Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41836087›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in neurological disorders2026

Testing for neural antibodies in autoimmune encephalitis: who, what, where, when, why, and how.

Shaza Almweisheer, Kamala Sangam, Ola Ismail, Adrian Budhram

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Shaza AlmweisheerDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Kamala SangamDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Ola IsmailDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Adrian BudhramDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, 339 Windermere Rd, London, ON N6A 5A5, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4860-0470

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent decades, neural antibody testing has emerged as a cornerstone of autoimmune encephalitis (AE) diagnosis. Commercially available assays to detect these antibodies are now in widespread use, resulting in dramatically increased test accessibility and reduced turnaround times. However, there remains heterogeneity in testing approach and pitfalls related to test ordering as well as diagnostic test performance, which may vary across laboratories depending on their testing methodologies or algorithms. This creates the potential for both false-negative and false-positive results, which can lead to patient misdiagnosis if clinicians are not familiar with both the strengths and limitations of this testing in practice. In this narrative review, we discuss the approach to patient selection for antibody testing, importance of serum and cerebrospinal fluid testing using appropriately handled specimens, potential limitations of local versus reference laboratory testing, optimal timing of testing, benefit of testing to patient management, and diagnostic performance of different test methodologies and algorithms ( the "who, what, where, when, why, and how" of neural antibody testing in AE), with the aim of providing a practically useful framework for clinicians who order this testing.

Indexed as

autoantibody testingautoimmune encephalitisneural antibody-associated diseaseneural antibody testing

Identifiers

PMID41836087
PMCPMC12988283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.