Muscle Testing, Biopsy & Antibodies
The diagnostic evaluation of inflammatory and immune-mediated myopathies integrates laboratory biomarkers, electrodiagnostic studies, imaging, serologic profiling, and histopathologic analysis. The identification of myositis-specific antibodies (MSAs) has transformed the approach to inflammatory myopathy, enabling subtype classification, prognostication, and treatment selection—often without requiring muscle biopsy. However, muscle biopsy remains indispensable when antibodies are absent, when inflammatory and hereditary myopathies must be distinguished, and for characterizing novel pathologic phenotypes. MRI-guided biopsy planning, standardized immunohistochemistry panels, and integrated antibody-histopathology algorithms now form the cornerstone of a modern diagnostic framework.
Bottom Line
- Serum CK: The most sensitive and specific serum marker of muscle fiber damage; markedly elevated (>10,000 U/L) in immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM), variably elevated in dermatomyositis (DM), and can be normal in antisynthetase syndrome (ASyS) or inclusion body myositis (IBM); AST/ALT elevation may be misattributed to liver disease—check gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) to distinguish hepatic from muscle origin
- Myositis-specific antibodies (MSAs): Present in ~50% of inflammatory myopathy cases; generally mutually exclusive; enable subtype classification without biopsy; 15 MSAs across three disease categories (DM, ASyS, IMNM) plus cN1A for IBM
- EMG in myopathy: Short-duration, low-amplitude, polyphasic motor unit potentials (MUPs) with early/rapid recruitment; fibrillation potentials indicate active disease (necrosis, inflammation); myotonic discharges occur in IMNM, DM, and non-inflammatory myopathies
- Muscle MRI: STIR hyperintensity indicates edema/active inflammation; T1 hyperintensity indicates irreversible fatty replacement; MRI guides biopsy site selection by identifying involved but not end-stage muscle
- Muscle biopsy: Open biopsy preferred over needle to reduce sampling error; target mildly weak muscle (MRC grade 4); characteristic patterns—perifascicular atrophy (DM), endomysial CD8+ T-cell invasion (PM/IBM), scattered necrosis without inflammation (IMNM), rimmed vacuoles (IBM)
- Immunohistochemistry: MHC-I upregulation (diffuse in PM/IBM, perifascicular in DM), C5b-9 membrane attack complex on capillaries (DM), CD68+ macrophage predominance (IMNM); MxA staining is highly specific for dermatomyositis
Laboratory Evaluation
Creatine Kinase (CK)
CK is the most sensitive and specific serum marker of skeletal muscle fiber damage. Its half-life is approximately 36 hours, which allows clinicians to differentiate acute rhabdomyolysis (rapidly declining CK) from ongoing myopathy (persistently elevated CK). CK levels vary considerably across inflammatory myopathy subtypes:
| Myopathy Subtype | Typical CK Range | Key Points |
|---|---|---|
| IMNM (HMGCR/SRP) | 2,000–50,000+ U/L | Highest CK among inflammatory myopathies; CK correlates with disease activity and guides treatment; rhabdomyolysis range (>10,000 U/L) common |
| Dermatomyositis | Normal–10,000 U/L | May be normal in amyopathic DM, juvenile DM, or when inflammation is predominantly perivascular/perimysial sparing fibers |
| Antisynthetase syndrome | Normal–5,000 U/L | CK can be normal when inflammation targets the interstitium/perimysium rather than muscle fibers; aldolase may be elevated despite normal CK |
