Assessment of international MOGAD diagnostic criteria in patients with overlapping MOG-associated disease and...

The clinical spectrum and diagnosis of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) has evolved in the setting of an optimized anti-MOG-IgG cell-based assay and expert consensus. The McDonald criteria for MS have been revised multiple times to improve the accuracy and specificity of diagnosis on a framework based on clinical presentation, MRI findings, and CSF results. While the uses of MS and MOGAD diagnostic criteria are helpful for typical cases, such utility for patients with overlapping clinical, laboratorial, and imaging features is unknown, posing diagnostic and management uncertainties.

To report a multicenter cohort of patients with overlapping phenotypic features of MOGAD and MS and evaluate the application of new MOGAD diagnostic criteria.

A collaborative retrospective cohort study was performed to identify patients with both positive serum anti-MOG-IgG and fulfillment of the MS revised 2017 McDonald criteria. Clinical and radiographic features of patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were reviewed longitudinally, including relapses, repeated MRI, and MOG-IgG testing in detail to allow the panel of expert opinion to assign to each case. The International MOGAD Panel proposed criteria were applied at onset and last follow-up to each case and compared to the expert author diagnosis assignment based on presentation, clinical and imaging features, and response to treatment.

Ten of 225 (4%) MOG-IgG seropositive cases met study inclusion criteria [seven of 10 were female; age at initial event: eight adults (mean age 26.8 years), two adolescents (mean age 14.5 years)]. AQP4-IgG was negative for all. Apart from serum titers of MOG-IgG, distinguishing clinical and radiographic features [i.e., clinical severity of the initial demyelinating event, radiographic features (optic nerve/spine/brain), and presence/absence of lesion normalization on serial scans] led to consensus of three separate classifications differing by degrees of shared features of MOGAD and MS. Patients were classified by expert panel into (1) Classic MOGAD even with MS-like, well-defined brain lesions, when severe events and most T2 lesions normalized (n = 5; MOG-IgG titers 1:100, 1:20, 1:160, 1:40, 1:200); (2) Classic RRMS included cases thought to have likely false positive or clinically irrelevant MOG-IgG, due to mild clinical events and no radiographic normalization of well-defined MS-like lesions (n = 3; MOG titers 1:20, 1:100, 1:40); (3) MOGAD and MS overlapping phenotype was defined by those with a combination of mild and severe clinical events, partial T2 lesion normalization, both well- and ill-defined lesions (n = 2; MOG titers 1:20, 1:100). The application of the International MOGAD Panel criteria categorized five patients (50%) in agreement with expert assignment. One additional patient was classified in agreement to assignment when MOGAD criteria were applied after serial MOG-IgG titers testing.

While the International MOGAD Panel diagnostic criteria have helped with accuracy for the diagnosis of this condition, in a group of patients seropositive for MOG-IgG with overlapping clinical and imaging features of RRMS criteria review may lead to increased accuracy. Serial serologies, repeated imaging, close attention to clinical course, and response to therapy are possible variables to consider for further refinement of MOGAD diagnostic criteria.