The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Correlation of muscle biopsy, clinical course, and outcome in PM and sporadic IBM
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To correlate muscle biopsy findings with prebiopsy and postbiopsy clinical course and response to therapy in polymyositis (PM) and sporadic inclusion body myositis (IBM). BACKGROUND: Existence of pure PM has recently been questioned; subsequently, the definition and criteria for diagnosing PM were debated. METHODS: Patient records, follow-up information, and muscle biopsies were analyzed in 107 patients whose biopsies were initially read as PM and IBM. RESULTS: The patients fell into three groups by combined biopsy and clinical criteria: PM, 27 patients; IBM, 64 patients; PM/IBM, 16 patients with biopsy diagnosis of PM but clinical features of IBM. For the three groups, the respective mean periods from disease onset to end of follow-up were 5.9, 8.5, and 9.6 years. Another autoimmune disease was present in 4 of 27 PM, 8 of 64 IBM, and 1 of 16 PM/IBM cases. An autoimmune serologic marker occurred in one-third of each group. Nineteen PM patients had no associated autoimmune disease or marker. Nonnecrotic fiber invasion by mononuclear cells appeared in all IBM, 17 of 27 PM, and 13 of 16 PM/IBM patients. The density of both invaded fibers and cytochrome-c oxidase-negative fibers was higher in IBM and PM/IBM than in PM. Immunotherapy improved 22 of 27 PM patients but had only transient beneficial effects in 2 of 32 IBM and 1 of 14 PM/IBM patients. CONCLUSIONS: 1) Sixteen of 43 patients (37%) with biopsy features of polymyositis (PM) had clinical features of inclusion body myositis (IBM). 2) Absence of canonical biopsy features of IBM from clinically affected muscles of IBM patients challenges biopsy criteria for IBM, or the IBM markers appear late in some patients, or their distribution in muscle is patchy and restricted compared with that of the inflammatory exudate. 3) The muscle biopsy is a reliable instrument in the diagnosis of PM and IBM in close to 85% of the patients. Errors of diagnosis in the remaining 15% can be avoided or reduced by combined evaluation of the clinical and pathologic findings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network
Greenberg, S. A. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2680 · Cited by 499
Mendell, J. R., Rodino‐Klapac, L. R., Rosales, X. Q., Coley, B. D., Galloway, G., Lewis, S., Malik, V., Shilling, C., Byrne, B. J., Conlon, T., et al. (2010) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.22251 · Cited by 248
Kamiya, M., Kimura, N., Umezawa, N., Hasegawa, H., & Yasuda, S. (2023) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2023.1191815 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Chahin, N., & Engel, A. G.
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2008-02-05
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 418-424
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2028224653
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.