Citations 5

Shared governance of international myositis networks

Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology | February 24, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.55563/clinexprheumatol/dfli8l | PMID 41738253

Collaborative research in myositis-related disorders: MIHRA, a global shared community model

Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology | March 4, 2024 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.55563/clinexprheumatol/hc1lsf | PMID 38436382

Mitochondrial transfer and implications for muscle function in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology | January 30, 2024 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.55563/clinexprheumatol/5lfq5x | PMID 38293948

Moving forward together: collaborative landscapes of research in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and calcinosis

Rheumatology | July 14, 2023 | Volume: 63 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1189-1191

10.1093/rheumatology/kead331 | PMID 37449887

2016 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Criteria for Minimal, Moderate, and Major Clinical Response in Adult Dermatomyositis and Polymyositis: An International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies Group/Paediatric Rheum

Arthritis & Rheumatology | April 6, 2017 | Volume: 69 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 898-910

10.1002/art.40064 | PMID 28382787

ObjectiveTo develop response criteria for adult dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM).MethodsExpert surveys, logistic regression, and conjoint analysis were used to develop 287 definitions using core set measures. Myositis experts rated greater improvement among multiple pairwise scenarios in conjoint analysis surveys, where different levels of improvement in 2 core set measures were presented. The PAPRIKA (Potentially All Pairwise Rankings of All Possible Alternatives) method determined the relative weights of core set measures and conjoint analysis definitions. The performance characteristics of the definitions were evaluated on patient profiles using expert consensus (gold standard) and were validated using data from a clinical trial. The nominal group technique was used to reach consensus.ResultsConsensus was reached for a conjoint analysis–based continuous model using absolute percent change in core set measures (physician, patient, and extramuscular global activity, muscle strength, Health Assessment Questionnaire, and muscle enzyme levels). A total improvement score (range 0–100), determined by summing scores for each core set measure, was based on improvement in and relative weight of each core set measure. Thresholds for minimal, moderate, and major improvement were ≥20, ≥40, and ≥60 points in the total improvement score. The same criteria were chosen for juvenile DM, with different improvement thresholds. Sensitivity and specificity in DM/PM patient cohorts were 85% and 92%, 90% and 96%, and 92% and 98% for minimal, moderate, and major improvement, respectively. Definitions were validated in the clinical trial analysis for differentiating the physician rating of improvement (P < 0.001).ConclusionThe response criteria for adult DM/PM consisted of the conjoint analysis model based on absolute percent change in 6 core set measures, with thresholds for minimal, moderate, and major improvement.