Inflammatory myopathies

From data to diagnosis: how machine learning is revolutionizing biomarker discovery in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) are a heterogeneous group of muscle disorders including adult and juvenile dermatomyositis, polymyositis, immune-mediated necrotising myopathy and sporadic inclusion body myositis, all of which present with variable symptoms and disease progression. The identification of effective biomarkers for IIMs has been challenging due to the heterogeneity between IIMs and within IIM subgroups, but recent advances in machine learning (ML) techniques have shown promises in identifying novel biomarkers. This paper reviews recent studies on potential biomarkers for IIM and evaluates their clinical utility. We also explore how data analytic tools and ML algorithms have been used to identify biomarkers, highlighting their potential to advance our understanding and diagnosis of IIM and improve patient outcomes. Overall, ML techniques have great potential to revolutionize biomarker discovery in IIMs and lead to more effective diagnosis and treatment.

Profile of specific and associated autoantibodies in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies in a Colombian population

Objectives

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) are chronic, autoimmune diseases with several forms of presentation. Diagnosis is mostly clinical in our region. Our aim was to evaluate the autoantibody profile of patients with IIMs.

Methods

This study is a cross-sectional study with a prospective recollection of data, conducted between 2019–2021, in a single center in Cali, Colombia. Patients with a clinical diagnosis or suspicion of IIM were included. The presence of myositis-specific/associated antibodies was evaluated by immunoblotting in serum samples. Phenotypic characterization was performed.

Results

A total of 36 patients were included. The mean age was 50.6 (16.7) years, and 20 (55.6%) were female. Eighteen (50%) patients were seropositive, of which 11 (30.5%) presented one positive antibody, with anti-TIF1ɣbeing the most frequent (n = 4, 11.1%), followed by anti-Ro52 (n = 2, 5.6%). Seven patients (19.4%) showed >1 positive antibody. Dermatomyositis was the most frequent type of IIM in seropositive patients (n = 8, 44.4%), followed by anti-synthetase syndrome (n = 4, 22.2%). Weakness was symmetric and presented in the upper and lower extremities in 11 (61.1%) patients each. Both respiratory insufficiency and weight loss were seen in 7 (38.9%) patients, Gottron papules in six (33.3%) patients, and heliotrope rash, esophageal dysmotility, and myalgia in 5 (27.8%) patients. Pulmonary interstitial disease was seen in 4 (22.2%, with antibodies for anti-Ro52, anti-MDA5 + anti-Jo1 + anti-TIF1ɣ, anti-MDA5 + anti-SAE1 + anti-NXP2, and anti-cN1A + anti-Ro52) patients, and malignancy was seen in 2 (11.1%) patients (1 with anti-Mi2β and 1 with anti-TIF1ɣ + anti-Mi2α). In all, 7 (19.4%) patients required intensive care (2 seropositive, 1 with anti-PL7, 1 with anti-MDA5 + anti-Jo1 + anti-TIF1ɣ), and 1 (2.8%) (seronegative) patient died.

Conclusion

This study is the first study in the Southwest of Colombia that evaluates myositis-specific/associated antibodies in IIM. Half of the patients were seropositive. Anti-TIF1ɣwas the most frequent MSA and anti-Ro52 was the most frequent MAA. Several patients presented antibody combinations. Further studies are needed to fully associate phenotypes with antibodies.

New Myositis Classification Criteria-What We Have Learned Since Bohan and Peter

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) classification criteria have been a subject of debate for many decades. Despite several limitations, the Bohan and Peter criteria are still widely used. The aim of this review is to discuss the evolution of IIM classification criteria.

RECENT FINDINGS

New IIM classification criteria are periodically proposed. The discovery of myositis-specific and myositis-associated autoantibodies led to the development of clinico-serological criteria, while in-depth description of IIM morphological features improved histopathology-based criteria. The long-awaited European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) IIM classification criteria were recently published. The Bohan and Peter criteria are outdated and validated classification criteria are necessary to improve research in IIM. The new EULAR/ACR IIM classification criteria are thus a definite improvement and an important step forward in the field.

Selected aspects of the current management of myositis

The idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a rare and heterogeneous group of acquired autoimmune muscle disorders, often referred to as 'myositis'. Clinical assessment, together with muscle biopsy findings and autoantibody status are key factors to consider when making a diagnosis of IIM, and in stratification of the 'IIM spectrum' into disease subgroups. Treatment stratified according to serotype (and in the future, likely also genotype) is increasingly being used to take account of the heterogeneity within the IIM spectrum. Subgroup classification is also important in terms of monitoring for complications, such as malignancy and interstitial lung disease. Disease monitoring should include the use of standardized tools such as the IMACS disease activity outcome measures. Other tools such as muscle MRI can be useful in identifying areas of active muscle inflammation. Treatment outcomes in IIM remain unsatisfactory. The evidence base to guide treatment decisions is remarkably limited. In addition to muscle inflammation, a number of noninflammatory cell-mediated mechanisms may contribute to weakness and disability, and for which no specific treatments are currently available.