| Polymyositis | 1,000–10,000 U/L | Diagnosis increasingly rare with modern antibody testing; most reclassified as IBM, ASyS, or IMNM |
| Inclusion body myositis | Normal–2,000 U/L | Often only mildly elevated or normal despite active endomysial inflammation; CK not a reliable marker of disease activity |
Other Serum Markers
- Aldolase: May be elevated with normal CK in perimysial/interstitial inflammation (DM, ASyS); useful adjunct when CK is unexpectedly normal
- AST/ALT: Present in liver and skeletal muscle; frequently misinterpreted as liver disease, leading to unnecessary hepatologic workup
- GGT: Exclusively hepatic—normal GGT with elevated AST/ALT and CK confirms muscle as the transaminase source
- Troponin T: Can be elevated from skeletal muscle (re-expressed isoforms) without cardiac injury; use troponin I for cardiac-specific assessment
- Myoglobin: Rises and falls earlier than CK in rhabdomyolysis; may cause pigmented nephropathy
The AST/ALT Trap in Myopathy
- Elevated AST and ALT in a patient with myopathy are frequently misattributed to liver disease, sometimes leading to immunosuppressant withholding or unnecessary liver biopsy
- Always check GGT: if GGT is normal and CK is elevated, the transaminase source is skeletal muscle, not liver
- Conversely, when monitoring hepatotoxicity of immunosuppressants (azathioprine, methotrexate), GGT is the most reliable liver-specific marker
- Noncardiac troponin T elevation in myopathy patients may trigger unnecessary cardiac catheterization—use troponin I for cardiac-specific assessment
Myositis-Specific Antibodies (MSAs)
MSAs are present in approximately 50% of patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. They are generally mutually exclusive, highly specific for inflammatory myopathy, and provide critical information about disease subtype, prognosis, extramuscular organ involvement, and cancer risk. Fifteen MSAs are recognized across three disease categories, plus the IBM-associated cN1A antibody.
Dermatomyositis-Associated MSAs
| Antibody | Target Antigen | Clinical Phenotype | Cancer Risk | ILD Risk | Prognosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-Mi-2 | Nucleosome remodeling deacetylase complex | Classic DM rash (heliotrope, Gottron); moderate-to-severe proximal weakness | Mildly increased | Low | Good; steroid-responsive |
| Anti-TIF1-γ | Transcription intermediary factor 1-gamma | Severe skin rash; variable muscle weakness; dysphagia common | Highest (RR ≈4.7); lung, stomach, breast, ovary most common | Low | Guarded; requires cancer screening within 3 years |
| Anti-NXP-2 | Nuclear matrix protein 2 (NXP2/MORC3) | Moderate-to-severe weakness; calcinosis cutis (especially children); subcutaneous edema; dysphagia | Possibly increased (adults) | Low | Moderate; calcinosis may be refractory |
| Anti-MDA5 | Melanoma differentiation-associated gene 5 (IFIH1) | Amyopathic or hypomyopathic DM; severe skin ulceration; palmar papules; rapidly progressive ILD | Not increased | Very high; can be fatal | Poor if ILD is severe; requires aggressive early treatment |
| Anti-SAE | Small ubiquitin-like modifier 1 activating enzyme | Skin-predominant initially; weakness may develop later; dysphagia; calcinosis | Possibly increased | Low-moderate | Generally good; responds to therapy |
Antisynthetase Syndrome MSAs
All antisynthetase antibodies target aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases. The clinical triad includes myositis, interstitial lung disease, and nonerosive arthritis, with Raynaud phenomenon, mechanic’s hands, and fever. Anti-Jo-1 is the most common (~60% of cases).
