ArticleEpilepsia2025
Performance of cryptogenic new onset refractory status epilepticus score in a Brazilian cohort after testing for antineuronal antibodies with tissue-based and cell-based assays.
Article in Epilepsia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tocilizumab for critically ill patients with refractory anti-NMDAR encephalitis: a case report.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
43 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study was undertaken to describe a case series of Brazilian new onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE) patients and evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of a clinical score to predict cryptogenic etiology (c-NORSE score) after autoimmune encephalitis (AE) testing.
methodsThirty-seven patients with NORSE from the Brazilian Autoimmune Encephalitis Network were investigated with brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis, and complementary testing with tissue-based assays and cell-based assays for antineuronal and antiglial antibodies (abs) in serum/CSF. Final diagnoses were compiled after chart review. Patients were allocated into two groups according to c-NORSE score: (≥5) high score (HS) or (<5) low score (LS), and clinical variables were compared. c-NORSE score sensitivity and specificity were calculated.
resultsWe found that 23 (62%) of the NORSE patients were children, 49% were female, 22% had AE, and 51% were classified as c-NORSE. Eleven patients (30%) were allocated to the HS group and 26 (70%) to LS. Bilateral and symmetric MRI findings were more frequent in the HS group (HS 100% vs. LS 43%, p = .018), whereas memory or behavioral symptoms were less common (HS 27% vs. LS 89%, p = .001). All HS patients had c-NORSE, whereas 69% of the LS patients had other diagnoses, such as AE (n = 8), herpes simplex virus encephalitis (n = 4), paraneoplastic encephalomyelitis (n = 1), acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (n = 1), and other causes (n = 4). The sensitivity of the c-NORSE score for predicting cryptogenic cases was 57.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 36%-80%), and the specificity was 100% (95% CI = 84%-100%). SIGNIFICANCE: In this cohort, AE was the most identified cause of NORSE, and 51% were cryptogenic. c-NORSE score ≥ 5 had a specificity of 100% (95% CI = 84%-100%) for identifying cryptogenic cases, whereas a score < 5 indicates additional investigation should be ordered. Although the sensitivity of the c-NORSE score was lower than previously reported, suggesting it may vary depending on complementary investigation, it is a useful tool for bedside NORSE evaluation in low-income countries, where access to antineuronal abs is limited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.