OBJECTIVE: To identify biomarkers for assessing myositis-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD). METHODS: We reviewed consecutive patients from our institution who had been newly diagnosed with PM, DM, or clinically amyopathic DM during the years 2002-2017. The patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of ILD, and the ILD group was further subdivided into three groups according to the clinical courses of induction failure, relapse and non-relapse. Baseline and time-course changes in the parameters were compared between groups. RESULTS: Among 110 patients enrolled, 75 (68%) had ILD. Baseline serum Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) was significantly higher in the ILD group than in the non-ILD group (1120 vs 236 U/ml; P < 0.001). In the ILD group consisting of the induction failure cases (n = 3), the relapse group (n = 24) and the non-relapse group (n = 48), baseline serum KL-6 was significantly different between the three groups [1971 vs 1870 vs 935 U/ml, respectively; P = 0.003 (relapse group vs non-relapse group)]. The time-course changes in serum KL-6 revealed that KL-6 significantly increased along with relapse, with the increase of 625 U/ml relevant to relapse. CONCLUSION: Serum KL-6 is a useful biomarker for assessing the disease activity of myositis-associated ILD.
OBJECTIVE: To identify biomarkers for assessing myositis-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD). METHODS: We reviewed consecutive patients from our institution who had been newly diagnosed with PM, DM, or clinically amyopathic DM during the years 2002-2017. The patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of ILD, and the ILD group was further subdivided into three groups according to the clinical courses of induction failure, relapse and non-relapse. Baseline and time-course changes in the parameters were compared between groups. RESULTS: Among 110 patients enrolled, 75 (68%) had ILD. Baseline serum Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) was significantly higher in the ILD group than in the non-ILD group (1120 vs 236 U/ml; P < 0.001). In the ILD group consisting of the induction failure cases (n = 3), the relapse group (n = 24) and the non-relapse group (n = 48), baseline serum KL-6 was significantly different between the three groups [1971 vs 1870 vs 935 U/ml, respectively; P = 0.003 (relapse group vs non-relapse group)]. The time-course changes in serum KL-6 revealed that KL-6 significantly increased along with relapse, with the increase of 625 U/ml relevant to relapse. CONCLUSION: Serum KL-6 is a useful biomarker for assessing the disease activity of myositis-associated ILD.