S, et al. Guidelines on routine cerebrospinal fluid analysis. Report from an EFNS task force. Eur J Neurol 2006;13:913–22.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 5.

    Reiber H. Flow rate of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) – a concept common to normal blood-CSF barrier function and to dysfunction in neurological diseases. J Neurol Sci 1994;122:189–203.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 6.

    Souverijn JH, Serrée HM, Peet R, Grenzebach Smit W, Bruyn GW. Intrathecal immunoglobulin synthesis. Comparison of various formulae with the “gold standard” of isoelectric focusing. J Neurol Sci 1991;102:11–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 7.

    Ohman S, Ernerudh J, Forsberg P, Henriksson A, von Schenck H, Vrethem M. Comparison of seven formulae and isoelectrofocusing for determination of intrathecally produced IgG in neurological diseases. Ann Clin Biochem 1992;29 (Pt 4):405–10.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 8.

    Freedman MS, Thompson EJ, Deisenhammer F, Giovannoni G, Grimsley G, Keir G, et al. Recommended standard of cerebrospinal fluid analysis in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement. Arch Neurol 2005;62:865–70.Google Scholar

  • 9.

    Presslauer S, Milosavljevic D, Huebl W, Parigger S, Schneider-Koch G, Bruecke T. Kappa free light chains: diagnostic and prognostic relevance in MS and CIS. PLoS One 2014;9:e89945.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 10.

    Presslauer S, Milosavljevic D, Brücke T, Bayer P, Hübl W. Elevated levels of kappa free light chains in CSF support the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2008;255:1508–14.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 11.

    Presslauer S, Milosavljevic D, Huebl W, Aboulenein-Djamshidian F, Krugluger W, Deisenhammer F, et al. Validation of kappa free light chains as a diagnostic biomarker in multiple sclerosis and clinically isolated syndrome: a multicenter study. Mult Scler 2016;22:502–10.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 12.

    Hegen H, Milosavljevic D, Schnabl C, Manowiecka A, Walde J, Deisenhammer F, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid free light chains as diagnostic biomarker in neuroborreliosis. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:1383–91.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 13.

    Nakano T, Matsui M, Inoue I, Awata T, Katayama S, Murakoshi T. Free immunoglobulin light chain: its biology and implications in diseases. Clin Chim Acta 2011;412:843–9.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 14.

    Makshakov G, Nazarov V, Kochetova O, Surkova E, Lapin S, Evdoshenko E. Diagnostic and prognostic value of the cerebrospinal fluid concentration of immunoglobulin free light chains in clinically isolated syndrome with conversion to multiple sclerosis. PLoS One 2015;10:e0143375.CrossrefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 15.

    Senel M, Tumani H, Lauda F, Presslauer S, Mojib-Yezdani R, Otto M, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid immunoglobulin kappa light chain in clinically isolated syndrome and multiple sclerosis. PLoS One 2014;9:e88680.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 16.

    Fischer C, Arneth B, Koehler J, Lotz J, Lackner KJ. Kappa free light chains in cerebrospinal fluid as markers of intrathecal immunoglobulin synthesis. Clin Chem 2004;50:1809–13.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 17.

    Zeman D, Kušnierová P, Bartoš V, Hradílek P, Kurková B, Zapletalová O. Quantitation of free light chains in the cerebrospinal fluid reliably predicts their intrathecal synthesis. Ann Clin Biochem 2016;53(Pt 1):174–6.Web of SciencePubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 18.

    Miller DH, Weinshenker BG, Filippi M, Banwell BL, Cohen JA, Freedman MS, et al. Differential diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis: a consensus approach. Mult Scler 2008;14:1157–74.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 19.

    Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, Filippi M, Hartung H-P, Kappos L, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the “McDonald Criteria”. Ann Neurol 2005;58:840–6.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 20.

    Teunissen CE, Petzold A, Bennett JL, Berven FS, Brundin L, Comabella M, et al. A consensus protocol for the standardization of cerebrospinal fluid collection and biobanking. Neurology 2009;73:1914–22.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 21.

    Hoedemakers RM, Pruijt JF, Hol S, Teunissen E, Martens H, Stam P, et al. Clinical comparison of new monoclonal antibody-based nephelometric assays for free light chain kappa and lambda to polyclonal antibody-based assays and immunofixation electrophoresis. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011;50:489–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 22.

    te Velthuis H, Knop I, Stam P, van den Broek M, Bos HK, Hol S, et al. N Latex FLC – new monoclonal high-performance assays for the determination of free light chain kappa and lambda. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011;49:1323–32.PubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 23.

    Wieand S, Mitchell HG, Barry RJ, Kang LJ. A family of nonparametric statistics for comparing diagnostic markers with paired or unpaired data. Biometrika 1989;76:585–92.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 24.

