OBJECTIVE: To use juvenile dermatomyositis (DM) survey data and expert opinion to develop a small number of consensus treatment protocols, which reflect current initial treatment of moderately severe juvenile DM. METHODS: A consensus meeting was held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada on December 1-2, 2007. Nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on treatment protocols, which represented typical management of moderately severe juvenile DM. Consensus was also reached as to which patients these protocols would be applicable (inclusion and exclusion criteria), which initial investigations should be done prior to initiating one of these protocols, which data should be collected to evaluate these protocols, and the concomitant interventions required or recommended. RESULTS: Three protocols that described the first 2 months of treatment were developed. All protocols included corticosteroids and methotrexate. One protocol also included intravenous gamma globulin. Consensus was achieved for all issues that were addressed by conference participants, although there were some areas of controversy. CONCLUSION: Despite considerable variation in clinical practice, it is possible to achieve consensus on the initial treatment of juvenile DM. Once these protocols are extended beyond 2 months, these protocols will be available for clinical use. By using methods that account for differences between patients (confounding by indication), the comparative effectiveness of the protocols will be evaluated. In the future, the goal will be to identify the optimal treatment of moderately severe juvenile DM.
OBJECTIVE: To use juvenile dermatomyositis (DM) survey data and expert opinion to develop a small number of consensus treatment protocols, which reflect current initial treatment of moderately severe juvenile DM. METHODS: A consensus meeting was held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada on December 1-2, 2007. Nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on treatment protocols, which represented typical management of moderately severe juvenile DM. Consensus was also reached as to which patients these protocols would be applicable (inclusion and exclusion criteria), which initial investigations should be done prior to initiating one of these protocols, which data should be collected to evaluate these protocols, and the concomitant interventions required or recommended. RESULTS: Three protocols that described the first 2 months of treatment were developed. All protocols included corticosteroids and methotrexate. One protocol also included intravenous gamma globulin. Consensus was achieved for all issues that were addressed by conference participants, although there were some areas of controversy. CONCLUSION: Despite considerable variation in clinical practice, it is possible to achieve consensus on the initial treatment of juvenile DM. Once these protocols are extended beyond 2 months, these protocols will be available for clinical use. By using methods that account for differences between patients (confounding by indication), the comparative effectiveness of the protocols will be evaluated. In the future, the goal will be to identify the optimal treatment of moderately severe juvenile DM.
Authors: Elizabeth Stringer; John Bohnsack; Suzanne L Bowyer; Thomas A Griffin; Adam M Huber; Bianca Lang; Carol B Lindsley; Sylvia Ota; Clarissa Pilkington; Ann M Reed; Rosie Scuccimarri; Brian M Feldman Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: A M Huber; B Lang; C M LeBlanc; N Birdi; R K Bolaria; P Malleson; I MacNeil; J A Momy; G Avery; B M Feldman Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2000-03
Authors: Eduardo P Mendez; Rebecca Lipton; Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman; Phil Roettcher; Susan Bowyer; Alan Dyer; Lauren M Pachman Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2003-06-15
Authors: F W Miller; L G Rider; Y L Chung; R Cooper; K Danko; V Farewell; I Lundberg; C Morrison; L Oakley; I Oakley; C Pilkington; J Vencovsky; K Vincent; D L Scott; D A Isenberg Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Lisa G Rider; Edward H Giannini; Michael Harris-Love; Galen Joe; David Isenberg; Clarissa Pilkington; Peter A Lachenbruch; Frederick W Miller Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Nicolino Ruperto; Angelo Ravelli; Kevin J Murray; Daniel J Lovell; Boel Andersson-Gare; Brian M Feldman; Stella Garay; Wietse Kuis; Claudia Machado; Lauren Pachman; Anne-Marie Prieur; Lisa G Rider; Earl Silverman; Elena Tsitsami; Pat Woo; Edward H Giannini; Alberto Martini Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2003-06-27 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Adam M Huber; Brian M Feldman; Robert M Rennebohm; Jeanne E Hicks; Carol B Lindsley; Maria D Perez; Lawrence S Zemel; Carol A Wallace; Susan H Ballinger; Murray H Passo; Ann M Reed; Ronald M Summers; Patience H White; Ildy M Katona; Frederick W Miller; Peter A Lachenbruch; Lisa G Rider Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2004-05
Authors: Adam M Huber; Angela B Robinson; Ann M Reed; Leslie Abramson; Sharon Bout-Tabaku; Ruy Carrasco; Megan Curran; Brian M Feldman; Harry Gewanter; Thomas Griffin; Kathleen Haines; Mark F Hoeltzel; Josephine Isgro; Philip Kahn; Bianca Lang; Patti Lawler; Bracha Shaham; Heinrike Schmeling; Rosie Scuccimarri; Michael Shishov; Elizabeth Stringer; Julie Wohrley; Norman T Ilowite; Carol Wallace Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Takayuki Kishi; William Warren-Hicks; Nastaran Bayat; Ira N Targoff; Adam M Huber; Michael M Ward; Lisa G Rider Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Sarah Ringold; Pamela F Weiss; Robert A Colbert; Esi Morgan DeWitt; Tzielan Lee; Karen Onel; Sampath Prahalad; Rayfel Schneider; Susan Shenoi; Richard K Vehe; Yukiko Kimura Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Neil Martin; Petra Krol; Sally Smith; Kevin Murray; Clarissa A Pilkington; Joyce E Davidson; Lucy R Wedderburn Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2010-09-07 Impact factor: 7.580