ReviewBiomedicines2026
Immunopathogenesis of Immune-Mediated Necrotizing Myopathy: Insights Drawn from Pathological Phenotypes and Mechanistic Elaboration.
Review in Biomedicines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM) is a distinct subtype of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs), classified by serum autoantibody status into anti-signal recognition particle (anti-SRP)-positive, anti-3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (anti-HMGCR)-positive, and seronegative subgroups. Its hallmark is a pathological paradox: extensive myofiber necrosis and regeneration accompanied by strikingly sparse inflammatory infiltrates, a feature that distinguishes IMNM from dermatomyositis and inclusion body myositis. In this review, we integrate preclinical and clinical evidence to build an immune-mechanistic pathogenesis model grounded in pathological observations: anti-SRP and anti-HMGCR autoantibodies trigger myofiber injury via both complement-dependent and complement-independent pathways; necrotic myofibers release damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) that activate Toll-like receptor signaling, thereby establishing a complement-independent, self-perpetuating injury-amplification loop; T-cell-dominated adaptive-immune responses, characterized by Th1-M1 pathway activation alongside widespread T-cell exhaustion, may only function as a secondary modulator; and aberrant vascular remodeling coupled with impaired tissue regeneration contributes to long-term prognosis. Variations in macrophage polarization, angiogenic potential, and malignancy risk between anti-SRP-positive and anti-HMGCR-positive IMNM may constitute intrinsic drivers underlying their disparate histopathological features, clinical trajectories, and treatment responses. This model accounts for the limited therapeutic benefit observed with complement-blockade monotherapy and proposes that regimens combining autoantibody suppression with the inhibition of necrosis-driven injury amplification could yield improved clinical outcomes, providing a theoretical basis for pathological subtyping and stratified therapy in IMNM.
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.