Objective To develop and validate new classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and their major subgroups. Methods Candidate variables were assembled from published criteria and expert opinion using consensus methodology. Data were collected from 47 rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and pediatric clinics worldwide. Several statistical methods were utilized to derive the classification criteria. Results Based on data from 976 IIM patients (74% adults; 26% children) and 624 non-IIM patients with mimicking conditions (82% adults; 18% children) new criteria were derived. Each item is assigned a weighted score. The total score corresponds to a probability of having IIM. Sub-classification is performed using a classification tree. A probability cutoff of 55%, corresponding to a score of 5.5 (6.7 with muscle biopsy) “probable IIM”, had best sensitivity/specificity (87%/82% without biopsies, 93%/88% with biopsies) and is recommended as a minimum to classify a patient as having IIM. A probability of ≥90%, corresponding to a score of ≥7.5 (≥8.7 with muscle biopsy), corresponds to “definite IIM”. A probability of <50%, corresponding to a score of <5.3 (<6.5 with muscle biopsy) rules out IIM, leaving a probability of ≥50 to <55% as “possible IIM”. Conclusions The EULAR/ACR classification criteria for IIM have been endorsed by international rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and pediatric groups. They employ easily accessible and operationally defined elements, and have been partially validated. They allow classification of “definite”, “probable”, and “possible” IIM, in addition to the major subgroups of IIM, including juvenile IIM. They generally perform better than existing criteria.

Objective To assess the safety and efficacy of rituximab in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-phase, trial of adult and pediatric myositis. Methods Adults with refractory polymyositis and adults and children with refractory dermatomyositis were enrolled. Entry criteria included muscle weakness and ≥2 additional abnormal core set measures (CSM) for adults. JDM patients required ≥ 3 abnormal CSM with or without muscle weakness. Patients were randomized to either ‘rituximab early’ or ‘rituximab late’ and glucocorticoid and immunosuppressive therapy were allowed at entry. The primary endpoint compared the time to achieve the preliminary International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies Group definition of improvement (DOI) between the 2 groups. The secondary endpoints were time to achieve ≥20% improvement in muscle strength, and the proportion of early and late rituximab patients achieving DOI at week 8. Results Among 200 randomized patients (76 PM/76 DM/48 JDM), 195 showed no difference in the time to DOI between the rituximab late (n=102) and rituximab early (n=93) groups (p=0.74, log rank) with a median time to DOI of 20.2 weeks and 20.0 weeks respectively. The secondary endpoints also did not significantly differ between the two treatment groups. However, 161 (83%) of randomized patients met the DOI and individual CSM improved in both groups throughout the 44-week trial. Conclusion Although there were no significant differences in the two treatment arms for the primary and secondary endpoints, 83% of refractory adult and juvenile myositis patients met the DOI. The role of B cell depleting therapies in myositis warrants further study with consideration for a different trial design.

Objective To develop and validate new classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and their major subgroups. Methods Candidate variables were assembled from published criteria and expert opinion using consensus methodology. Data were collected from 47 rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and pediatric clinics worldwide. Several statistical methods were utilized to derive the classification criteria. Results Based on data from 976 IIM patients (74% adults; 26% children) and 624 non-IIM patients with mimicking conditions (82% adults; 18% children) new criteria were derived. Each item is assigned a weighted score. The total score corresponds to a probability of having IIM. Sub-classification is performed using a classification tree. A probability cutoff of 55%, corresponding to a score of 5.5 (6.7 with muscle biopsy) “probable IIM”, had best sensitivity/specificity (87%/82% without biopsies, 93%/88% with biopsies) and is recommended as a minimum to classify a patient as having IIM. A probability of ≥90%, corresponding to a score of ≥7.5 (≥8.7 with muscle biopsy), corresponds to “definite IIM”. A probability of <50%, corresponding to a score of <5.3 (<6.5 with muscle biopsy) rules out IIM, leaving a probability of ≥50 to <55% as “possible IIM”. Conclusions The EULAR/ACR classification criteria for IIM have been endorsed by international rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and pediatric groups. They employ easily accessible and operationally defined elements, and have been partially validated. They allow classification of “definite”, “probable”, and “possible” IIM, in addition to the major subgroups of IIM, including juvenile IIM. They generally perform better than existing criteria.

No abstract

Guideline or diagnostic criteria in clinical practice assist physicians in their clinical decision-making and improve health outcomes for patients. Diagnostic and classification criteria are based on evidence from rigorously conducted controlled studies. Formal group consensus methods have been developed to organize subjective judgments and to synthesize them with the available evidence. This review discusses four types of formal consensus methods used in the health field and their applications in rheumatology: the Delphi method, nominal group technique, RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, and National Institutes of Health consensus development conference.