补体抑制剂在神经系统自身免疫性疾病临床 应用中的研究进展
Research Progress on the Clinical Application of Complement Inhibitors in Autoimmune Diseases of the Nervous System
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2026.162717, PDF, HTML, XML,   
作者: 刘超群:济宁医学院临床医学院(附属医院),山东 济宁;王玉忠*:济宁医学院附属医院神经内科,山东 济宁;济宁医学院附属医院医学研究中心,山东 济宁
关键词: 补体系统补体抑制剂神经免疫疾病Complement System Complement Inhibitors Autoimmune Diseases of the Nervous System
摘要: 神经系统自身免疫性疾病是一类由机体免疫系统异常激活,错误攻击自身神经系统组织所导致的疾病。补体系统的异常激活被认为是导致神经元损伤和炎症反应的关键因素,通过特异性抑制补体级联反应可以有效阻断补体激活引起的组织损伤和炎症反应。随着对补体系统的深入研究,补体抑制剂作为一种新兴的治疗策略,逐渐成为研究热点。本文分析补体在神经系统自身免疫性疾病中的作用机制,总结近年来补体抑制剂治疗神经系统自身免疫性疾病的研究进展,旨在为补体抑制剂临床研究及应用提供参考。
Abstract: Autoimmune diseases of the nervous system are a class of disorders caused by the abnormal activation of the body’s immune system, which mistakenly attacks its own nervous system tissues. The abnormal activation of the complement system is considered a key factor leading to neuronal damage and inflammatory responses. Specific inhibition of the complement cascade can effectively block tissue damage and inflammatory responses caused by complement activation. With the in-depth study of the complement system, complement inhibitors have gradually become a research hotspot as an emerging therapeutic strategy. This article analyzes the mechanisms by which complement contributes to autoimmune diseases of the nervous system and summarizes recent research progress on the therapeutic effects of complement inhibitors in these diseases, aiming to provide reference for clinical research and application of complement inhibitors.
文章引用:刘超群, 王玉忠. 补体抑制剂在神经系统自身免疫性疾病临床 应用中的研究进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2026, 16(2): 3042-3052. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2026.162717

1. 引言

神经系统自身免疫性疾病是一类由免疫系统异常激活导致神经系统结构和功能损伤的疾病,这类疾病临床表现多样,可累及中枢神经系统、周围神经系统和神经–肌肉接头。神经免疫疾病的发病机制涉及细胞免疫和体液免疫的相互作用,细胞免疫通过T细胞和巨噬细胞等免疫细胞介导的炎症反应参与疾病进展,而体液免疫则主要通过抗体和补体系统介导神经炎症和损伤。越来越多的研究表明,自身免疫性抗体激活补体为代表的体液免疫在神经免疫疾病中发挥了更多的作用。近年来,多种补体抑制剂应用于神经免疫性疾病的基础和临床治疗性研究。本文综述了补体在神经免疫性疾病中的作用机制、常见补体抑制剂的种类及其在神经免疫性疾病的治疗研究进展,旨在为该类疾病的临床治疗提供参考。

2. 补体系统及常见的补体抑制剂

补体系统是人体免疫系统的重要组成部分,包括可溶性蛋白、膜结合性蛋白和补体受体,补体系统主要通过经典途径、旁路途径和凝集素途径激,它们通过形成C3转化酶,进而形成C5转化酶激活C5裂解为C5b,并与C6、C7、C8、C9反应最终形成膜攻击复合物(Membrane Attack Complex, MAC) [1]。在生理状态下,补体系统负责调节组织稳态、参与免疫、炎症反应以及清除病原体和受损细胞。当补体激活与抑制的平衡被破坏,补体的过度激活成为诱发和加剧炎症及自身免疫性疾病的关键驱动因素。

补体抑制剂通过阻断补体激活从而减少炎症级联反应和组织损伤。补体C1、C5是目前神经免疫疾病中常见的作用靶点(补体激活及补体抑制剂作用靶点见图1)。补体C1抑制剂通过抑制经典途径的活化发挥作用,目前正在研究中的药物包括Cinryze、Riliprubart、TX301、ANX005等。Cinryze是一种C1酯酶抑制剂(C1 esterase inhibitor, C1-INH),是丝氨酸蛋白酶抑制剂(Serine Protease Inhibitors, Serpins),通过抑制C1r和C1s的丝氨酸蛋白酶活性,阻止C4和C2的裂解,进而阻止C3转化酶的形成,从而减少了下游补体成分激活[2]-[4]。ANX005可选择性抑制C1q活性,阻止经典补体通路的启动。Riliprubart和

Figure1. Schematic diagram of the three pathways of the complement system and the targets of complement inhibitors

1. 补体系统的三条途径及补体抑制剂作用靶点示意图

Table 1. Summary of clinical trials on complement inhibitors for autoimmune diseases of the nervous system

1. 补体抑制剂治疗神经免疫疾病临床试验总结

药物名称

作用靶点

适应症

试验阶段

主要疗效指标

样本量

主要安全信号

Cinryze

C1

NMOSD

Ⅰb期

EDSS评分改善

10例

未发生严重不良事件

Riliprubart

C1s

CIDP

II期

(III期进行中)

