IIM is a heterogenous group of diseases that occur in autoimmune nature and primarily affect muscles. IIM can be seen in all age groups and genders. The average age of PM onset is 50–60 years, while there are two peaks in DM, which are the ages of 5–15 years and 45–65 years. IBM is usually seen in individuals over the age of 50 years, and it is rare in young individuals2. Our case was diagnosed at the age of 83 years, and she was at a more advanced aged than expected in terms of PM and DM.
A significant portion of all myositis (11–40%) can accompany autoimmune diseases such as systemic sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and Sjogren’s syndrome2–3. In our case, no secondary disease accompanying myositis was observed. In addition, other causes that may lead to myositis such as infection, drug use, or malignancy did not exist.
Muscle weakness in PM and DM usually start in a subacute way developing in a few weeks or chronically developing in months. In rare cases, it can display an acute onset4. While symmetric proximal muscle involvement is expected in PM and DM, asymmetric proximal and distal involvement is observed in IBM, and it progresses insidiously. Clinical symptoms of our case had started in two weeks, and proximal and distal muscles were affected. No asymmetric involvement as in IBM was observed.
In the primary evaluation of IIM, CK elevation is observed as 80–90%. CK elevation in PM and DM can be seen up to 50-fold. Normal CK level is more frequently observed in DM than in PM2. While CK level can be normal in IBM, CK level can increase up to 100 times higher in NAM5. In our case, CK levels followed a high course from the beginning, and they reached up to 5–10 times higher than normal levels.
Autoantibodies in IIM are divided into two as myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSA) and myositis-associated autoantibodies (MAA). While MSAs can be seen in 50–60% of IIMs, MAA can be observed in other autoimmune diseases6. MSAs are divided into three groups as anti t RNA synthetases, anti-signal recognition particle (anti-SRP), and other antibodies against cytoplasmic or nuclear components involved in the regulation of protein synthesis and translocation, gene transcription, and viral recognition including anti-Mi-2 anti-PM-Scl and anti-CADM-1407. MSAs and MAAs in our case were determined to be negative.
Muscle biopsy is important in terms of both establishing the diagnosis of IIM and excluding other myopathy causes. Although our case had symptoms consistent with IIM, no full consistence with any of the IIM subgroups was determined. As inclusion/vacuole formations in some myofibers were not prevalent and clinical symptoms were not consistent with IBM, they were not evaluated as IBM. Although 29% of IBM cases are clinically consistent, they are not diagnosed with PM as vacuole is not observed. To add to the complexity, patients who have steroid-responsive PM may have a few rimmed vacuoles. Although better visualized on immunostaining of phosphorylated tau (with SMI-31), eosinophilic cytoplasmic inclusions are rarely seen in IBM8. In our case, performing of biopsy on the second day of steroid treatment as a clinical necessity can be misleading in terms of histopathological evaluation.
In the last decade, immune mediated necrotizing myopathy, which is a subtype that is seen without lymphocytic infiltration as in muscle biopsies of other IIMs and where muscle fiber necrosis stands out, has been defined9. In two-thirds of these patients, anti-SRP antibodies or anti-3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) antibodies are determined, and in negative ones, an underlying malignancy can be detected. Patients who have HMCGR antibody can be divided into two as those exposed to statin and those not exposed to statin. Those who are not exposed to statin are younger, their CK levels are elevated, and their response to treatment is poorer10. Though not very prevalent, necrotic fibers were prominent in the muscle biopsy of our case, and T lymphocyte infiltration was observed. Her histopathological findings were not consistent with NAM, anti SRP and anti HMCGR antibodies were negative, and she had no history of exposure to statin.
The first three years after the diagnosis of IIMs, especially the first year, are very risky in terms of malignancy development. Paraneoplastic myositis is similar to IIM, but thee are also differences between them. Paraneoplastic myositis is seen in advanced ages, and along with more severe muscle involvement such as dysphagia and ulceration in the skin, skin involvement is observed more. Muscle biopsies are not very different in myositis seen without malignancy11. In some studies, vacuole fibers and intense complementary C5b-9 accumulations are observed12. Response to steroid is very good in paraneoplastic myositis. The onset of the disease in our case in advanced age, presence of dysphagia, and observation of inclusion/vacuole in some myofibrils are consistent with paraneoplastic myositis. In the evaluation of the patient in terms of malignancy supported with PET/CT, no anomaly was detected, and no malignancy developed until the 24th month follow-up.
Our case is an inflammatory myositis case which is seen in advanced ages, in which symmetric proximal and distal lower and upper extremity muscles and paraspinal muscles are involved, which has an acute onset, and whose autoantibodies are negative. In muscle biopsy, necrotic and regenerated fibers consistent with inflammatory myositis and interstitial T lymphocyte infiltration in endomysium were observed. With these findings, the case was evaluated as intermediate inflammatory myositis under the umbrella of PM and treated accordingly. It should be noted that performing biopsy after starting steroid can affect the result of the biopsy to some extent.