    Duranti F, Pieri M, Centonze D, Buttari F, Bernardini S, Dessi M. Determination of κFLC and κ Index in cerebrospinal fluid: a valid alternative to assess intrathecal immunoglobulin synthesis. J Neuroimmunol 2013;263:116–20.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 25.

    Christiansen M, Gjelstrup MC, Stilund M, Christensen T, Petersen T, Jon Møller H. Cerebrospinal fluid free kappa light chains and kappa index perform equal to oligoclonal bands in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;57:210–20.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 26.

    Gurtner KM, Shosha E, Bryant SC, Andreguetto BD, Murray DL, Pittock SJ, et al. CSF free light chain identification of demyelinating disease: comparison with oligoclonal banding and other CSF indexes. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:1071–80.Web of SciencePubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 27.

    Puthenparampil M, Altinier S, Stropparo E, Zywicki S, Poggiali D, Cazzola C, et al. Intrathecal K free light chain synthesis in multiple sclerosis at clinical onset associates with local IgG production and improves the diagnostic value of cerebrospinal fluid examination. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2018;25:241–5.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 28.

    Valencia-Vera E, Martinez-Escribano Garcia-Ripoll A, Enguix A, Abalos-Garcia C, Segovia-Cuevas MJ. Application of κ free light chains in cerebrospinal fluid as a biomarker in multiple sclerosis diagnosis: development of a diagnosis algorithm. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:609–13.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 29.

    Vasilj M, Kes VB, Vrkic N, Vukasovic I. Relevance of KFLC quantification to differentiate clinically isolated syndrome from multiple sclerosis at clinical onset. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2018;174:220–9.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 30.

    Emersic A, Anadolli V, Krsnik M, Rot U. Intrathecal immunoglobulin synthesis: The potential value of an adjunct test. Clin Chim Acta 2019;489:109–16.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 31.

    Menéndez-Valladares P, García-Sánchez MI, Cuadri Benítez P, Lucas M, Adorna Martínez M, Carranco Galán V, et al. Free kappa light chains in cerebrospinal fluid as a biomarker to assess risk conversion to multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin 2015;1:2055217315620935.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 32.

    Reiber H. Dynamics of brain-derived proteins in cerebrospinal fluid. Clin Chim Acta 2001;310:173–86.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 33.

    Reiber H, Peter JB. Cerebrospinal fluid analysis: disease-related data patterns and evaluation programs. J Neurol Sci 2001;184:101–22.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 34.

    Dispenzieri A, Kyle R, Merlini G, Miguel JS, Ludwig H, Hajek R, et al. International Myeloma Working Group guidelines for serum-free light chain analysis in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Leukemia 2009;23:215–24.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

About the article

Corresponding author: Stefan Presslauer, MD, Department of Neurology, Wilhelminenspital, Montleartstrasse 37, 1160 Vienna, Austria, Phone: +43 149150 2008, Fax: +43 149150 2009


Received: 2018-12-06

Accepted: 2019-04-12

Published Online: 2019-05-21

Published in Print: 2019-09-25


Author contributions: H. Hegen participated in the conception and design of the study, acquisition and statistical analysis of the data, and in drafting the manuscript. J. Walde participated in statistical analysis of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. D. Milosavljevic participated in acquisition of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. F. Aboulenein-Djamshidian participated in acquisition of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. M. Senel participated in acquisition of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. H. Tumani participated in acquisition of the data and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. F. Deisenhammer participated in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. S. Presslauer participated in the conception and design of the study, acquisition of the data, and in reviewing the manuscript for intellectual content. All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

Research funding: Multiple Sclerosis Society Vienna. H. Hegen participated in meetings sponsored by, received speaker honoraria or travel funding from Bayer, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme and Teva, and received honoraria for acting as consultant for Teva. M. Senel received honoraria for speaking and/or travel from Bayer, Biogen, Sanofi Genzyme and TEVA and research funding from the Hertha-Nathorff-Program and University of Ulm, none related to this study. H. Tumani received funding for research projects, lectures and travel from Bayer, Biogen, Genzyme, Fresenius, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Roche, Siemens Health Diagnostics, Teva, and received research support from Hertie-Stiftung, BMBF, University of Ulm and Landesstiftung BW. F. Deisenhammer participated in meetings sponsored by or received honoraria for acting as an advisor/speaker for Biogen, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme and Teva-Ratiopharm. His institution has received financial support for participation in randomized controlled trials of INFb-1b (Betaferon, Bayer Schering Pharma), INFb-1a (Avonex, Biogen; Rebif, Merck Serono), glatiramer acetate (Copaxone, Teva Pharmaceuticals), Natalizumab (Tysabri, Biogen), in multiple sclerosis. He is section editor of the MSARD journal (Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders). S. Presslauer participated in meetings sponsored by Bayer Schering, Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, Novartis and Teva.

Employment or leadership: None declared.

Honorarium: None declared.

Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), Volume 57, Issue 10, Pages 1574–1586, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-1300.

Export Citation

©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in