临床应答率、

功能量表改善

78例

总体耐受性良好

TX301

C1s

CIDP

III期进行中

-

-

-

ANX005

C1q

GBS

Ⅰb期

MRC肌力、GBS-DS、 ONLS评分改善

50例

长期安全性需 III期验证

Eculizumab

C5

NMOSD

MG

GBS

III期

III期

III期

复发风险降低

MG加重率降低

未显示功能改善

143例

125例

57例

常见不良事件: 上呼吸道感染、头痛

Ravulizumab

C5

NMOSD

MG

III期

III期

显著降低复发风险

MG-ADL迅速改善, 长期维持获益

58例

161例

总体耐受性良好

Zilucoplan

C5

MG

III期

MG-ADL

评分迅速改善

174例(RAISE)

200例(RAISE-XT)

常见不良事件:注射部 位淤青、头痛、腹泻

TX301则是一种靶向补体C1s的人源化单克隆抗体。补体C5是补体系统的关键成分,作为补体抑制治疗领域的重要靶点,目前已有多种药物应用于临床实践,如依库珠单抗(Eculizumab)、雷夫利珠单抗(Ravulizumab)以及泽勒普肽(Zilucoplan)等,通过阻断C5裂解为C5a和C5b,进而阻断MAC的形成,从而减少炎症和细胞损伤。补体抑制剂在神经免疫疾病的临床应用中显示出显著的临床疗效(补体抑制剂治疗神经免疫疾病临床试验总结见表1)。

3. 补体在神经免疫性疾病中的致病机制及补体抑制剂治疗进展

补体激活在多发性硬化(multiple sclerosis, MS)、视神经脊髓炎谱系疾病(Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders, NMOSD)、重症肌无力(Myasthenia Gravis, MG)、吉兰–巴雷综合征(Guillain-Barré syndrome, GBS)及慢性炎性脱髓鞘性多发性神经根神经病(Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyradiculoneuropathy, CIDP)等多种神经免疫性疾病的发生中扮演了重要角色。

3.1. MS

MS是免疫介导的中枢神经系统炎性脱髓鞘疾病,具有空间和时间多发性的特点。补体在MS发病机制中作用受到广泛关注,其参与MS白质和灰质病变的证据来自MS组织病理学、脑脊液生物标志物研究以及实验性自身免疫性脑脊髓炎(Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, EAE)的动物模型。对MS患者死后大脑的免疫组织化学研究显示补体沉积是MS脱髓鞘病变的决定性特征[5]。在MS患者活性与非活性白质病变及丘脑灰质病变中均检测到补体激活产物[6]-[8]。最近的一项研究对MS患者CSF和血浆中的补体成分和补体激活产物进行检测,发现临床孤立综合征和MS患者CSF中的C3a和C4a与扩展致残状况量表(expanded disability status scale, EDSS)评分升高有关。这提示补体激活与MS的疾病严重程度有关[9]。作为用于研究MS常用的动物模型,通过在小鼠EAE中使用补体抑制剂探索补体在MS中的作用。研究发现,全身递送C3受体阻滞剂sCR1可抑制急性EAE患者脱髓鞘[10],局部接种C3抑制剂Crry能够减少EAE的突触丧失[11]。MS的发病机制涉及免疫攻击、炎症反应、神经退行性变等多个环节,补体的过度活化促进了MAC的形成和髓鞘的损伤,不同的补体成分和激活途径在不同阶段、不同病理类型中可能不同,单一的补体抑制剂无法精准作用于关键的病理损伤部位。尽管大量的证据表明补体在MS的发病机制中起到重要作用,并且补体抑制剂在动物模型中的应用显示出一定效果,但补体抑制剂在MS患者中的疗效和安全性仍有待进一步临床验证。

3.2. NMOSD

NMOSD是一种主要累及视神经和脊髓的中枢神经系统自身免疫性疾病,以反复发作的急性视神经炎和脊髓炎为特征。约65%~88%的NMOSD患者体内能检测到抗水通道蛋白4 (aquaporin 4, AQP4)的IgG抗体[12]。AQP4广泛存在于星形胶质细胞足突中,主要参与调节脑内水平衡、神经胶质瘢痕形成和星形胶质细胞迁移。星形胶质细胞表面的AQP4通过C1q结合到AQP4-IgG的Fc区域,激活补体级联反应,分解C5为C5a、C5b,最终形成MAC,引发补体介导的细胞毒性作用(complement dependent cytotoxicity, CDC)导致星形胶质细胞损伤[13] [14],是NMOSD主要的致病因素。补体系统不仅通过CDC介导星形胶质细胞损伤,还通过释放C3a和C5a等过敏毒素,招募炎症细胞(如中性粒细胞、巨噬细胞和嗜酸性粒细胞)浸润,进一步加剧细胞损伤和脱髓鞘[15]。此外,补体激活产生的炎症反应会引起血脑屏障的破坏,并最终损伤少突胶质细胞和神经元[16]

