[Relapses in inflammatory myopathies]. / Miopatías inflamatorias con evolución recidivante.

Most studies about treatment of inflammatory myopathies consist of cross-sectional analyses that do not assess long-term efficacy. In the present study we describe the follow-up of seven patients with inflammatory myopathies, 5 polymyositis and 2 dermatomyositis. We describe their clinical features, follow-up, muscle enzyme levels, and treatment responses. We define the latter as treatment cycles, every one of which end when steroid doses need to be increased or a new immunosuppressive drug has to be added because of clinical worsening or sustained increases in muscle enzyme levels. Treatment can cause remission, partially control, or fail in achieving myositis improvement when it normalizes, stabilizes, or does not affect muscle enzymes or clinical features, respectively. We analyzed 20 cycles, in which remission was achieved in 14 cases, partial control in 5 instances, and treatment failure in one case. Remission occurred after an average of 139 ± 98 days, whereas partial control took place in 160 ± 100 days. Except in one case, all treatment cycles controlled or remitted the symptoms. However, in all patients the illness recurred with time.

Miopatías inflamatorias con evolución recidivante / Relapses in inflammatory myopathies

La mayoría de los estudios de tratamiento de las miopatías inflamatorias son de corte y no permiten establecer su eficacia en largo plazo. En este trabajo, describimos el seguimiento de siete pacientes con miopatías inflamatorias, 5 polimiositis y 2 dermatomiositis. Determinamos su presentación, su seguimiento clínico mediante el examen físico, las enzimas musculares y la respuesta al tratamiento. Esta última la definimos como cursos de tratamiento, donde cada curso termina al aumentar los corticoides o al colocar una nueva medicación inmunosupresora debido al empeoramiento clínico o aumento sostenido de las enzimas musculares. El tratamiento instaurado puede remitir, controlar parcialmente, o fracasar en controlar la enfermedad en cuanto se normalicen, estabilicen, o no modifiquen respectivamente tanto la clínica como las enzimas musculares. Se analizaron 20 ciclos, en 14 se logró la remisión, en cinco se controló parcialmente y en uno fracasó el tratamiento. La remisión se logró en un tiempo promedio de 139 ± 98 días y el control en un promedio de 160 ± 100 días. Excepto en una ocasión, todos los ciclos de tratamiento, independientemente del que fuera, remitieron o controlaron los síntomas, pero en el tiempo todos los pacientes recidivaron en su enfermedad.

Most studies about treatment of inflammatory myopathies consist of cross-sectional analyses that do not assess long-term efficacy. In the present study we describe the follow-up of seven patients with inflammatory myopathies, 5 polymyositis and 2 dermatomyositis. We describe their clinical features, follow-up, muscle enzyme levels, and treatment responses. We define the latter as treatment cycles, every one of which end when steroid doses need to be increased or a new immunosuppressive drug has to be added because of clinical worsening or sustained increases in muscle enzyme levels. Treatment can cause remission, partially control, or fail in achieving myositis improvement when it normalizes, stabilizes, or does not affect muscle enzymes or clinical features, respectively. We analyzed 20 cycles, in which remission was achieved in 14 cases, partial control in 5 instances, and treatment failure in one case. Remission occurred after an average of 139 ± 98 days, whereas partial control took place in 160 ± 100 days. Except in one case, all treatment cycles controlled or remitted the symptoms. However, in all patients the illness recurred with time.

Neuron specific enolase concentration is increased in serum and decreased in platelets of patients with active systemic sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine frequency, origin, and clinical associations of elevated serum neuron specific enolase (NSE) in systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: Serum was obtained from 75 patients with SSc, 20 systemic lupus erythematosus, 8 polymyositis, 10 idiopathic interstitial lung disease, and 10 healthy volunteers. NSE status was determined in serum (in all individuals) and in platelet lysate (in volunteers and 30 patients with SSc). RESULTS: Elevated serum NSE (mean 22.6 ng/ml, range 12.1-68.2 ng/ml) was observed in 26 patients with SSc (34.6%). Those with diffuse SSc had higher serum NSE than those with limited disease (16.5 +/- 13.4 vs 9.6 +/- 5.0 ng/ml, p = 0.006). No association was found between serum NSE and lung or esophagus involvement. Patients with long-standing disease had lower serum NSE than those with early disease (10.8 +/- 7.3 vs 16.1 +/- 13.6 ng/ml, p = 0.05). Serum NSE was 19.4 +/- 13.0 ng/ml in patients with total skin score (TSS) > 20, 8.3 +/- 2.1 ng/ml in patients with TSS < 5, and 6.0 +/- 3.1 ng/ml in volunteers (p = 0.01). NSE platelet lysate concentration was 3.6 +/- 2.9 ng/ml in patients with TSS > 20, 12.4 +/- 4.1 ng/ml in those with TSS < 5, and 14.1 +/- 6.5 ng/ml in healthy individuals (p < 0.001). Volunteers and SSc patients with low TSS had comparable S/PL-NSE index (serum/platelet lysate NSE concentration) (0.42 +/- 0.16 and 0.75 +/- 0.33, respectively), both lower than SSc patients with high TSS (7.45 +/- 5.57) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Elevated serum NSE was observed in one-third of SSc patients but not in other autoimmune rheumatic diseases. The inverse relationship between serum and platelet lysate NSE concentration suggests platelet activation as the origin of high serum NSE in SSc. NSE S/PL was the best discriminatory variable between healthy volunteers and SSc patients as well as between patients with high and low TSS. High serum NSE and high NSE-S/PL index seemed to be associated with SSc disease activity. Further work is warranted to investigate a possible role for this marker in assessing disease activity and therapy response.