| Antibody | Target Synthetase | Frequency | Myositis Severity | ILD Severity | Other Features |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-Jo-1 | Histidyl-tRNA | Most common (~60%) | Highest among ASyS | Moderate | Fever, arthritis, mechanic’s hands, Raynaud; most complete syndrome |
| Anti-PL-7 | Threonyl-tRNA | Uncommon | Moderate | Severe | Higher ILD severity than Jo-1; worse in Black patients |
| Anti-PL-12 | Alanyl-tRNA | Uncommon | Mild | Severe | ILD may be the presenting feature without myositis; esophageal involvement |
| Anti-EJ | Glycyl-tRNA | Rare | Moderate | Severe | Fever, arthritis, Raynaud, mechanic’s hands |
| Anti-OJ | Isoleucyl-tRNA | Rare | Moderate | Severe | Fever, arthritis, Raynaud, mechanic’s hands |
| Anti-KS | Asparaginyl-tRNA | Rare | Mild | Severe | ILD-predominant; mild rash |
| Anti-Zo | Phenylalanyl-tRNA | Very rare | Mild | Mild | Arthritis, Raynaud, mechanic’s hands |
| Anti-Ha (YRS) | Tyrosyl-tRNA | Very rare | Mild | Mild | Arthritis, mechanic’s hands |
IMNM-Associated and IBM-Associated MSAs
| Antibody | Target Antigen | Clinical Phenotype | Cancer Risk | Key Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-SRP | Signal recognition particle (54 kDa subunit) | Severe proximal weakness; very high CK; possible cardiac involvement; mild ILD | Not increased | Often treatment-resistant; PLEX or rituximab may be needed; younger onset than HMGCR |
| Anti-HMGCR | 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase | Severe proximal weakness; very high CK; statin-exposed in ~67% | Possibly increased (older patients) | Most responsive to IVIg; antibody titer correlates with CK and strength; statin exposure not required |
| Anti-cN1A | Cytosolic 5′-nucleotidase 1A | IBM: progressive asymmetric weakness of quadriceps and deep finger flexors; dysphagia in 50% | Not established | Sensitivity 30–70% for IBM (varies by assay); specificity ~92–97%; positive in some SLE, DM, Sjogren; should not be used as sole diagnostic criterion |
Myositis-Associated Antibodies (MAAs)
MAAs are not specific for inflammatory myopathy and can be found in connective tissue disorders with or without concurrent myositis. Their presence suggests overlap syndrome:
| Antibody | Associated Conditions | Clinical Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Anti-Ro/SSA (Ro52, Ro60) | ASyS overlap, Sjogren, SLE | Most common MAA; when co-occurring with an MSA, may amplify ILD risk; Ro52 alone may signal ASyS |
| Anti-PM-Scl | PM-scleroderma overlap | Myositis with scleroderma features (skin thickening, calcinosis, Raynaud); generally good prognosis |
| Anti-Ku | Overlap myositis, SLE, scleroderma | Proximal weakness with overlap connective tissue features; variable ILD |
| Anti-U1-RNP | Mixed connective tissue disease | Myositis, arthritis, Raynaud, sclerodactyly; high titer suggests MCTD |
When to Order Antibody Testing vs. Muscle Biopsy
- Antibodies first: Subacute proximal weakness with elevated CK; suspected statin-related myopathy (order HMGCR); characteristic DM rash (MSA panel may obviate biopsy); suspected ASyS with ILD, arthritis, mechanic’s hands
- Biopsy essential: Antibody-negative patients with clinical myopathy; suspicion for IBM (pathologic confirmation required for definitive diagnosis even with positive cN1A); atypical presentations that could represent muscular dystrophy; DM sine dermatitis; when genetic myopathy cannot be excluded
- Both recommended: Antibody-positive patients with unexpected features or treatment resistance; suspected overlap with hereditary myopathy; need for pathologic confirmation before initiating aggressive immunosuppression
- Important caveat: Anti-cN1A should not be used as the sole diagnostic criterion for IBM; its specificity is imperfect (positive in SLE, DM, Sjogren), and definitive IBM diagnosis requires clinicopathologic correlation
Electrodiagnostic Studies
EMG Patterns in Myopathy
Needle EMG confirms myopathy, distinguishes it from neurogenic processes, assesses disease activity, and helps select a biopsy site. The hallmark findings reflect loss and regeneration of individual muscle fibers within motor units:
| EMG Feature | Finding in Myopathy | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|
| MUP duration | Short (<normal mean) | Loss of muscle fibers within the motor unit reduces the summated potential duration; most reliable parameter for myopathy |
| MUP amplitude | Low | Fewer functioning muscle fibers generate less total voltage |
