Dataset Information

OptimisAtion of Diagnostic Accuracy in idioPathic inflammaTory myopathies (ADAPT study): a protocol for a prospective diagnostic accuracy study of multimodality testing in patients suspected of a treatable idiopathic inflammatory myopathy.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) excluding inclusion body myositis (IBM) are a group of heterogeneous autoimmune disorders characterised by subacute-onset and progressive proximal muscle weakness, which are frequently part of a multisystem autoimmune disorder. Reaching the diagnosis can be challenging, and no gold standard for the diagnosis of IIM exists. Diagnostic modalities include serum creatine kinase activity, muscle imaging (MRI or ultrasound (US)), electromyography (EMG), myositis autoantibody testing and muscle biopsy. Several diagnostic criteria have been developed for IIMs, varying in reported sensitivity and specificity.

Hypothesis

We hypothesise that an evidence-based diagnostic strategy, using fewer and preferably the least invasive diagnostic modalities, can achieve the accuracy of a complete panel of diagnostic tests, including MRI, US, EMG, myositis-specific autoantibody testing and muscle biopsy.

Methods and analysis

The OptimizAtion of Diagnostic Accuracy in idioPathic inflammaTory myopathies study is a prospective diagnostic accuracy study with an over-complete study design. 100 patients suspected of an IIM excluding IBM will be included. A reference diagnosis will be assigned by an expert panel using all clinical information and all results of all ancillary tests available, including 6 months of follow-up. Several predefined diagnostic strategies will be compared against the reference diagnosis to find the optimal diagnostic strategy.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was obtained from the medical ethics committee of the Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2019-814). The results will be distributed through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications.

Trial registration number

Netherlands trial register; NL8764.

SUBMITTER: Walter HAW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8671992 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLine blot immunoassays (LIA) for myositis-specific (MSA) and myositis-associated (MAA) autoantibodies have become commercially available. In the largest study of this kind, we evaluated the clinical performance of a widely used LIA for MSAs and MAAs.MethodsAdults tested for MSA/MAA by LIA at a tertiary myositis centre (January 2016-July 2018) were identified. According to expert-defined diagnoses, true and false positive rates were calculated for strongly and weakly positive autoantibody results within three cohorts: idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM), connective tissue disease (CTD) without myositis, and non-CTD/IIM. Factors associated with true positivity were determined.ResultsWe analysed 342 cases. 67 (19.6%) had IIM, in whom 71 autoantibodies were detected (50 strong positives [70.4%], 21 weak positives [29.6%]). Of the strong positives, 48/50 (96.0%; 19 MSAs, 29 MAAs) were deemed true positives. Of the weak positives, 15/21 (71.4%; 3 MSAs, 12 MAAs) were deemed true positives.In CTD without myositis cases (n = 120), 31/61 (51.0%; 5 MSAs, 26 MAAs) autoantibodies were strongly positive, with 24/31 (77.4%; 0 MSAs, 24 MAAs) true positives. 30/61 (49.2%; 13 MSAs, 17 MAAs) were weakly positive, with 16/30 (53.3%; 0 MSAs, 16 MAAs) true positives. In non-CTD/IIM cases (n = 155), all 24 MSAs and 22 MAAs were false positives; these results included 17 (37.0%; 7 MSAs, 10 MAAs) strong positives.Individual autoantibody specificities were > 98.2 and > 97.5% for weakly and strongly positive results, respectively. True positivity was associated with high pre-test for IIM (odds ratio 50.8, 95% CI 13.7-189.2, p < 0.001) and strong positive (versus weak positive) results (4.4, 2.3-8.3, p < 0.001).ConclusionsWe demonstrated the high specificity of a myositis LIA in a clinical setting. However, a significant burden of false positive results was evident in those with a low pre-test likelihood of IIM and for weakly positive autoantibodies.