Drugs in induction and treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

Myotoxicity Induced by Antiepileptic Drugs: Could be a Rare but Serious Adverse Event?

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are used in various pathologies such as including epilepsy, migraine, neuropathic pain, etc. They can improve symptoms but cause adverse events (ADRs). Case reports have reported that one rare but serious AED-induced adverse reaction that has appeared in case reports is myotoxicity from rhabdomyolysis. Rhabdomyolysis can be induced by a therapeutically dosed occur with therapeutic doses of antiepileptic drugs and is in most cases reversible, although rarely it can cause serious complications. Clinical manifestations of rhabdomyolysis range from a single isolated asymptomatic rise in serum CK levels to severe electrolyte imbalances, cardiac arrhythmia, acute and disseminated renal failure, intravascular coagulation, and other symptoms. Many clinical cases reported that both conventional older and newer AEDs, as well as propofol, can cause rhabdomyolysis, even if there are no conclusive data. It has recently been shown that genetic factors certainly contribute to adverse reactions of antiepileptic drugs. A study of genetic polymorphism in patients with AED-induced rhabdomyolysis may be useful to explain the rarity of this adverse event and to improve the treatment of these AED patients, in terms of AED type and dose adjustment.

LIM and cysteine-rich domains 1 (LMCD1) regulates skeletal muscle hypertrophy, calcium handling, and force

BACKGROUND

Skeletal muscle mass and strength are crucial determinants of health. Muscle mass loss is associated with weakness, fatigue, and insulin resistance. In fact, it is predicted that controlling muscle atrophy can reduce morbidity and mortality associated with diseases such as cancer cachexia and sarcopenia.

METHODS

We analyzed gene expression data from muscle of mice or human patients with diverse muscle pathologies and identified LMCD1 as a gene strongly associated with skeletal muscle function. We transiently expressed or silenced LMCD1 in mouse gastrocnemius muscle or in mouse primary muscle cells and determined muscle/cell size, targeted gene expression, kinase activity with kinase arrays, protein immunoblotting, and protein synthesis levels. To evaluate force, calcium handling, and fatigue, we transduced the flexor digitorum brevis muscle with a LMCD1-expressing adenovirus and measured specific force and sarcoplasmic reticulum Ca²⁺ release in individual fibers. Finally, to explore the relationship between LMCD1 and calcineurin, we ectopically expressed Lmcd1 in the gastrocnemius muscle and treated those mice with cyclosporine A (calcineurin inhibitor). In addition, we used a luciferase reporter construct containing the myoregulin gene promoter to confirm the role of a LMCD1-calcineurin-myoregulin axis in skeletal muscle mass control and calcium handling.

RESULTS

Here, we identify LIM and cysteine-rich domains 1 (LMCD1) as a positive regulator of muscle mass, that increases muscle protein synthesis and fiber size. LMCD1 expression in vivo was sufficient to increase specific force with lower requirement for calcium handling and to reduce muscle fatigue. Conversely, silencing LMCD1 expression impairs calcium handling and force, and induces muscle fatigue without overt atrophy. The actions of LMCD1 were dependent on calcineurin, as its inhibition using cyclosporine A reverted the observed hypertrophic phenotype. Finally, we determined that LMCD1 represses the expression of myoregulin, a known negative regulator of muscle performance. Interestingly, we observed that skeletal muscle LMCD1 expression is reduced in patients with skeletal muscle disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our gain- and loss-of-function studies show that LMCD1 controls protein synthesis, muscle fiber size, specific force, Ca²⁺ handling, and fatigue resistance. This work uncovers a novel role for LMCD1 in the regulation of skeletal muscle mass and function with potential therapeutic implications.

Current Treatment for Myositis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review was to give an update on treatment modalities for patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, or shortly myositis, excluding the subgroup inclusion body myositis, based on a literature survey on therapies used in myositis. Few controlled trials have been performed in patients with myositis; therefore, we also included a summary of open-label trials, case series, and case reports.

RECENT FINDINGS

Glucocorticoid (GC) in high doses is still the first-line treatment of patients with myositis. There is a general recommendation to combine GCs with another immunosuppressive agent in the early phase of disease to better control disease activity and possibly to reduce the risk for GC-related side effects. Furthermore, combining pharmacological treatment with individualized and supervised exercise can be recommended based on evidence. There is some evidence for the effect of rituximab in patients with certain myositis-specific autoantibodies, whereas other biologic agents are currently being tested in clinical trials.

SUMMARY

Immunosuppressive treatment in combination with exercise is recommended for patients with myositis to reduce disease activity and improve muscle performance. Subgrouping of patients into clinical and serological subtypes may be a way to identify biomarkers for response to specific immunosuppressive and biological agents and should be considered in future trials.

Elevated risk of venous thromboembolic events in patients with inflammatory myopathies

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a multifactorial disease manifesting as either deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Its prevalence makes VTE a significant issue for both the individual – as a negative factor influencing the quality of life and prognosis – and the society due to economic burden. VTE is the third most common vascular disorder in Western countries, after myocardial infarction and stroke, making it a major cause of in-hospital mortality, responsible for 5%–10% of hospital deaths. Despite many studies conducted, only 50%–60% provoking factors have been identified, while the remaining 40%–50% have been classified as idiopathic or unprovoked. Chronic inflammatory disorders, with their underlying prothrombotic state, reveal an increased risk of VTE (six to eight times) compared with the general population. Among the inflammatory disorders, we can identify inflammatory myopathies – a group of rare, chronic diseases featuring weakness and inflammation of muscles with periods of exacerbation and remission; their main classes are polymyositis and dermatomyositis. The objective of this review is to emphasize the need of VTE prophylaxis in individuals with inflammatory myopathies in order to reduce morbidity and mortality rates among those patients and improve their quality of life and prognosis.

Current pharmacological treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

The idiopathic inflammatory myopathies are uncommon and heterogeneous disorders. Their classification is based on distinct clinicopathologic features. Although idiopathic inflammatory myopathies share some similarities, different subtypes may have variable responses to therapy, so it is very important to distinguish the correct subtype. There are few randomised, double blind placebo controlled studies to support the current treatment. High dose corticosteroids continue to be the first-line therapy and other immunosupressive drugs are used in refractory cases, as well as steroid-sparing agents. Some novel therapeutic approaches have emerged as potential treatment including tacrolimus, intravenous immunoglobulin and rituximab, following good outcomes reported in case studies. However, more randomised controlled trials are needed. This review considers the current and the potential future therapies for inflammatory myopathies.