Journal of the neurological sciences · 2024
Myositis -specific and -associated antibodies in neurological disorders - A retrospective study of 727 patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kleiser Benedict, Hoffmann David, Kowarik Markus C, Dubois Evelyn, Armbruster Marcel, Grimm Alexander, Marquetand Justus
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Myositis-specific antibodies (MSAs) and myositis-associated antibodies (MAAs) are assessed in clinical neurology, serving as a non-invasive tool for the differential diagnosis of autoimmune myopathies. However, the presence of MSAs and MAAs in neurological disorders remains uncertain.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted on 878 serum samples from the neurological laboratory of the University Hospital Tübingen, Germany. The EUROLINE Myositis Profil 3 (IgG) Line Blot was used for antibody evaluation (anti-Mi2, -Ku, -PM-Scl100, -PM-Scl75, -Jo1, -SRP, -PL7, -PL12, -EJ, -OJ, and -Ro52). Samples were categorized into 19 disease groups, with consideration for myositis-linked and non-myositis-linked diseases. Then, the distribution of positive findings and the concurrent presence of more than one MAA/MSA were analyzed.
RESULTS: Among 727 included line blots, 84 could be assigned to myositis-linked diseases (thereof 44 positive for MAA/MSA). MAA and MSA taken together were more frequently positive for the main group of myositis-linked disease (52.4 %) compared to the non-myositis-linked group (14.6 %, overall specificity 85.4 %). However, individual antibodies were specific, ranging above 97.5 %. False positive antibody results can also occur in neurological differential diagnoses such as muscle dystrophy or cramp fasciculation syndrome. Furthermore, the concurrent presence of more than one MAA/MSA does not show a significant association with the presence of a myositis-linked disease for antibody-positive samples (p = 0.136).
DISCUSSION: Testing MSA and MAA simultaneously may not be suitable as a primary screening method for myositis-linked diseases in clinical neurological groups. However, MSAs and MAAs may offer valuable diagnostic support, particularly in cases where myositis is strongly considered.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted on 878 serum samples from the neurological laboratory of the University Hospital Tübingen, Germany. The EUROLINE Myositis Profil 3 (IgG) Line Blot was used for antibody evaluation (anti-Mi2, -Ku, -PM-Scl100, -PM-Scl75, -Jo1, -SRP, -PL7, -PL12, -EJ, -OJ, and -Ro52). Samples were categorized into 19 disease groups, with consideration for myositis-linked and non-myositis-linked diseases. Then, the distribution of positive findings and the concurrent presence of more than one MAA/MSA were analyzed.
RESULTS: Among 727 included line blots, 84 could be assigned to myositis-linked diseases (thereof 44 positive for MAA/MSA). MAA and MSA taken together were more frequently positive for the main group of myositis-linked disease (52.4 %) compared to the non-myositis-linked group (14.6 %, overall specificity 85.4 %). However, individual antibodies were specific, ranging above 97.5 %. False positive antibody results can also occur in neurological differential diagnoses such as muscle dystrophy or cramp fasciculation syndrome. Furthermore, the concurrent presence of more than one MAA/MSA does not show a significant association with the presence of a myositis-linked disease for antibody-positive samples (p = 0.136).
DISCUSSION: Testing MSA and MAA simultaneously may not be suitable as a primary screening method for myositis-linked diseases in clinical neurological groups. However, MSAs and MAAs may offer valuable diagnostic support, particularly in cases where myositis is strongly considered.