Clinical Correlations With Dermatomyositis-Specific Autoantibodies in Adult Japanese Patients With Dermatomyositis A Multicenter Cross-sectional Study
Clinical Correlations With Dermatomyositis-Specific Autoantibodies in Adult Japanese Patients With Dermatomyositis A Multicenter Cross-sectional Study
复制标题
DOI:
10.1001/archdermatol.2011.52
复制
发表时间:
2011-04-01
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Fujimoto, Manabu
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Hamaguchi, Yasuhito;Kuwana, Masataka;Fujimoto, Manabu
Objective: To clarify the association of clinical and prognostic features with dermatomyositis (DM)-specific autoantibodies (Abs) in adult Japanese patients with DM.Design: Retrospective study.Setting: Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science Department of Dermatology and collaborating medical centers.Patients: A total of 376 consecutive adult Japanese patients with DM who visited our hospital or collaborating medical centers between 2003 and 2008.Main Outcome Measures: Clinical and laboratory characteristics of adult Japanese patients with DM and DM-specific Abs that include Abs against Mi-2, 155/140, and CADM-140.Results: In patients with DM, anti-Mi-2, anti-155/140, and anti-CADM-140 were detected in 9 (2%), 25 (7%), and 43 (11%), respectively. These DM-specific Abs were mutually exclusive and were detected in none of 34 patients with polymyositis, 326 with systemic sclerosis, and 97 with systemic lupus erythematosus. Anti-Mi-2 was associated with classical DM without interstitial lung disease or malignancy, whereas anti-155/140 was associated with malignancy. Patients with anti-CADM-140 frequently had clinically amyopathic DM and rapidly progressive interstitial lung disease. Cumulative survival rates were more favorable in patients with anti-Mi-2 compared with those with anti-155/140 or anti-CADM-140 (P < .01 for both comparisons). Nearly all deaths occurred within 1 year after diagnosis in patients with anti-CADM-140.Conclusion: Dermatomyositis-specific Abs define clinically distinct subsets and are useful for predicting clinical outcomes in patients with DM. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147(4):391-398