This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
In “A multicenter comparison of MOG-IgG cell-based assays,” Waters et al. compared 3 myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein immunoglobulin G (MOG-IgG) cell-based assays (CBAs) from 3 international centers and found that the specificity was highest for the 2 live CBAs as compared to the fixed CBA (99.6% and 100% vs 98.1%). Furthermore, they reported that the positive predictive values (PPVs) were highest for the 2 live CBAs as compared to the fixed CBA (95.5% and 100% vs 82.1%). Budhram questions the value of these PPV calculations, noting that PPV is dependent on knowledge of disease prevalence, which is not always accurate in a case-control study, and clinician ordering practices. He recommends that clinicians be aware of the importance of appropriate patient selection when ordering MOG-IgG, particularly when using a fixed CBA.
In “A multicenter comparison of MOG-IgG cell-based assays,” Waters et al. compared 3 myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein immunoglobulin G (MOG-IgG) cell-based assays (CBAs) from 3 international centers and found that the specificity was highest for the 2 live CBAs as compared to the fixed CBA (99.6% and 100% vs 98.1%). Furthermore, they reported that the positive predictive values (PPVs) were highest for the 2 live CBAs as compared to the fixed CBA (95.5% and 100% vs 82.1%). Budhram questions the value of these PPV calculations, noting that PPV is dependent on knowledge of disease prevalence, which is not always accurate in a case-control study, and clinician ordering practices. He recommends that clinicians be aware of the importance of appropriate patient selection when ordering MOG-IgG, particularly when using a fixed CBA.
Footnotes
Author disclosures are available upon request (journal{at}neurology.org).
- Received January 17, 2020.
- Accepted in final form January 15, 2020.
- © 2020 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