目前治疗NMOSD的临床研究中,C5抑制剂和C1-INH已经取得了阶段性的成果,主要包括Eculizumab、Ravulizumab以及Cinryze。补体C5是治疗AQP4-IgG阳性NMOSD的有效靶点,相应的C5补体抑制剂Eculizumab和Ravulizumab均在临床中显示出良好的效果。一项针对Eculizumab的II期试验入组了14例具有高复发风险的患者,其中有12例患者在Eculizumab治疗12个月内无复发[17]。在以上结果的基础上,进行了Eculizumab的III期临床试验。结果显示,接受Eculizumab治疗的患者有97.9%无复发,而接受安慰剂治疗的患者仅有63.2%无复发[12]。基于临床结果所显示出的Eculizumab在治疗NMOSD患者中良好的治疗潜力,FDA批准了Eculizumab用于预防AQP4-IgG阳性NMOSD患者的复发[18]。目前,我国已批准Eculizumab用于治疗AQP4-IgG阳性NMOSD,并逐渐成为首选药物[19]

作为长效C5补体抑制剂,2025年,Ravulizumab在我国正式获批用于治疗AQP4抗体阳性的成人NMOSD患者,这基于III期CHAMPION-NMOSD临床试验的积极结果,研究显示接受Ravulizumab治疗的58例患者在中位治疗73周期间实现100%无复发,相比安慰剂组降低98.6%,在48周时所有患者维持无复发[20]。其长效作用机制为NMOSD患者提供了更优的治疗选择。

Cinryze作为一种C1-INH,目前已在NMOSD急性发作期的治疗中进行了初步研究。一项单中心、开放标签的Ib期试验纳入了10名AQP4-IgG血清阳性的NMOSD患者,接受激素联合Cinryze治疗。研究结果显示所有患者均未发生严重不良事件,此外,患者的EDSS评分从入院时的中位数4.5降至出院时的4.0,并在30天随访时进一步降至2.5 [21]">">。这表明Cinryze可能对减少神经损伤和改善预后具有潜在益处。而另一项体外和大鼠模型实验结果则提示C1-INH在血清中的补体抑制作用过低,难以在NMOSD患者中产生显著的治疗效果[22]。C1-INH的临床应用仍处于早期阶段,确切疗效仍需要进行进一步的临床试验来确定。尽管C1-INH在理论上具有治疗神经免疫性疾病的潜力,但目前的研究主要集中于其在遗传性血管性水肿中的应用[23],其在治疗NMOSD患者中的作用仍需进一步临床试验的研究和验证。

3.3. MG

MG是以肌无力和骨骼肌疲劳为特征的自身免疫性疾病,由神经–肌肉接头(Neuromuscular Junction, NMJ)处传递功能障碍所引起。在大多数MG患者的血清中可以检测到针对AChR的自身抗体,阳性率约85% [24],AChR抗体可以通过阻断ACh与AChR结合、与AChR交联内化和激活补体损伤突触后膜结构以影响NMJ的结构和功能。其中,补体激活是三种途径中主要的病理机制,在AChR抗体阳性的MG患者中起到关键作用。AChR抗体主要属于IgG1和IgG3亚类,这两个亚类有较长且富含二硫键的铰链区,使其具有更高的结构灵活性,有助于形成抗体–抗原复合物,促进C1q的结合,并启动补体激活的经典途径[25],最终形成MAC直接破坏NMJ的突触后膜,从而减少了AChR通道和电压门控钠通道的表面积和数量[26],导致胆碱能传递障碍。在MG患者的NMJ中也观察到IgG、C3和C9的沉积[27],C9作为MAC的一部分,进一步说明了补体激活的在MG中的作用。另外,AChR抗体阳性MG患者血清中补体级联上游成分C3、C4水平降低[28] [29],提示了补体系统被过度激活和消耗。补体在NMJ中的作用的证据也来自主动或被动免疫的动物模型,有研究发现通过眼镜蛇毒因子消耗实验大鼠的补体,可以抑制实验性自身免疫重症肌无力(experimental autoimmune MG, EAMG)的发生[30]。在补体C3、C4、C5或C6缺乏的动物中,EAMG的发生率明显降低,且NMJ处的IgG沉积不会导致MAC形成[31] [32]。实验和临床证据均表明补体激活在AChR抗体阳性MG的发病机制中起关键作用。

补体抑制剂的临床应用也进一步验证了补体在MG中的作用机制,目前C5抑制剂在MG的治疗中取得阶段性进展。一项Eculizumab的Ⅲ期随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验纳入了125例难治性AChR抗体阳性的MG患者,分别接受Eculizumab与安慰剂治疗,结果显示与安慰剂组相比,接受Eculizumab治疗的MG加重率降低了65%,再次入院率及抢救率均降低了66%。这一结果使得Eculizumab成为首个被批准用于治疗难治性AChR抗体阳性MG的药物[33]。在后续REGAIN扩展研究中,117例接受Eculizumab治疗的难治性MG患者的加重率降低了75%,研究期间未报告脑膜炎球菌感染事件,这进一步证实了Eculizumab的长期安全性和持续有效性[34]。基于以上结果,2023年Eculizumab在我国获批用于治疗抗AChR抗体阳性的难治性全身型MG成人患者。2024年,被纳入我国国家医保目录。