Diagnosis and classification of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

The idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) are a heterogeneous group of diseases, collectively termed myositis, sharing symptoms of muscle weakness, fatigue and inflammation. Other organs are frequently involved, supporting the notion that these are systemic inflammatory diseases. The IIMs can be subgrouped into dermatomyositis, polymyositis and inclusion body myositis. The myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSAs) identify other and often more distinct clinical phenotypes, such as the antisynthetase syndrome with antisynthetase autoantibodies and frequent interstitial lung disease and anti-SRP and anti-HMGCR autoantibodies that identify necrotizing myopathy. The MSAs are important both to support myositis diagnosis and to identify subgroups with different patterns of extramuscular organ involvement such as interstitial lung disease. Another cornerstone in the diagnostic procedure is muscle biopsy to identify inflammation and to exclude noninflammatory myopathies. Treatment effect and prognosis vary by subgroup. To develop new and better therapies, validated classification criteria that identify distinct subgroups of myositis are critical. The lack of such criteria was the main rationale for the development of new classification criteria for IIMs, which are summarized in this review; the historical background regarding previous diagnostic and classification criteria is also reviewed. As the IIMs are rare diseases with a prevalence of 10 in 100 000 individuals, an international collaboration was essential, as was the interdisciplinary effort including experts in adult and paediatric rheumatology, neurology, dermatology and epidemiology. The new criteria have been developed based on data from more than 1500 patients from 47 centres worldwide and are based on clinically easily available variables.

Classification, diagnosis, and management of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

The detection and characterization of a large array of autoantibodies, including at least 8 different antisynthetase, anti-SRP, -200/100 (HMGCR), -Mi-2, -CADM-140 (MDA5), -SAE, -p155, -MJ (NXP-2), and -PMS1, frequently associated with distinct and well-defined clinicopathological features, allowed for significant improvement in the definition and diagnosis of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). Classification remains difficult, with lingering divergence between the different specialties involved in IIM care, but several categories clearly stand out, including dermatomyositis (DM), overlap myositis (OM), polymyositis, necrotizing myositis, and sporadic inclusion body myositis (s-IBM). Biopsy and histological analysis remain crucial, particularly in the absence of autoantibodies, to accurately specify the diagnosis and rule out mimics such as muscular dystrophies and metabolic myopathies. Numerous infectious agents (in particular human immunodeficiency virus and human T cell lymphotrophic virus-1) and drugs (statins, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, and proton pump inhibitors) can cause mimic IIM that must also be excluded. Pharmacological treatment, in addition to glucocorticoids and immunoglobulins, now includes mycophenolate mofetil and rituximab, which proved helpful in resistant cases, particularly rituximab in DM and OM. Exercise, initially seen as potentially deleterious, recently was shown to be efficacious and safe. IIM can thus be reasonably well controlled in most cases, although aggressive disease remains refractory to treatment, including some cases of necrotizing myopathy. Sporadic IBM still seems resistant to all medications tested to date.

Classification criteria in rheumatic diseases: a review of methodologic properties

OBJECTIVE

To identify classification criteria for the rheumatic diseases and to evaluate their measurement properties and methodologic rigor using current measurement standards.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of published literature and evaluated criteria sets for stated purpose, derivation and validation sample characteristics, methods of criteria generation and reduction, and consideration of validity, and reliability.

RESULTS

We identified 47 classification criteria sets encompassing 13 conditions. Approximately 50% of the criteria sets were developed based on expert opinion rather than patient data. Of the 47 criteria sets, control samples were derived from patients with rheumatic disease in 15 (32%) sets, from patients with nonrheumatic diseases in 4 (9%) sets, and from healthy participants in 2 (4%) sets. Where patient data were used, the number of cases ranged from 20-588 and the number of controls from 50-787. In only 1 (2%) criteria set was there a distinct separation between investigators who derived the criteria set and clinicians who provided cases and controls. Authors commented on the need for individual criterion to be reliable in 5 (11%) sets, precise in 5 (11%) sets; authors noted the importance of content validity in 12 (26%) sets, and construct validity in 12 (26%) sets.

CONCLUSION

The variation in methodologic rigor used in sample selection affects the validity and reliability of the criteria sets in different clinical and research settings. Despite potential deficiencies in the methods used for some criteria development, the sensitivity and specificity of many criteria sets is moderate to strong.