ArticleClinical rheumatology2021
Real world utilization of the myositis autoantibody panel.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective analysis of myositis-specific antibody-positive veteran survival between 2011 and 2023.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Rhabdomyolysis-associated acute kidney injury in a teenager: Answers.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2023Article
- Statin-induced autoimmune myositis: a proposal of an "experience-based" diagnostic algorithm from the analysis of 69 patients.Internal and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Myositis-Specific and Myositis-Associated Antibodies in Fibromyalgia Patients: A Prospective Study.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- A New Method for the Assessment of Myalgia in Interstitial Lung Disease: Association with Positivity for Myositis-Specific and Myositis-Associated Antibodies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMyositis autoantibody panel results can offer diagnostic and prognostic information in patients with concern for idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM). However, there has been widespread utilization of myositis autoantibody testing clinically, often in situations where concern for an IIM is unclear. We sought to determine ordering practices and factors predicting positive results on ordered myositis antibody panels.
methodsWe included all patients in the Duke University Health System who had a "myositis antibody panel" ordered from October 2014 through December 2016. Retrospective chart review was performed evaluating antibody positivity, provider specialty, ordering location, demographics, medical history, review of systems (ROS), physical examination (PE), and laboratory values. Fisher's exact and t test tests and backward multivariable regression analysis were performed for statistical analysis.
resultsThere were 642 unique tests obtained with 114 positive autoantibodies (17.7%) over the 26-month period. Myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSAs) were the most common and anti-Mi-2 was the most frequent (40% of MSAs). Pulmonology providers ordered the majority of tests (383; 59.6%). Adult Rheumatology had the highest antibody positivity rate (34.3%, p=0.0001) among specialties with at least 10 panels ordered. In backward multivariable regression analysis, factors independently associated with a positive myositis antibody panel were chronic corticosteroid use (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.30-3.38) and sclerodermoid skin changes (OR: 6.89; 95% CI: 2.02-23.47).
conclusionThe positivity rate of myositis antibody panel testing in this real-world clinical setting was 18%. Anti-Mi-2 antibody was the most frequent autoantibody present. Specific factors associated with positive results can be utilized to identify patients at higher risk for IIM. KEY POINTS: • Only eighteen percent of all myositis antibody panel tests ordered returned positive. • Anti-Mi-2 antibody was the most frequent autoantibody in our cohort. • Specific factors associated with positive results can help identify patients at higher risk for IIM, particularly for non-rheumatologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.