Ravulizumab在2025年4月被我国批准用于治疗抗AChR抗体阳性的成人全身型重症肌无力(generalized MG, gMG)。一项III期CHAMPION-MG临床试验显示,1周内患者的MG日常生活质量(MG-activities of daily living profile, MG-ADL)量表和MG定量评分体系(quantitative MG scoring system, QMG)评分迅速改善;164周随访显示141例MG-ADL改善 ≥ 2分,达最小症状表达(MSE)者占比41.8%,大部分患者维持临床获益,安全性良好[35] [36]。该研究进一步评估了Ravulizumab在治疗AChR抗体阳性gMG患者的长期疗效和安全性。Ravulizumab与Eculizumab功能相似,但由于其具有更长的半衰期并且减少了给药频率,为患者带来极大便利性。

Zilucoplan在2023年被多个国家批准用于治疗抗AChR抗体阳性的gMG成年患者,目前国内正申报上市中。Zilucoplan的获批来自III期临床研究结果的支持,与安慰剂组相比,经过12周的治疗后Zilucoplan组患者的MG-ADL、QMG、MGC和MG-QoL15r评分均有显著改善[37]。该研究证实Zilucoplan对AChR抗体阳性的gMG患者效果良好。一项RAISE-XT多中心开放标签的扩展研究进一步评估了Zilucoplan的长期疗效和安全性。RAISE-XT研究的96周中期分析结果显示[38],接受Zilucoplan患者的MG-ADL评分在第1周迅速改善且持续改善至第24周,并维持相似水平至第96周。在安全性结果方面,200例接受Zilucoplan治疗的患者,期间未发生与治疗相关的患者死亡事件,最常见的治疗期间不良事件(TEAEs)为COVID-19、MG恶化和头痛等">">。后续RAISE-XT研究的120周事后分析结果显示,对于MG-ADL和QMG,第1周患者应答率及达到应答的时间直至第120周均维持在较高水平,而在第1周无应答的患者后续治疗中也观察到应答[39]。这些数据表明Zilucoplan治疗具有快速和持续的疗效和良好的安全性。由于Zilucoplan使用方式的便捷与灵活性,为了进一步探索其临床应用价值,一项研究纳入静脉注射补体C5抑制剂治疗下病情稳定,并愿意转换为Zilucoplan的患者,结果显示转换治疗后出现的不良事件(Treatment Emergent Adverse Events, TEAEs)大多数为轻度,安全性良好,经过12周的治疗,患者症状显著改善,且有76.9%的患者更倾向于皮下注射方式[40]。未来研究应进一步探索Zilucoplan在更广泛群体中的长期安全性和有效性,为MG患者提供更加有效和个性化的治疗方案。

3.4. GBS

GBS是免疫介导的多发性神经根神经病,包括经典型和变异型两大类,经典型GBS基于病理机制又分为脱髓鞘型和轴索型两类。GBS的免疫应答与补体激活有关,针对感染因子产生的抗体与周围神经轴索与髓鞘中的抗原交叉反应,参与补体激活[41] [42]。高达92%的GBS患者在疾病的急性活跃期检测到针对神经节苷脂复合物的 IgM和IgG抗体[42]-[45]。在GBS患者血清及脑脊液中检测到补体激活产物的沉积[46] [47],早在1996年,Hafer-Macko等[48]在一项尸检研究中证实,在急性炎症脱髓鞘性多发性神经病(acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, AIDP)早期的施万细胞表面存在补体激活产物C3d和MAC沉积,这提示补体参与了AIDP的病理过程,由此推测抗原抗体结合激活补体系统,招募巨噬细胞吞噬髓鞘碎片。在轴索型GBS中,病理结果显示IgG和补体沉积在朗飞结轴膜上[49],这提示自身抗体驱动补体激活导致轴突损伤。GD1a、GM1神经节苷脂抗体与补体结合,诱导MAC的形成,驱动巨噬细胞活化并损伤轴突[50],最终影响神经冲动的传导。Miller-Fisher综合征(Miller-Fisher syndrome, MFS)是GBS的一种变异型。大多数MFS患者都有抗GQ1b抗体,抗GQ1b抗体引起MFS神经损伤的作用机制是补体介导的[51] [52],补体抑制剂rEV576已在动物模型中成功证明了这一点[53]。补体激活被认为是MFS的主要致病机制。

在GBS的补体抑制剂治疗中,C1、C5仍然是热门的靶点。一项I期临床试验提示ANX005在治疗GBS中具有良好潜力。结果显示接受ANX005治疗的患者神经损伤的生物标志物水平显著降低,与安慰剂相比,ANX005在四肢肌力评分(Medical research council, MRC)、GBS-残疾评分(Guillain-Barré Syndrome Disability Score, GBS-DS)和整体神经功能限制量表(Overall Neuropathy Limitations Scale, ONLS)评分指标均有更大的改善。ANX005抑制C1q的沉积,阻止了下游补体成分的进一步沉积,从而全面切断了经典补体通路的级联反应。其在GBS患者中的长期疗效和安全性需在Ⅲ期临床试验中进一步探索[54]