| Polyphasia | Increased (>20% of MUPs) | Asynchronous firing from regenerating fibers with variable conduction velocities and collateral sprouting |
| Recruitment | Early (rapid) recruitment | Individual motor units generate less force; additional units must be activated earlier to compensate |
| Fibrillation potentials | Present in active/inflammatory myopathies | Segmental necrosis or inflammation separates muscle fibers from the endplate zone, causing denervation-like spontaneous discharge |
| Myotonic discharges | May occur in IMNM, DM, Pompe, toxic myopathies | Muscle membrane instability from structural abnormalities (protein aggregates, vacuoles, necrosis, inflammation); often brief and waning only |
| Complex repetitive discharges | Chronic myopathies | Ephaptic transmission between adjacent muscle fibers in chronically remodeled muscle |
EMG Diagnostic Pearls
- Normal EMG does not exclude myopathy—especially in mild, slowly progressive, or interstitial-predominant disease
- When CK exceeds 2,000 U/L, the diagnosis of myopathy is already highly probable; EMG is less critical for diagnosis but can help select a biopsy site
- In IBM, EMG may show a mixed pattern—both short-duration myopathic MUPs and long-duration neurogenic-appearing MUPs from chronic remodeling, which can cause diagnostic confusion with motor neuron disease
- Fibrillation potentials indicate active muscle fiber damage (necrosis, inflammation); their presence helps distinguish active myositis from steroid myopathy or chronic irreversible damage
- Low-frequency (2–3 Hz) repetitive nerve stimulation should be considered in chronic myopathy, as some genetic myopathies overlap with congenital myasthenic syndromes (e.g., GMPPB, DOK7 disorders)
- In patients with MuSK myasthenia vs. IMNM, the EMG pattern is critical: NMJ disorder shows decrement on RNS and increased jitter on SFEMG, while IMNM shows myopathic MUPs with fibrillation potentials
Muscle MRI
Imaging Sequences and Interpretation
Muscle MRI provides noninvasive assessment of disease activity, extent of involvement, and chronicity. T1-weighted images detect fatty replacement (hyperintense signal), indicating chronic, irreversible damage that predicts poor functional recovery. STIR (short tau inversion recovery) or T2 fat-suppressed images detect muscle edema (hyperintense signal), indicating active inflammation or acute damage that correlates with inflammatory infiltrates on biopsy and can normalize with treatment.
MRI Patterns in Inflammatory Myopathies
| Disease | STIR Edema Pattern | T1 Fatty Replacement | Additional Findings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dermatomyositis | Peripheral/perifascicular distribution; fascial and subcutaneous edema common | Usually mild or absent early | Subcutaneous tissue involvement mirrors skin disease; fascial edema is characteristic |
| Antisynthetase syndrome | Fascial edema prominent; perimysial distribution | Variable | May overlap with DM pattern; fascial signal is a clue to perimysial pathology |
| IMNM | Extensive muscle edema; highest total edema scores among IIMs | Early and extensive fatty replacement (more than DM) | Edema and fatty replacement scores significantly higher than DM/PM; SRP IMNM may show more severe changes than HMGCR |
| IBM | Variable; often modest relative to degree of weakness | Selective fatty replacement of quadriceps and deep finger flexors | Asymmetric involvement; relative sartorius/gracilis sparing with severe quadriceps atrophy is a diagnostic clue |
| Inherited myopathies | Usually absent unless active necrosis/inflammation | Pattern-specific fatty replacement (e.g., peripheral “tigroid” in collagen VI; central involvement in POMT1) | Specific muscle group involvement patterns can narrow genetic differential; e.g., sartorius involvement suggests selenoproteinopathy or RYR1 myopathy |
MRI-Guided Biopsy Planning
MRI optimizes biopsy yield by identifying involved muscle while avoiding end-stage tissue. The ideal biopsy target is a muscle with STIR hyperintensity (active disease) but without extensive T1 fatty replacement (end-stage changes). Avoid muscles with severe fatty atrophy on T1 (yield only fibrous/fatty connective tissue) and those with normal signal on both sequences. If EMG was performed on one side, biopsy the contralateral side from the same muscle group to avoid needle artifact. When MRI is unavailable, biopsy a mildly weak muscle (MRC grade 4) rather than a severely affected muscle.
