Skip to main content

Table 2 Association of baseline sGFAP and sNfL with clinical disability parameters in AQP4-IgG+ and MOG-IgG+ patients

From: Serum GFAP and NfL as disease severity and prognostic biomarkers in patients with aquaporin-4 antibody-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder

 

Patient group (n)

sGFAP

sNfL

ηρ2 for interaction, p

Standardized effect size

β (95% CI)

p

ηρ2 for interaction, p

Standardized effect size

β (95% CI)

p

EDSSa

AQP4-IgG+ (33)

0.10, p = 0.04

1.30

1.78 (0.52–3.04)

0.007

0.06, p = 0.11

1.09

1.58 (− 0.58–3.75)

0.15

MOG-IgG+ (16)

− 0.48

− 0.52 (− 2.26–1.30)

0.59

− 0.29

− 0.43 (− 2.55–1.70)

0.69

MSFCa

AQP4-IgG+ (25)

0.14, p = 0.03

− 1.28

− 0.73 (− 1.30 to − 0.16)

0.01

0.05, p = 0.20

− 1.75

− 1.05 (− 2.13−0.03)

0.06

MOG-IgG+ (12)

0.76

0.43 (− 0.46–1.32)

0.33

− 0.37

− 0.22 (− 1.26–0.82)

0.67

9-HPTa

AQP4-IgG+ (32)

0.11, p = 0.04

− 1.03

− 0.007 (− 0.013 to − 0.001)

0.03

< 0.01, p = 0.70

− 0.82

− 0.006 (− 0.017–0.005)

0.28

MOG-IgG+ (14)

0.65

0.004 (− 0.004–0.013)

0.32

− 0.47

− 0.003 (− 0.015–0.008)

0.56

PASATa

AQP4-IgG+ (27)

0.05, p = 0.19

− 1.00

− 12.7 (− 25.1 to − 0.3)

0.045

0.13, p = 0.03

− 1.86

− 23.0 (− 43.7 to − 2.4)

0.03

MOG-IgG+ (13)

0.21

2.7 (− 17.0–22.4)

0.78

0.44

5.5 (− 15.9–26.9)

0.61

T25-FWb

AQP4-IgG+ (30)

0.01, p = 0.61

0.19

0.027 (− 0.105–0.158)

0.69

0.01, p = 0.54

0.31

0.043 (− 0.179–0.265)

0.70

MOG-IgG+ (14)

− 0.21

− 0.029 (− 0.212–0.154)

0.75

0.89

0.122 (− 0.099–0.343)

0.27

  1. aLinear model using log-transformed sGFAP or sNfL values, including age as well as the log-transformed interval since the last attack as covariates. Furthermore, an interaction term of baseline sGFAP or sNFL (log-transformed) and group was included to assess the statistical significance of inter group differences
  2. bLinear model using log-transformed sGFAP or sNfL and log-transformed T25-FW values, including age as well as the log-transformed interval since the last attack as covariates. Furthermore, an interaction term of baseline sGFAP or sNFL (log-transformed) and group was included to assess the statistical significance of inter group differences
  3. Note that a higher EDSS score indicates a worse functional status, whereas a higher MSFC score indicates a better functional status. The EDSS [23] is the most common score to rate global neurological dysfunction secondary to MS and NMOSD. The MSFC [24] is a more complex, multidimensional scoring system for neurological impairment in MS and NMOSD, which consists of three components. These components, which may each be used individually as well, are the 9-HPT, PASAT, and T25-FW. The 9-HPT assesses upper extremity function and dexterity. PASAT, in rating the processing speed of auditory input and calculation ability, quantifies cognitive impairment. T25-FW addresses lower extremity function based on walking speed
  4. 9-HPT 9-hole peg test, AQP4-IgG aquaporin-4 immunoglobulin G, β regression coefficient, CI confidence interval, ηρ2 partial eta-squared, EDSS expanded disability status scale, MOG-IgG myelin oligodendrocyte protein immunoglobulin G, MSFC multiple sclerosis functional composite, n number, NMOSD neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder, PASAT paced auditory serial addition test, sGFAP serum glial fibrillary acidic protein, sNfL serum neurofilament light chain protein, T25-FW timed 25-foot walk
Back to article page

Journal of Neuroinflammation

ISSN: 1742-2094