Muscular dystrophies and neurologic diseases that present as myopathy

Challenges and Advances in Molecular Diagnosis of Myopathies and Dystrophies in Perspective of Their Use in Developing Countries: Past, Present, and Future

Background

Proper diagnosis is the first and most critical step for effective identification and treatment of myopathy and dystrophy disorders. Although various histochemical and biochemical studies have paved the way for efficient testing of these disorders, they are insufficient for accurate diagnosis. To overcome this, the diagnostic procedure has now shifted more toward the "genetic first approach," with the remarkable role played by various genetic and molecular techniques.

Objective

In developing countries, successful diagnosis of such disorders is affected by the shortage of hospitals, poor lab setup, limited diagnostic methods, and unavailability of technical expertise. As a major population living in developing countries faces such inadequate healthcare facilities, there has always been a need for identifying effective diagnostic techniques that could identify genetic alterations more prone in such regions.

Materials and Methods

This article reviews studies done in the last few years that primarily use nonsequencing-based molecular diagnosis methods to identify myopathy- and dystrophy-specific gene alterations and thus could equally hold potential for screening key genetic alterations reported in certain regions in developing countries. Further, this review deals with new emerging sequencing and next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based approach and their potential in providing an adequate diagnosis.

Conclusions

This study promotes nonsequencing-based molecular methods to be an effective method for early-stage diagnosis and management of myopathies and dystrophies in developing countries and suggests the high importance of emerging NGS methods in proper diagnosis and identifying new players in neuromuscular disorders.

Clinical and laboratory features distinguishing juvenile polymyositis and muscular dystrophy

OBJECTIVE

To differentiate juvenile polymyositis (PM) and muscular dystrophy, both of which may present with chronic muscle weakness and inflammation.

METHODS

We studied 39 patients with probable or definite juvenile PM and 9 patients with muscular dystrophies who were initially misdiagnosed as having juvenile PM. Differences in demographic, clinical, and laboratory results; outcomes; and treatment responses were evaluated by Fisher's exact and rank sum tests. Random forests classification analysis and logistic regression were performed to examine significant differences in multivariable models.

RESULTS

Clinical features and serum muscle enzyme levels were similar between juvenile PM and dystrophy patients, except 89% of dystrophy patients had muscle atrophy compared with 46% of juvenile PM patients. Dystrophy patients had a longer delay to diagnosis (median 12 versus 4 months) and were less frequently hospitalized than juvenile PM patients (22% versus 74%). No dystrophy patients, but 54% of juvenile PM patients, had a myositis autoantibody. Dystrophy patients more frequently had myopathic features on muscle biopsy, including diffuse variation of myofiber size, fiber hypertrophy, and myofiber fibrosis (44-100% versus 8-53%). Juvenile PM patients more frequently had complex repetitive discharges on electromyography and a complete response to treatment with prednisone or other immunosuppressive agents than dystrophy patients (44% versus 0%). Random forests analysis revealed that the most important features in distinguishing juvenile PM from dystrophies were myositis autoantibodies, clinical muscle atrophy, and myofiber size variation on biopsy. Logistic regression confirmed muscle atrophy, myofiber fibrosis, and hospitalization as significant predictors.

CONCLUSION

Muscular dystrophy can present similarly to juvenile PM. Selected clinical and laboratory features are helpful in combination in distinguishing these conditions.