然而Eculizumab未能显现出较好的效果。一项III期临床试验评估了Eculizumab作为静脉注射免疫球蛋白辅助治疗在重度GBS患者中的疗效。研究纳入57名日本GBS患者,尽管结果显示患者耐受性良好并显著降低血清C5浓度,但在功能结果方面未显示改善[55]。这考虑到GBS作为一种急性、快速进展的疾病,其神经损伤可能在发病早期即达到高峰,Eculizumab通过抑制C5阻止终末级联反应,虽然能够有效抑制补体激活,阻止了后续的神经损伤,但无法逆转已经发生的轴索变性或脱髓鞘。由于现有研究的样本量较小,未来需要更大规模的多中心临床试验来进一步验证Eculizumab在GBS治疗中的疗效。

3.5. CIDP

CIDP是一种免疫介导性周围神经病,其发病机制复杂,补体参与CIDP的作用机制在病理学、血清学和体外模型中得到验证。病理学证实,在CIDP患者的腓肠神经活检中存在补体沉积[56]。在1例CIDP和抗LM1抗体患者的报告中也观察到补体在髓鞘处沉积[57]。研究发现,补体激活成分MAC与C5a水平随疾病严重程度增加而增加[58]。一种体外CIDP模型显示患者血清中含有抗GM1的IgG和IGM的自身抗体结合在施万细胞和运动神经元膜上,激活了模型的补体级联,从而检测到C3b和MAC [59]。另外有部分与CIDP相关的抗体属于IgG4亚型不能激活补体,如抗接触蛋白-1 (CNTN1)抗体、抗接触蛋白相关蛋白-1 (Caspr1)抗体和抗神经束蛋白155 (NF155)抗体等[60],因此抑制补体活化可能对这些抗体阳性的CIDP患者无效。

近期的病例报告中描述了Eculizumab在1例难治性CIDP中的成功应用。在患者神经活检明确显示存在补体沉积的基础上,予以Eculizumab治疗,患者临床症状和神经电生理指标均有显著改善。但目前尚无针对CIDP的正式临床试验。未来可能需要进一步研究[61]

Riliprubart和TX301均是一种靶向补体C1s的人源化单克隆抗体。在针对治疗耐药和初治CIDP患者II期临床试验中,患者总体耐受性良好,88%的标准治疗(糖皮质激素/免疫球蛋白)患者在换用riliprubart后病情改善或稳定,44%的患者病情改善。50%的标准治疗效果欠佳的患者对riliprubart有良好应答[62]。研究结果提示riliprubart可能为CIDP患者提供一种新的治疗选择。目前两项III期临床试验正在进行中,分别评价Riliprubart对标准治疗无效及IVIg治疗有效但仍有残疾的CIDP患者的有效性和安全性。目前针对CIDP患者的全球性III期TX301临床试验正在进行中,其采用皮下注射的便利给药方式有望为患者提供更有效便利的治疗方案。

