Cargando…

External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria

OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria for idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM) and determine the optimal cut points for Australian patients. To determine the level of agreement with traditional cr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luu, Queenie, Day, Jessica, Hall, Alix, Limaye, Vidya, Major, Gabor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858041/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31777826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acr2.11061
_version_ 1783470873983844352
author Luu, Queenie
Day, Jessica
Hall, Alix
Limaye, Vidya
Major, Gabor
author_facet Luu, Queenie
Day, Jessica
Hall, Alix
Limaye, Vidya
Major, Gabor
author_sort Luu, Queenie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria for idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM) and determine the optimal cut points for Australian patients. To determine the level of agreement with traditional criteria and assess the effect of including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and an extended myositis antibody panel as well as extending histological criteria to include myofiber invasion. METHODS: Data were collected on adult patients referred for muscle biopsy to two Australian teaching hospitals. Patients were scored for “risk of IIM” according to EULAR/ACR criteria, using clinician diagnosis as the gold standard. RESULTS: Overall, 87 of 204 patients had IIM. For patients with muscle biopsy, the optimal cut point of 5.25 (sensitivity 90%, specificity 89%) was lower than the EULAR/ACR cut point of 6.7, which in our cohort showed reduced sensitivity (71% vs 93%) but comparable specificity (89% vs 88%). We found moderate agreement between the EULAR/ACR criteria and Bohan and Peter (κ = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.28, 0.62, P < 0.001) and Targoff (κ = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.23, 0.57, P < 0.001). Inclusion of MRI (area under curve [AUC] = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.79, 0.93) or non‐Jo1 antibodies (AUC = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.77, 0.91) as covariates improved the probability of IIM diagnosis (AUC = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.75, 0.86). Extending histologic criteria to include myofiber invasion slightly improved sensitivity (75% vs 71%) with the same level of specificity (89% vs 89%). CONCLUSION: Application of the EULAR/ACR criteria to an Australian cohort showed comparable specificity but lower sensitivity, and a lower optimal cut point. Inclusion of MRI or non‐Jo1 antibodies as covariates may improve the accuracy of determining the probability of IIM diagnoses. Extending the histologic criteria to include myofiber invasion did not reduce specificity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6858041
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68580412019-11-27 External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria Luu, Queenie Day, Jessica Hall, Alix Limaye, Vidya Major, Gabor ACR Open Rheumatol Original Article OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria for idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM) and determine the optimal cut points for Australian patients. To determine the level of agreement with traditional criteria and assess the effect of including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and an extended myositis antibody panel as well as extending histological criteria to include myofiber invasion. METHODS: Data were collected on adult patients referred for muscle biopsy to two Australian teaching hospitals. Patients were scored for “risk of IIM” according to EULAR/ACR criteria, using clinician diagnosis as the gold standard. RESULTS: Overall, 87 of 204 patients had IIM. For patients with muscle biopsy, the optimal cut point of 5.25 (sensitivity 90%, specificity 89%) was lower than the EULAR/ACR cut point of 6.7, which in our cohort showed reduced sensitivity (71% vs 93%) but comparable specificity (89% vs 88%). We found moderate agreement between the EULAR/ACR criteria and Bohan and Peter (κ = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.28, 0.62, P < 0.001) and Targoff (κ = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.23, 0.57, P < 0.001). Inclusion of MRI (area under curve [AUC] = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.79, 0.93) or non‐Jo1 antibodies (AUC = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.77, 0.91) as covariates improved the probability of IIM diagnosis (AUC = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.75, 0.86). Extending histologic criteria to include myofiber invasion slightly improved sensitivity (75% vs 71%) with the same level of specificity (89% vs 89%). CONCLUSION: Application of the EULAR/ACR criteria to an Australian cohort showed comparable specificity but lower sensitivity, and a lower optimal cut point. Inclusion of MRI or non‐Jo1 antibodies as covariates may improve the accuracy of determining the probability of IIM diagnoses. Extending the histologic criteria to include myofiber invasion did not reduce specificity. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6858041/ /pubmed/31777826 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acr2.11061 Text en © 2019 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American College of Rheumatology. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Article
Luu, Queenie
Day, Jessica
Hall, Alix
Limaye, Vidya
Major, Gabor
External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria
title External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria
title_full External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria
title_fullStr External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria
title_full_unstemmed External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria
title_short External Validation and Evaluation of Adding MRI or Extended Myositis Antibody Panel to the 2017 EULAR/ACR Myositis Classification Criteria
title_sort external validation and evaluation of adding mri or extended myositis antibody panel to the 2017 eular/acr myositis classification criteria
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858041/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31777826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acr2.11061
work_keys_str_mv AT luuqueenie externalvalidationandevaluationofaddingmriorextendedmyositisantibodypaneltothe2017eularacrmyositisclassificationcriteria
AT dayjessica externalvalidationandevaluationofaddingmriorextendedmyositisantibodypaneltothe2017eularacrmyositisclassificationcriteria
AT hallalix externalvalidationandevaluationofaddingmriorextendedmyositisantibodypaneltothe2017eularacrmyositisclassificationcriteria
AT limayevidya externalvalidationandevaluationofaddingmriorextendedmyositisantibodypaneltothe2017eularacrmyositisclassificationcriteria
AT majorgabor externalvalidationandevaluationofaddingmriorextendedmyositisantibodypaneltothe2017eularacrmyositisclassificationcriteria