Development of the clinical assessment scale in autoimmune encephalitis.

OBJECTIVE: There is no scale for rating the severity of autoimmune encephalitis (AE). In this study, we aimed to develop a novel scale for rating severity in patients with diverse AE syndromes and to verify the reliability and validity of the developed scale. METHODS: The key items were generated by a panel of experts and selected according to content validity ratios. The developed scale was initially applied to 50 patients with AE (development cohort) to evaluate its acceptability, reproducibility, internal consistency, and construct validity. Then, the scale was applied to another independent cohort (validation cohort, n = 38). RESULTS: A new scale consisting of 9 items (seizure, memory dysfunction, psychiatric symptoms, consciousness, language problems, dyskinesia/dystonia, gait instability and ataxia, brainstem dysfunction, and weakness) was developed. Each item was assigned a value of up to 3 points. The total score could therefore range from 0 to 27. We named the scale the Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis (CASE). The new scale showed excellent interobserver (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.97) and intraobserver (ICC = 0.96) reliability for total scores, was highly correlated with modified Rankin scale (r = 0.86, p < 0.001), and had acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.88). Additionally, in the validation cohort, the scale showed high interobserver reliability (ICC = 0.99) and internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.92). INTERPRETATION: CASE is a novel clinical scale for AE with a high level of clinimetric properties. It would be suitable for application in clinical practice and might help overcome the limitations of current outcome scales for AE. ANN NEUROL 2019;85:352-358.

Relative and combined effects of socioeconomic status and diabetes on mortality: A nationwide cohort study.

Both low socioeconomic status (SES) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are important risk factors for mortality. However, little is known about their combined effects and relative contribution to the mortality risk.From a nationwide cohort provided by the National Health Insurance Service in Korea, 153,075 subjects who were over 30 years of age from 2003 to 2004 were followed-up until 2010. The SESs of the subjects in the DM and non-DM (NDM) groups were categorized into 3 groups (highest 30% as S1, middle 40% as S2, and lowest 30% as S3) based on the subjects' income levels.During the 7.9-year follow-up, 3933 deaths occurred. When the subjects were stratified into 6 groups by their socioeconomic and diabetes status, a linearly increasing pattern of the hazard ratio (HR) of mortality from the higher SES without diabetes group (NDM-S1, as a reference) to the lower SES with diabetes group (DM-S3; HR, 2.04, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.80-2.36) was observed (P for trend < 0.001). Notably, subjects with DM in the highest SES group (DM-S1) had a significantly higher mortality risk than did non-DM subjects in the lowest SES group (NDM-S3). This pattern was maintained in cause-specific mortality but was more prominent in cardiovascular disease (CVD) and less prominent in cancer mortality. The association was not affected by gender; however, in individuals <60 years of age, the combined effects of SES and DM on mortality were more prominent (DM-S3; HR, 3.68, 95% CI, 2.95-4.60) than in those ≥60 years of age.Low SES and DM were major determinants of mortality and synergistically increased the risks of all-cause, CVD, and cancer mortality.