4. 总结

补体抑制剂在神经免疫疾病的治疗中展现出良好的临床应用前景,为患者提供了新的治疗选择的同时也面临着一系列挑战,补体系统是识别和清除病原体的关键免疫屏障,补体抑制剂通过抑制补体功能虽然能够达到治疗目的,但也人为制造了关键补体缺陷的病理状态,使得机体对感染的防御能力降低。脑膜炎奈瑟菌感染是最典型且被高度重视的风险,MAC末端通路是裂解该菌的关键所在,抑制补体激活终末阶段,如目前应用较广的C5抑制剂,会使患者脑膜炎球菌感染的风险显著增加。因此,为了应对感染风险,疫苗接种成为使用补体抑制剂前的强制性的预防措施,甚至需要考虑预防性使用抗生素直至疫苗生效。而对于需要紧急干预的急重症患者、对疫苗应答可能减弱的免疫抑制患者及对疫苗成分过敏的患者则可能被排除在补体抑制剂治疗之外。接种疫苗可以降低但不能消除脑膜炎球菌感染的风险,在治疗过程中应监测患者感染的早期症状和体征、定期监测疫苗效力,这进一步增加了治疗的复杂性,也为临床应用带来了限制。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Conigliaro, P., Triggianese, P., Ballanti, E., Perricone, C., Perricone, R. and Chimenti, M.S. (2019) Complement, Infection, and Autoimmunity. Current Opinion in Rheumatology, 31, 532-541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Dalakas, M.C., Alexopoulos, H. and Spaeth, P.J. (2020) Complement in Neurological Disorders and Emerging Complement-Targeted Therapeutics. Nature Reviews Neurology, 16, 601-617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Karnaukhova, E. (2022) C1-Inhibitor: Structure, Functional Diversity and Therapeutic Development. Current Medicinal Chemistry, 29, 467-488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Loveless, S., Neal, J.W., Howell, O.W., Harding, K.E., Sarkies, P., Evans, R., et al. (2017) Tissue Microarray Methodology Identifies Complement Pathway Activation and Dysregulation in Progressive Multiple Sclerosis. Brain Pathology, 28, 507-520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Lucchinetti, C., Brück, W., Parisi, J., Scheithauer, B., Rodriguez, M. and Lassmann, H. (2000) Heterogeneity of Multiple Sclerosis Lesions: Implications for the Pathogenesis of Demyelination. Annals of Neurology, 47, 707-717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Ingram, G., Loveless, S., Howell, O.W., Hakobyan, S., Dancey, B., Harris, C.L., et al. (2014) Complement Activation in Multiple Sclerosis Plaques: An Immunohistochemical Analysis. Acta Neuropathologica Communications, 2, Article No. 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Rus, H., Cudrici, C. and Niculescu, F. (2005) C5b‐9 Complement Complex in Autoimmune Demyelination and Multiple sclerosis: Dual Role in Neuroinflammation and Neuroprotection. Annals of Medicine, 37, 97-104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Cooze, B.J., Dickerson, M., Loganathan, R., Watkins, L.M., Grounds, E., Pearson, B.R., et al. (2022) The Association between Neurodegeneration and Local Complement Activation in the Thalamus to Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Outcome. Brain Pathology, 32, e13054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Oechtering, J., Schaedelin, S.A., Stein, K., Maleska Maceski, A., Melie-Garcia, L., Benkert, P., et al. (2025) Aberrant Complement Activation Is Associated with Structural Brain Damage in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, 12, e200361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Piddlesden, S.J., Storch, M.K., Hibbs, M., Freeman, A.M., Lassmann, H. and Morgan, B.P. (1994) Soluble Recombinant Complement Receptor 1 Inhibits Inflammation and Demyelination in Antibody-Mediated Demyelinating Experimental Allergic Encephalomyelitis. The Journal of Immunology, 152, 5477-5484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Werneburg, S., Jung, J., Kunjamma, R.B., Ha, S., Luciano, N.J., Willis, C.M., et al. (2020) Targeted Complement Inhibition at Synapses Prevents Microglial Synaptic Engulfment and Synapse Loss in Demyelinating Disease. Immunity, 52, 167-182.e7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Pittock, S.J., Berthele, A., Fujihara, K., Kim, H.J., Levy, M., Palace, J., et al. (2019) Eculizumab in Aquaporin-4-Positive Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder. New England Journal of Medicine, 381, 614-625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Soltys, J., Liu, Y., Ritchie, A., Wemlinger, S., Schaller, K., Schumann, H., et al. (2019) Membrane Assembly of Aquaporin-4 Autoantibodies Regulates Classical Complement Activation in Neuromyelitis Optica. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 129, 2000-2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Carnero Contentti, E. and Correale, J. (2021) Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders: From Pathophysiology to Therapeutic Strategies. Journal of Neuroinflammation, 18, Article No. 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Mastellos, D.C., Hajishengallis, G. and Lambris, J.D. (2023) A Guide to Complement Biology, Pathology and Therapeutic Opportunity. Nature Reviews Immunology, 24, 118-141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Huang, T., Wang, J., Chang, P., Hsu, Y., Lin, C., Lin, K., et al. (2022) Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder: From Basic Research to Clinical Perspectives. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23, Article 7908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Pittock, S.J., Lennon, V.A., McKeon, A., Mandrekar, J., Weinshenker, B.G., Lucchinetti, C.F., et al. (2013) Eculizumab in AQP4-IGG-Positive Relapsing Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders: An Open-Label Pilot Study. The Lancet Neurology, 12, 554-562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Duchow, A., Paul, F. and Bellmann-Strobl, J. (2020) Current and Emerging Biologics for the Treatment of Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 20, 1061-1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] 中华医学会神经病学分会神经免疫学组. 中国视神经脊髓炎谱系疾病诊断与治疗指南(2025版) [J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2025, 58(7): 687-703.