Muscle Biopsy
When and Where to Biopsy
Biopsy is indicated for antibody-negative myopathy, suspected IBM (definitive diagnosis requires pathologic confirmation), atypical presentations, exclusion of muscular dystrophy, DM sine dermatitis, and characterizing variants of uncertain significance. Open biopsy is preferred over needle biopsy in inflammatory myopathy because the disease is patchy and open technique provides a larger sample with direct visualization. Commonly biopsied muscles include deltoid, biceps, vastus lateralis, and gluteus medius—target a mildly weak muscle (MRC grade 4), as severely weak muscles (≤3/5) yield only end-stage fibrous/fatty tissue. Frozen tissue processing is essential; structural abnormalities can be missed in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue.
Histopathology Patterns by Disease
| Disease | Key Histologic Pattern | Inflammatory Infiltrate | Special Features |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dermatomyositis | Perifascicular atrophy (small regenerating/degenerating fibers at fascicle periphery) | Perivascular and perimysial; macrophages, B cells, CD4+ plasmacytoid dendritic cells; not CD8+ T cells | C5b-9 on capillaries (may appear before other findings); reduced capillary density; tubuloreticular inclusions on EM; MxA expression in perifascicular fibers (highly specific) |
| Antisynthetase syndrome | Perimysial pathology with perimysial fragmentation; may have perifascicular atrophy | Perimysial and perivascular predominance | Perimysial alkaline phosphatase staining; HLA-DR and MHC-I perifascicular expression; less MxA than DM; MAC on sarcolemma |
| IMNM | Scattered necrotic fibers with minimal to no inflammatory infiltrate | Sparse; predominantly macrophages (CD68+); no significant lymphocytic invasion | Variable, faint MHC-I; occasional MAC on non-necrotic fiber sarcolemma; no perifascicular atrophy; no tubuloreticular inclusions |
| Polymyositis | Endomysial CD8+ T-cell invasion of non-necrotic fibers expressing MHC-I | Endomysial; CD8+ cytotoxic T cells surrounding and invading non-necrotic fibers | Definitive diagnosis requires this specific pattern; most biopsies with this pattern ultimately prove to be IBM; diagnosis of exclusion |
| Inclusion body myositis | Rimmed vacuoles + endomysial CD8+ T-cell invasion of non-necrotic fibers | Endomysial; CD8+ T cells; may also have macrophages | Rimmed vacuoles (modified Gomori trichrome); congophilic amyloid deposits; 15–18 nm tubulofilamentous inclusions on EM; p62+ and TDP-43+ sarcoplasmic aggregates; mitochondrial abnormalities (COX-negative fibers) |
Immunohistochemistry Panel
A standardized immunohistochemical panel is essential for accurate classification of inflammatory myopathies. Key stains include:
| Marker | Target | Pattern in Disease |
|---|---|---|
| MHC-I (HLA-ABC) | Major histocompatibility complex class I | Diffuse sarcolemmal upregulation in PM/IBM; perifascicular in DM/ASyS; faint/variable in IMNM; can be positive in some dystrophies (dysferlinopathy, FSHD) |
| C5b-9 (MAC) | Membrane attack complex | On capillaries in DM (relatively specific); on sarcolemma of necrotic fibers in IMNM; on small blood vessels in DM |
| MxA (myxovirus resistance protein A) | IFN-I-inducible protein | Sarcoplasmic expression in perifascicular fibers—highly specific for DM; minimal in ASyS; absent in IMNM, PM, IBM |
| CD8 | Cytotoxic T lymphocytes | Endomysial invasion of non-necrotic fibers in PM and IBM; not prominent in DM or IMNM |
| CD4 | T helper cells / plasmacytoid dendritic cells | Perivascular in DM (often plasmacytoid dendritic cells rather than true T helper cells) |
| CD68 | Macrophages | Predominant inflammatory cell in IMNM; present in all subtypes |
| CD20 | B lymphocytes | Perivascular aggregates in DM; may form germinal center-like structures |
