Gulnara Mamyrova1, Takayuki Kishi2, Ira N Targoff3, Alison Ehrlich4, Rodolfo V Curiel1, Lisa G Rider1,2. 1. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC. 2. Environmental Autoimmunity Group, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. 3. Veteran's Affairs Medical Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, and Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, Oklahoma City, OK. 4. Department of Dermatology, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
Objective: We examined features of clinically amyopathic JDM (CAJDM), in which patients have characteristic rashes with little to no evidence of muscle involvement, to determine whether this is a distinct phenotype from JDM. Methods: Demographic, clinical, laboratory and treatment data from 12 (9 hypomyopathic, 3 amyopathic) patients meeting modified Sontheimer criteria for CAJDM and from 60 matched JDM patients meeting Bohan and Peter criteria were examined. Differences were evaluated by Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney tests, random forests and logistic regression analysis. Results: Nine (75%) CAJDM patients had anti-p155/140 (transcriptional intermediary factor 1), one (8.3%) anti-melanoma differentiation-associated gene 5 autoantibodies and two (16.7%) were myositis autoantibody negative. CAJDM patients were younger at diagnosis and frequently had mild disease at onset. CAJDM patients had less frequent myalgias, arthritis, contractures, calcinosis, dysphagia, abdominal pain and fatigue. The muscle, skeletal and overall clinical scores were lower in CAJDM. Serum muscle enzymes were less frequently increased in CAJDM, and peak values were lower. CAJDM patients received fewer medications compared with JDM patients. Only 50% of CAJDM patients received oral prednisone, but the maximum dose and treatment duration did not differ from JDM. At a median follow-up of 2.9 years, CAJDM patients had no documented functional disability, and none developed weakness, calcinosis, interstitial lung disease or lipodystrophy. Multivariable modelling revealed a lower skeletal score and less frequent myalgias as the most important factors in distinguishing CAJDM from JDM. Conclusion: CAJDM may be distinguished from JDM, in that they often have p155/140 (transcriptional intermediary factor 1) autoantibodies, have fewer systemic manifestations and receive less therapy.
Objective: We examined features of clinically amyopathic JDM (CAJDM), in which patients have characteristic rashes with little to no evidence of muscle involvement, to determine whether this is a distinct phenotype from JDM. Methods: Demographic, clinical, laboratory and treatment data from 12 (9 hypomyopathic, 3 amyopathic) patients meeting modified Sontheimer criteria for CAJDM and from 60 matched JDM patients meeting Bohan and Peter criteria were examined. Differences were evaluated by Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney tests, random forests and logistic regression analysis. Results: Nine (75%) CAJDM patients had anti-p155/140 (transcriptional intermediary factor 1), one (8.3%) anti-melanoma differentiation-associated gene 5 autoantibodies and two (16.7%) were myositis autoantibody negative. CAJDM patients were younger at diagnosis and frequently had mild disease at onset. CAJDM patients had less frequent myalgias, arthritis, contractures, calcinosis, dysphagia, abdominal pain and fatigue. The muscle, skeletal and overall clinical scores were lower in CAJDM. Serum muscle enzymes were less frequently increased in CAJDM, and peak values were lower. CAJDM patients received fewer medications compared with JDM patients. Only 50% of CAJDM patients received oral prednisone, but the maximum dose and treatment duration did not differ from JDM. At a median follow-up of 2.9 years, CAJDM patients had no documented functional disability, and none developed weakness, calcinosis, interstitial lung disease or lipodystrophy. Multivariable modelling revealed a lower skeletal score and less frequent myalgias as the most important factors in distinguishing CAJDM from JDM. Conclusion: CAJDM may be distinguished from JDM, in that they often have p155/140 (transcriptional intermediary factor 1) autoantibodies, have fewer systemic manifestations and receive less therapy.
Authors: Ira N Targoff; Gulnara Mamyrova; Edward P Trieu; Osvaldo Perurena; Bhanu Koneru; Terrance P O'Hanlon; Frederick W Miller; Lisa G Rider Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2006-11
Authors: Lisa G Rider; Mona Shah; Gulnara Mamyrova; Adam M Huber; Madeline Murguia Rice; Ira N Targoff; Frederick W Miller Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 1.817
Authors: Peng Huang; Li Tang; Lu Zhang; Yi Ren; Hong Peng; Yangyang Xiao; Jie Xu; Dingan Mao; Lingjuan Liu; Liqun Liu Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2022-05-30 Impact factor: 8.786
Authors: Gulnara Mamyrova; Takayuki Kishi; Min Shi; Ira N Targoff; Adam M Huber; Rodolfo V Curiel; Frederick W Miller; Lisa G Rider Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Judith Wienke; Claire T Deakin; Lucy R Wedderburn; Femke van Wijk; Annet van Royen-Kerkhof Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 7.561