CorrespondenceDiagnostic criteria for polymyositis and dermatomyositis
References (3)
- et al.
Polymyositis and dermatomyositis
Lancet
(2003)
Cited by (44)
Inflammatory Diseases of Muscle and Other Myopathies
2016, Kelley and Firestein's Textbook of Rheumatology: Volumes 1-2, Tenth EditionMinimally invasive procedures
2015, Rheumatology: Sixth EditionThe clinical features, diagnosis and classification of dermatomyositis
2014, Journal of AutoimmunityCitation Excerpt :If rash is absent, but the biopsy sample is indicative of DM, a diagnosis of “probable” DM can be made. Finally, in the case of patients with typical DM rashes, but without apparent muscle weakness, the diagnosis should be ADM. This classification was criticized because of the difficulty in correctly classifying patients when muscle biopsy is poorly informative and, thus, non-diagnostic [25–27]. However, muscle biopsy seems to be less useful for the diagnosis of DM than for PM or IBM.
Inflammatory Diseases of Muscle and Other Myopathies
2012, Kelley's Textbook of Rheumatology: Volume 1-2, Ninth EditionParaneoplastic Muscle Disease
2011, Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North AmericaCitation Excerpt :The risk of an underlying malignancy is much lower for polymyositis (PM) but remains statistically significant. The criteria by Bohan and Peter7 for the diagnosis of PM and DM have been the standard since their publication in 1975, although new criteria are clearly needed.8 The author identified a total of 35 retrospective case series of inflammatory myopathy in the period between 1975 and 2009 that used these diagnostic criteria and reported the occurrence of malignancy in these patients (Table 1).
Observations on the classification of the inflammatory myopathies
2011, Presse MedicaleCitation Excerpt :A review in 2003 summarised developments in the field and emphasised the central importance of the immunopathological findings [4]. This viewpoint was challenged with the suggestions that immunopathological testing was not widely available, that muscle biopsy had low sensitivity, and that there was no evidence of the performance characteristics of the proposed new diagnostic criteria [22]–implicit in the latter was that the long-used Bohan and Peter criteria were “clinically practical, sensitive, specific”, and that any new criteria should be compared to those and be “derived from well-designed, prospective, comprehensive studies”. It was an obvious irony that the Bohan and Peter criteria had themselves not been derived in such a fashion.