| p62 / TDP-43 | Protein aggregate markers | Sarcoplasmic aggregates in IBM; specificity for IBM over other inflammatory myopathies |
Biopsy Pitfalls
- Inflammation does not equal inflammatory myopathy: Inflammatory infiltrates can be seen in muscular dystrophies (dysferlinopathy, FSHD, merosin-deficient CMD, calpainopathy) and toxic myopathies; always correlate with clinical phenotype and genetic testing
- Absent perifascicular atrophy does not exclude DM: It may be absent in early disease; MxA staining and C5b-9 capillary deposition can establish DM before perifascicular atrophy develops
- IMNM may be mistaken for muscular dystrophy: Chronic IMNM can show nonspecific myopathic changes without prominent necrosis, mimicking limb-girdle muscular dystrophy; always test HMGCR and SRP antibodies in unexplained chronic myopathy
- Complement and MHC-I are not specific to immune-mediated disease: Can be positive in inherited and toxic myopathies; interpretation requires full clinical context
- Sampling error: Inflammatory myopathies are often patchy; a negative biopsy does not exclude disease, especially from a needle biopsy; repeat biopsy from a different site may be necessary
Diagnostic Algorithm
The following stepwise approach integrates clinical, serologic, electrodiagnostic, imaging, and histopathologic data for the evaluation of suspected inflammatory myopathy:
Stepwise Diagnostic Approach
- Step 1 — Clinical assessment: Pattern of weakness (proximal symmetric vs. IBM pattern), tempo (acute/subacute/chronic), skin changes, ILD symptoms, arthritis, Raynaud, dysphagia, medication history (statins, checkpoint inhibitors), cancer history, family history
- Step 2 — Laboratory panel: CK (with GGT to distinguish liver source), aldolase (if CK normal with suspected myositis), CBC, TSH, renal function; comprehensive MSA panel (DM panel: Mi-2, TIF1-γ, NXP-2, MDA5, SAE; ASyS panel: Jo-1, PL-7, PL-12, EJ, OJ, KS, Zo, Ha; IMNM: SRP, HMGCR); MAA panel (Ro/SSA, PM-Scl, Ku, U1-RNP); cN1A if IBM suspected
- Step 3 — EMG: Confirms myopathy; identifies affected muscles for biopsy; fibrillation potentials indicate active disease; mixed pattern (myopathic + neurogenic MUPs) raises suspicion for IBM
- Step 4 — Muscle MRI: STIR for active edema/inflammation; T1 for chronic fatty replacement; guides biopsy site selection; helps differentiate steroid myopathy (no edema) from myositis relapse (edema present) in patients on chronic corticosteroids
- Step 5 — Decide: biopsy or treat?
- Biopsy may be deferred if: a specific MSA is positive AND the clinical phenotype matches the expected disease (e.g., classic DM rash + anti-Mi-2; severe weakness + very high CK + anti-HMGCR after statin exposure)
- Biopsy is recommended if: MSAs are negative; clinical features are atypical; IBM is suspected (definitive diagnosis requires pathologic confirmation); hereditary myopathy must be excluded; treatment resistance requires diagnostic reassessment
- Step 6 — Cancer screening: Age-appropriate screening in all adult-onset inflammatory myopathy; enhanced screening for anti-TIF1-γ (highest cancer risk); repeat screening within 3 years of diagnosis; chest/abdomen/pelvis CT, mammography, colonoscopy, gynecologic imaging; consider whole-body PET in high-risk patients
Special Considerations
Statin Myopathy vs. HMGCR IMNM
In statin myotoxicity, CK declines toward normal within 2–4 weeks of discontinuation, HMGCR antibodies are negative, and symptoms resolve without immunosuppression. In anti-HMGCR IMNM, CK remains elevated or rises despite statin cessation, HMGCR antibody is positive, and weakness persists or progresses, requiring immunosuppressive treatment (IVIg often first-line). Notably, 33% of HMGCR IMNM patients are statin-naive. Key action: in any patient with suspected statin myopathy whose CK does not normalize after 2–4 weeks off statin, order HMGCR antibodies and full MSA panel.
Checkpoint Inhibitor-Associated Myositis
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab) can cause de novo myositis, typically within 3 months of treatment initiation. It frequently overlaps with myocarditis and myasthenia gravis (the “triple M” syndrome), is often seronegative for standard MSAs, and carries high mortality when cardiac involvement is present. Biopsy may show necrotizing myopathy or mixed inflammatory infiltrates. Urgent troponin I, ECG, and echocardiogram are essential.
Hereditary vs. Inflammatory Myopathy
Inflammation on muscle biopsy does not automatically confirm inflammatory myopathy. Dysferlinopathy (prominent macrophage-rich inflammation mimicking IMNM), FSHD (inflammatory infiltrates in up to 40% of biopsies), calpainopathy (macrophage-rich and eosinophil-rich infiltrates), and merosin-deficient CMD (lymphocytic infiltrates) can all be misdiagnosed as inflammatory myopathy. When in doubt, genetic testing (next-generation sequencing panels) should accompany or follow biopsy, especially in chronic, slowly progressive, or treatment-resistant cases.
References
- Milone M. A pattern recognition approach to myopathy. Continuum (Minneap Minn) 2025;31(5):1244–1269.
- Salajegheh MK, Amato AA. Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Continuum (Minneap Minn) 2025;31(5):1385–1408.
- Damoiseaux J, Mammen AL, Piette Y, et al. 256th ENMC international workshop: myositis specific and associated autoantibodies (MSA-ab): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 8–10 October 2021. Neuromuscul Disord 2022;32(7):594–608.
- Lundberg IE, Tjarnlund A, Bottai M, et al. 2017 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and their major subgroups. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76(12):1955–1964.
- Pinal-Fernandez I, Munoz-Braceras S, Casal-Dominguez M, et al. Pathological autoantibody internalisation in myositis. Ann Rheum Dis 2024;83(11):1549–1560.
- Suh J, Amato AA. Management of immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy. Muscle Nerve 2024;70(2):166–172.
- Aggarwal R, Charles-Schoeman C, Schessl J, et al. Trial of intravenous immune globulin in dermatomyositis. N Engl J Med 2022;387(14):1264–1278.
- Albayda J, Demonceau G, Carlier PG. Muscle imaging in myositis: MRI, US, and PET. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2022;36(2):101765.
- Soontrapa P, Shahar S, Eauchai L, Ernste FC, Liewluck T. Disease spectrum of myopathies with elevated aldolase and normal creatine kinase. Eur J Neurol 2024;31(2):e16117.
- Mammen AL, Allenbach Y, Stenzel W, Benveniste O; ENMC 239th Workshop Study Group. 239th ENMC International Workshop: classification of dermatomyositis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 14–16 December 2018. Neuromuscul Disord 2020;30(1):70–92.
- Nelke C, Schmid S, Kleefeld F, et al. Complement and MHC patterns can provide the diagnostic framework for inflammatory neuromuscular diseases. Acta Neuropathol 2024;147(1):15.
- Galindo-Feria AS, Wang G, Lundberg IE. Autoantibodies: pathogenic or epiphenomenon. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2022;36(2):101767.
- Tanboon J, Uruha A, Stenzel W, Nishino I. Where are we moving in the classification of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies? Curr Opin Neurol 2020;33(5):590–603.
- Uruha A, Nishikawa A, Tsuburaya RS, et al. Sarcoplasmic MxA expression: a valuable marker of dermatomyositis. Neurology 2017;88(5):493–500.
- Triplett JD, Shelly S, Livne G, et al. Diagnostic modelling and therapeutic monitoring of immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy: role of electrical myotonia. Brain Commun 2020;2(2):fcaa191.