[20] Pittock, S.J., Barnett, M., Bennett, J.L., Berthele, A., de Sèze, J., Levy, M., et al. (2023) Ravulizumab in Aquaporin‐4-Positive Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder. Annals of Neurology, 93, 1053-1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Levy, M. and Mealy, M.A. (2014) Purified Human C1-Esterase Inhibitor Is Safe in Acute Relapses of Neuromyelitis Optica. Neurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, 1, e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Tradtrantip, L., Asavapanumas, N., Phuan, P. and Verkman, A.S. (2014) Potential Therapeutic Benefit of C1-Esterase Inhibitor in Neuromyelitis Optica Evaluated in Vitro and in an Experimental Rat Model. PLOS ONE, 9, e106824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Sinnathamby, E.S., Issa, P.P., Roberts, L., Norwood, H., Malone, K., Vemulapalli, H., et al. (2023) Hereditary Angioedema: Diagnosis, Clinical Implications, and Pathophysiology. Advances in Therapy, 40, 814-827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Huda, S., Woodhall, M.R., Vincent, A. and Heckmann, J.M. (2016) Characteristics of Acetylcholine‐Receptor‐Antibody-Negative Myasthenia Gravis in a South African Cohort. Muscle & Nerve, 54, 1023-1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Frischauf, N., Strasser, J., Borg, E.G.F., Labrijn, A.F., Beurskens, F.J. and Preiner, J. (2024) Complement Activation by Igg Subclasses Is Governed by Their Ability to Oligomerize Upon Antigen Binding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121, e2406192121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Cetin, H. and Vincent, A. (2018) Pathogenic Mechanisms and Clinical Correlations in Autoimmune Myasthenic Syndromes. Seminars in Neurology, 38, 344-354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Engel, A.G., Sahashi, K. and Fumagalli, G. (1981) The Immunopathology of Acquired My Asthenia Gravis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 377, 158-174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Romi, F., Kristoffersen, E.K., Aarli, J.A. and Gilhus, N.E. (2005) The Role of Complement in Myasthenia Gravis: Serological Evidence of Complement Consumption in Vivo. Journal of Neuroimmunology, 158, 191-194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[29] Liu, A., Lin, H., Liu, Y., Cao, X., Wang, X. and Li, Z. (2009) Correlation of C3 Level with Severity of Generalized Myasthenia Gravis. Muscle & Nerve, 40, 801-808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[30] Lennon, V.A., Seybold, M.E., Lindstrom, J.M., Cochrane, C. and Ulevitch, R. (1978) Role of Complement in the Pathogenesis of Experimental Autoimmune Myasthenia Gravis. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 147, 973-983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[31] Morgan, B.P., Chamberlain-Banoub, J., Neal, J.W., Song, W., Mizuno, M. and Harris, C.L. (2006) The Membrane Attack Pathway of Complement Drives Pathology in Passively Induced Experimental Autoimmune Myasthenia Gravis in Mice. Clinical and Experimental Immunology, 146, 294-302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[32] Chamberlain-Banoub, J., Neal, J.W., Mizuno, M., Harris, C.L. and Morgan, B.P. (2006) Complement Membrane Attack Is Required for Endplate Damage and Clinical Disease in Passive Experimental Myasthenia Gravis in Lewis Rats. Clinical and Experimental Immunology, 146, 278-286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[33] Howard, J.F., Utsugisawa, K., Benatar, M., Murai, H., Barohn, R.J., Illa, I., et al. (2017) Safety and Efficacy of Eculizumab in Anti-Acetylcholine Receptor Antibody-Positive Refractory Generalised Myasthenia Gravis (REGAIN): A Phase 3, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicentre Study. The Lancet Neurology, 16, 976-986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[34] Muppidi, S., Utsugisawa, K., Benatar, M., Murai, H., Barohn, R.J., Illa, I., et al. (2019) Long‐term Safety and Efficacy of Eculizumab in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis. Muscle & Nerve, 60, 14-24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[35] Vu, T., Meisel, A., Mantegazza, R., Annane, D., Katsuno, M., Aguzzi, R., et al. (2023) Summary of Research: Terminal Complement Inhibitor Ravulizumab in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis. Neurology and Therapy, 12, 1435-1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[36] Meisel, A., Annane, D., Vu, T., Mantegazza, R., Katsuno, M., Aguzzi, R., et al. (2023) Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Ravulizumab in Adults with Anti-Acetylcholine Receptor Antibody-Positive Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: Results from the Phase 3 CHAMPION MG Open-Label Extension. Journal of Neurology, 270, 3862-3875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[37] Howard, J.F., Bresch, S., Genge, A., Hewamadduma, C., Hinton, J., Hussain, Y., et al. (2023) Safety and Efficacy of Zilucoplan in Patients with Generalised Myasthenia Gravis (RAISE): A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 3 Study. The Lancet Neurology, 22, 395-406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[38] Howard, J.F., Bresch, S., Farmakidis, C., Freimer, M., Genge, A., Hewamadduma, C., et al. (2024) Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Zilucoplan in Patients with Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: Interim Analysis of the RAISE-XT Open-Label Extension Study. Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders, 17, 1-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[39] Blanchard, O., Bresch, S., Freimer, M., Hewamadduma, C., Leite, M., Maniaol, A., et al. (2025) P.107 Early and Sustained Response over Time with Zilucoplan in Generalised Myasthenia Gravis: 120-Week Post Hoc Analysis of Raise-XT. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences/Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques, 52, S40-S40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[40] Freimer, M., Desai, U., Govindarajan, R., Kang, M.K., Khan, S., Khatri, B., et al. (2025) Switching to Subcutaneous Zilucoplan from Intravenous Complement Component 5 Inhibitors in Generalised Myasthenia Gravis: A Phase IIIB, Open-Label Study. Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders, 18, 1-15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[41] Hagen, K.M. and Ousman, S.S. (2021) The Neuroimmunology of Guillain-Barré Syndrome and the Potential Role of an Aging Immune System. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 12, Article ID: 613628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[42] van den Berg, B., Walgaard, C., Drenthen, J., Fokke, C., Jacobs, B.C. and van Doorn, P.A. (2014) Guillain-Barré Syndrome: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Treatment and Prognosis. Nature Reviews Neurology, 10, 469-482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[43] Halstead, S.K., Kalna, G., Islam, M.B., Jahan, I., Mohammad, Q.D., Jacobs, B.C., et al. (2016) Microarray Screening of Guillain-Barré Syndrome Sera for Antibodies to Glycolipid Complexes. Neurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, 3, e284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[44] Rinaldi, S., Brennan, K.M., Kalna, G., Walgaard, C., van Doorn, P., Jacobs, B.C., et al. (2013) Antibodies to Heteromeric Glycolipid Complexes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome. PLOS ONE, 8, e82337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[45] Thomma, R.C.M., Halstead, S.K., de Koning, L.C., Wiegers, E.J.A., Gourlay, D.S., Tio-Gillen, A.P., et al. (2025) Large-scale Profiling of Antibody Reactivity to Glycolipids in Patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Brain, 148, 4000-4015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[46] Koski, C.L., Sanders, M.E., Swoveland, P.T., Lawley, T.J., Shin, M.L., Frank, M.M., et al. (1987) Activation of Terminal Components of Complement in Patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome and Other Demyelinating Neuropathies. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 80, 1492-1497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[47] Hartung, H., Schwenke, C., Bitter-Suermann, D. and Toyka, K.V. (1987) Guillain‐Barré Syndrome: Activated Complement Components C3a and C5a in CSF. Neurology, 37, 1006-1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[48] Hafer‐Macko, C.E., Sheikh, K.A., Li, C.Y., Ho, T.W., Cornblath, D.R., McKhann, G.M., et al. (1996) Immune Attack on the Schwann Cell Surface in Acute Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy. Annals of Neurology, 39, 625-635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[49] Hafer‐Macko, C., Hsieh, S., Ho, T.W., Sheikh, K., Cornblath, D.R., Li, C.Y., et al. (1996) Acute Motor Axonal Neuropathy: An Antibody‐Mediated Attack on Axolemma. Annals of Neurology, 40, 635-644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[50] Ang, C., Laman, J., Willison, H., Wagner, E., Endtz, H., De Klerk, M., et al. (2002) Structure of Campylobacter Jejuni Lipopolysaccharides Determines Antiganglioside Specificity and Clinical Features of Guillain‐Barre, and Miller Fisher Patients. Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System, 7, 206-206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[51] O’Hanlon, G.M., Plomp, J.J., Chakrabarti, M., Morrison, I., Wagner, E.R., Goodyear, C.S. et al. (2001) Anti-GQ1b Ganglioside Antibodies Mediate Complement-Dependent Destruction of the Motor Nerve Terminal. Brain, 124, 893-906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[52] Jacobs, B.C., O’Hanlon, G.M., Bullens, R.W., Veitch, J., Plomp, J.J. and Willison, H.J. (2003) Immunoglobulins Inhibit Pathophysiological Effects of Anti-Gq1b-Positive Sera at Motor Nerve Terminals through Inhibition of Antibody Binding. Brain, 126, 2220-2234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[53] Halstead, S.K., Humphreys, P.D., Zitman, F.M.P., Hamer, J., Plomp, J.J. and Willison, H.J. (2008) C5 Inhibitor Rev576 Protects against Neural Injury in an in Vitro mouse Model of Miller Fisher Syndrome. Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System, 13, 228-235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[54] Mohammad, Q.D., Islam, Z., Papri, N., Hayat, S., Jahan, I., Azad, K.A.K., et al. (2025) Results from a Phase 1 Study Evaluating the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Efficacy of anx005, a C1q Inhibitor, in Patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System, 30, e70009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[55] Kuwabara, S., Kusunoki, S., Kuwahara, M., Yamano, Y., Nishida, Y., Ishida, H., et al. (2024) Efficacy and Safety of Eculizumab in Guillain‐Barré Syndrome: A Phase 3, Multicenter, Double‐blind, Randomized, Placebo‐controlled Clinical Trial. Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System, 29, 339-349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[56] Dalakas, M.C. and Engel, W.K. (1980) Immunoglobulin and Complement Deposits in Nerves of Patients with Chronic Relapsing Polyneuropathy. Archives of Neurology, 37, 637-640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[57] Koike, H., Ikeda, S., Fukami, Y., Nishi, R., Kawagashira, Y., Iijima, M., et al. (2020) Complement Deposition and Macrophage-Induced Demyelination in CIDP with Anti-LM1 Antibodies. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 408, Article 116509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[58] Quast, I., Keller, C.W., Hiepe, F., Tackenberg, B. and Lünemann, J.D. (2016) Terminal Complement Activation Is Increased and Associated with Disease Severity in CIDP. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology, 3, 730-735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[59] Rumsey, J.W., Lorance, C., Jackson, M., Sasserath, T., McAleer, C.W., Long, C.J., et al. (2022) Classical Complement Pathway Inhibition in a “Human‐on‐a‐Chip” Model of Autoimmune Demyelinating Neuropathies. Advanced Therapeutics, 5, Article 2200030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[60] Uncini, A. and Vallat, J. (2017) Autoimmune Nodo-Paranodopathies of Peripheral Nerve: The Concept Is Gaining Ground. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 89, 627-635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[61] Schilke, E.D., Cereda, D., Fusco, M.L., Stanzani, L., Marzorati, L., Ripolone, M., et al. (2025) Eculizumab as a Disease‐modifying Therapy in Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP): A Case Report. Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System, 30, e70010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[62] Querol, L., Lewis, R.A., Hartung, H., van Doorn, P.A., Wallstroem, E., Auwarter, K., et al. (2025) Phase 2 Efficacy and Safety of Riliprubart, a C1s-Complement Inhibitor, in Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (S16.009). Neurology, 104, Article No. 2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef