Commentary
A common mechanism and a new categorization for anti-ganglioside antibody-mediated neuropathies

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2012.03.023Get rights and content

Abstract

Serum antibodies to different gangliosides have been identified in some Guillain-Barré (GBS) subtypes and variants. In the January issue of Experimental Neurology Susuki and colleagues (2012) showed that in experimental neuropathies associated with antibodies to GM1, GD1a and GD1b the common mechanism is a complement mediated dysfunction and disruption of the nodes of Ranvier which causes a pathophysiological continuum from early reversible conduction failure to axonal degeneration. These observations, correlated and integrated with electrophysiological and pathological findings in humans indicate that the GBS subtypes acute motor conduction block neuropathy, acute motor axonal neuropathy, acute motor and sensory neuropathy and acute sensory neuropathy and possibly also a chronic disorder as multifocal motor neuropathy represent a spectrum of the same immunopathologic process. Being the nodal axolemma and the paranode the focus of the nerve injury, these immune mediated neuropathies could be more properly classified as nodo-paranodopathies.

Introduction

Gangliosides, glycosphingolipids made of a ceramide attached to one or more sugars, are important components of the plasma membranes organized in clusters forming, together with cholesterol and glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored proteins, microdomains termed lipid rafts (Simons and Toomre, 2000). In the peripheral nervous system gangliosides are present in both axons and myelin, and biochemically there are no significant quantitative differences of the major gangliosides in human ventral and dorsal roots (reviewed in Ogawa-Goto and Abe, 1998). Gangliosides GM1, GD1a and GD1b are highly enriched at or near the nodes of Ranvier, a critical region for generation and propagation of action potentials, and contribute to stability of paranodal junctions and ion channel clusters (Kaida et al., 2009, Susuki et al., 2007a).

In the last two decades serum antibodies to different gangliosides have been identified in some Guillain-Barré (GBS) subtypes and variants. IgG autoantibodies to gangliosides GM1 and GD1a are associated with acute motor axonal neuropathy (AMAN), acute motor conduction block neuropathy (AMCBN) and acute motor-sensory axonal motor neuropathy (AMSAN) (Capasso et al., 2003, Ho et al., 1999, Lugaresi et al., 1997, Yuki et al., 1990, Yuki et al., 1993, Yuki et al., 1999). IgG anti-GQ1b antibodies are strongly associated with Fisher syndrome (Chiba et al., 1993), mono-specific IgG antibodies to GD1b are found in patients with ataxic GBS and acute ataxic neuropathy (ASAN) (Kaida et al., 2008, Kusunoki et al., 1996, Notturno et al., 2008; Pan et al., 2001), and patients with pharyngeal–cervical brachial weakness more often carry IgG anti-GT1a antibodies, which may cross-react with GQ1b, and less often IgG anti-GD1a antibodies (Nagashima et al., 2007).

Two issues trouble the topic of acute anti-ganglioside antibody-mediated neuropathies: 1) whether anti-ganglioside antibodies are associated with only axonal or also demyelinating GBS subtypes; 2) given the ubiquity of gangliosides how to explain the selective fiber injury caused by antibodies to specific gangliosides.

In the January issue of Experimental Neurology Susuki et al. (2012) furnished an important contribution to the solution of the first issue showing that in the animal models of AMAN with antibody to GM1 and ASAN with antibody to GD1b, the antibodies attack and disrupt the node of Ranvier via complement pathway. Regarding the second issue in the AMAN rabbit model with anti-GM1 antibodies sensory fibers occasionally showed complement deposition, nodal disruption and Wallerian like degeneration demonstrating that motor involvement is predominant but not exclusive.

These observations have important translational implications for the understanding of clinical and electrophysiological characteristics of GBS subtypes associated with antibodies to gangliosides. Following are some comments resulting from the correlation and integration of experimental and clinical data.

Section snippets

AMAN is not only characterized by axonal degeneration

AMAN was initially thought to be characterized pathophysiologically by simple axonal degeneration and its electrodiagnosis was based on absence of demyelinating features and reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitudes (Ho et al., 1995). However AMAN patients with antibody to GM1 showed in some nerves conduction block (CB) in distal and intermediate segments which promptly resolved without the development of excessive temporal dispersion (TD) of CMAPs. This feature, named

RCF is common to different GBS subtypes with antibodies to gangliosides

Susuki et al. (2012) showed that nodal disruption is a mechanism common to experimental neuropathies associated with antibodies to gangliosides GM1, GD1a and GD1b. In humans, besides AMAN, RCF has been recognized in both motor and sensory fibers in AMSAN patients with ab anti-GM1 and -GD1b (Capasso et al., 2011), in patients with pharingo-cervical brachial variant of GBS with antibody anti-GT1a, -GD1a, -GM1 and -GD1b (Capasso et al., 2010), and in GBS-Miller Fisher overlap cases with antibody

AMAN is not exclusively motor

By definition AMAN is characterized by exclusive motor involvement. Susuki et al. (2012) showed that in the AMAN rabbit model with IgG anti-GM1 antibodies nodal disruption was found primarily in motor fibers but occasionally also in sensory fibers. Serial conductions in AMAN patients have showed that in initially normal sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) amplitudes significantly increased or decreased during the disease course (Capasso et al., 2011). In some nerves SNAP amplitudes increased

Nodo-paranodopathies: a new category

Neuropathies are classified into demyelinating and axonal whether the pathologic process affects primarily the myelin/Schwann cell or the axon. Human and experimental acute neuropathies mediated by anti-ganglioside antibodies should be classified as axonal neuropathies as the primary attack is at the excitable axolemma of Ranvier nodes. However in the common neurological knowledge the adjective axonal immediately evokes degeneration and not a transitory dysfunction as RCF. Moreover detachment

Conclusions

Integration of electrophysiologic and pathologic findings from humans and animal models indicates that dysfunction and disruption of the nodal region are common mechanisms in acute (and possibly chronic) neuropathies associated with antibodies to GM1, GD1a and GD1b. The common mechanism explains the spectrum of severity ranging from RCF with prompt recovery to axonal degeneration with poorer outcome in the different neuropathies and some features of the continuum between AMAN and AMSAN.

The

References (55)

  • M. Capasso et al.

    Acute motor conduction block neuropathy. Another Guillain-Barré syndrome variant

    Neurology

    (2003)
  • M. Capasso et al.

    Reversible conduction failure in pharyngeal–cervical-brachial variant of Guillain-Barré syndrome

    Muscle Nerve

    (2010)
  • M. Capasso et al.

    Involvement of sensory fibers in axonal subtypes of Guillain-Barré syndrome

    J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry

    (2011)
  • A. Chiba et al.

    Serum anti-GQ1b IgG antibody is associated with ophthalmoplegia in Miller Fisher syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome: clinical and immunohistochemical studies

    Neurology

    (1993)
  • N.A. Gregson et al.

    Antibodies to gangliosides in Guillain-Barrè syndrome: specificity and relationship to clinical features

    QJM

    (1993)
  • J.W. Griffin et al.

    Guillain-Barré syndrome in northern China: the spectrum of neuropathological changes in clinically defined cases

    Brain

    (1995)
  • J.W. Griffin et al.

    Early nodal changes in the acute motor axonal neuropathy pattern of Guillain-Barré syndrome

    J. Neurocytol.

    (1996)
  • C. Hafer-Macko et al.

    Acute motor axonal neuropathy: an antibody-mediated attack on axolemma

    Ann. Neurol.

    (1996)
  • G.K. Harvey et al.

    Failure of anti-GM1 IgG or IgM to induce conduction block following intraneural transfer

    Muscle Nerve

    (1995)
  • T.W. Ho et al.

    Guillain-Barré syndrome in northern China. Relationship to Campylobacter jejuni infection and anti-glycolipid antibodies

    Brain

    (1995)
  • T.W. Ho et al.

    Anti-GD1a antibody is associated with axonal but not demyelinating forms of Guillain-Barré syndrome

    Ann. Neurol.

    (1999)
  • K. Kaida et al.

    GD1b-specific antibody induces ataxia in Guillain-Barré syndrome

    Neurology

    (2008)
  • K. Kaida et al.

    Antiganglioside antibodies and their pathophysiological effects on Guillain-Barré syndrome and related disorders—a review

    Glycobiology

    (2009)
  • R. Kaji et al.

    Pathological findings at the site of conduction block in multifocal motor neuropathy

    Ann. Neurol.

    (1993)
  • M.C. Kiernan et al.

    Differences in recovery cycle of excitability in sensory and motor axons of human median nerve

    Brain

    (1996)
  • N. Kokubun et al.

    Conduction block in acute motor axonal neuropathy

    Brain

    (2010)
  • S. Kusunoki et al.

    Localization of GM1 and GD1b antigens in the human peripheral nervous system

    Muscle Nerve

    (1993)
  • Cited by (31)

    • Treatment and Management of Autoimmune Neuropathies

      2021, Neuromuscular Disorders: Treatment and Management
    • Sialic acid and anti-ganglioside antibody levels in children with autism spectrum disorders

      2018, Brain Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Moreover, one study reported that the level of GM1 increased in the cerebral spinal fluid of ASD children (Nordin et al., 1998). Anti-GM1 antibody, especially those directed at GM1, was reported to be associated with some immune-mediated neuropathies (Uncini, 2012). The presence of brain-specific auto-antibodies could play the role in the cause of ASD (Mostafa et al., 2008).

    • Guillain-Barré syndrome

      2016, The Lancet
      Citation Excerpt :

      A substantial proportion of acutely diagnosed patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome cannot be classified into a category, either because the tractable nerves (ie, the upper and lower limb nerves that can be readily accessed by surface electrodes used in clinical electrophysiology) are so severely affected that they are inexcitable, or are physiologically normal; both states are uninformative for classification as acute motor axonal neuropathy or acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. Furthermore, electrophysiological recordings are ambiguous, change during the clinical course in any one individual, and yield an acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy pattern early on and an acute motor axonal neuropathy pattern later (reversible conduction block).59,60 Thus, inflammatory injury of either glial or axonal membranes (or both simultaneously) in the nodal complex might result in very similar electrophysiological features of reversible conduction failure.

    • Sural-sparing is seen in axonal as well as demyelinating forms of Guillain-Barré syndrome

      2015, Clinical Neurophysiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      This would improve the validity of interpreting serial SNAP changes. The pathology of AMAN is not confined to length-dependent Wallerian-like degeneration, where the sural nerve is most affected, but also includes RCF (Uncini, 2012). These two pathologies are likely to co-exist in the same patient at different periods of the illness.

    • Lymphoma-associated dysimmune polyneuropathies

      2015, Journal of the Neurological Sciences
      Citation Excerpt :

      Publications were retrieved and scrutinized, and article bibliographies were cross-referenced to ensure that this review is accurate and comprehensive. Reviews exist on the presumed immunopathogenesis of the acquired inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathies [32–37] and autoantibody-mediated polyneuropathies [38–42], and will not be discussed in detail here. To summarize, in inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathies, cellular and humoral immune responses both participate in the disease mechanism (Figs. 1 and 2).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text