Dergiler / Acta Medica Nicomedia / 2026 / Cilt: 9

JUVENİL DERMATOMİYOZİTLİ HASTALARIN KLİNİK, LABORATUVAR VE TEDAVİ ÖZELLİKLERİ: TEK MERKEZ DENEYİMİ

CLINICAL, LABORATORY AND TREATMENT FEATURES OF PATIENTS WITH JUVENILE DERMATOMYOSITIS: A SINGLE-CENTER EXPERIENCE

Ayfer Sakarya Gunes(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0003-1821-6881
Duygu Aydın(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-8869-4614
Bülent Kara(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0003-3780-6596
Hafize Emine Sönmez(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-9186-3068
Sayfa
1–8
Yayın Tarihi
2026-10-16
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Demografik veriler, klinik ve laboratuvar bulguları, otoantikor profilleri, görüntüleme sonuçları, tedaviler ve klinik sonuçlar değerlendirildi.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Amaç: Juvenil dermatomiyozit (JDM) tanısıyla izlenen hastaların demografik, klinik, laboratuvar, tedavi ve izlem özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Yöntem: Haziran–Aralık 2025 döneminde Kocaeli Üniversitesi Çocuk Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları AD, Çocuk Nörolojisi ve Çocuk Romatolojisi kliniklerinde izlenen, Bohan–Peter veya 2017 EULAR/ACR sınıflama kriterlerini karşılayan 15 JDM hastasının kayıtları retrospektif olarak incelendi.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Demografik veriler, klinik ve laboratuvar bulguları, otoantikor profilleri, görüntüleme sonuçları, tedaviler ve klinik sonuçlar değerlendirildi.
🔬Tür:Laboratuvar & Saha Deneyi
📍Kapsam:2025 · 14 hasta
⚙️Değişkenler:Juvenil dermatomiyozit · miyozit-spesifik antikorlar · manyetik rezonans görüntüleme

Özet

Amaç: Juvenil dermatomiyozit (JDM) tanısıyla izlenen hastaların demografik, klinik, laboratuvar, tedavi ve izlem özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. Yöntem: Haziran–Aralık 2025 döneminde Kocaeli Üniversitesi Çocuk Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları AD, Çocuk Nörolojisi ve Çocuk Romatolojisi kliniklerinde izlenen, Bohan–Peter veya 2017 EULAR/ACR sınıflama kriterlerini karşılayan 15 JDM hastasının kayıtları retrospektif olarak incelendi. Demografik veriler, klinik ve laboratuvar bulguları, otoantikor profilleri, görüntüleme sonuçları, tedaviler ve klinik sonuçlar değerlendirildi. Kas gücü ve fonksiyonu Çocukluk Çağı Miyozit Değerlendirme Ölçeği (CMAS) ile değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Hastaların %80’i kızdı; ortanca tanı yaşı 7 (2–12) yıl, takip süresi 37 (6–91) aydı. Gottron papülleri %100, fotosensitivite %86,7 ve heliotrop döküntü %73,3 oranında saptandı. Kas-iskelet sistemi tutulumu %86,7, kas enzim yüksekliği %80, antinükleer antikor pozitifliği %60 oranındaydı. Miyozit-ilişkili antikorlar incelenen 14 hastanın 4’ünde, miyozit-spesifik antikorlar 13 hastanın 9’unda pozitifti. Kardiyak tutulum %26,7, akciğer tutulumu %6,7 oranında bulundu. Kas manyetik rezonans görüntülemesinde (MRG) 15 hastanın 13’ünde miyozit bulguları saptanırken, elektromiyografi yapılan iki hastada miyopatik bulgu izlenmedi. Tüm hastalar sistemik kortikosteroid, %86,7’si metotreksat ve %53,3’ü intravenöz immünglobulin aldı. İzlemde herhangi bir zamanda remisyon %80, son vizitte remisyon %66,7 oranındaydı; mortalite gözlenmedi. Sonuç: Tek merkez verilerimiz, JDM’nin pediatrik popülasyonda klasik mukokutanöz bulgularla prezente olduğunu ve kas MRG’nin aktif inflamasyonun gösterilmesinde duyarlı ve invaziv olmayan bir tanısal araç olduğunu göstermektedir. Hastaların çoğunun erken dönemde steroid–metotreksat temelli tedavi aldığı kohortumuzda yüksek remisyon oranları gözlenmiştir.

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and outcome characteristics of patients with juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM). Methods: Fifteen patients who fulfilled the Bohan–Peter or 2017 EULAR/ACR classification criteria and were followed at the Pediatric Neurology and Pediatric Rheumatology Clinics of the Department of Pediatrics at Kocaeli University during June–December 2025 were retrospectively evaluated. Demographic data, clinical and laboratory findings, autoantibody profiles, imaging, treatments, and outcomes were recorded. Muscle strength and function were assessed using the Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale (CMAS). Results: Eighty percent of patients were female; median age at diagnosis was 7 (2–12) years and median follow-up was 37 (6–91) months. Gottron papules, photosensitivity, and heliotrope rash occurred in 100%, 86.7%, and 73.3%, respectively. Musculoskeletal involvement, elevated muscle enzymes, and antinuclear antibody positivity occurred in 86.7%, 80%, and 60%, respectively. Myositis-associated antibodies were positive in 4/14 tested patients and myositis-specific antibodies in 9/13. Cardiac and pulmonary involvement occurred in 26.7% and 6.7%, respectively. Muscle magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed findings consistent with myositis in 13/15 patients, whereas neither of the two patients undergoing electromyography had myopathic findings. All patients received systemic corticosteroids; 86.7% received methotrexate and 53.3% intravenous immunoglobulin. Remission was achieved at any time in 80% and at the last visit in 66.7%; no deaths occurred. Conclusion: Typical skin findings support JDM diagnosis, and muscle MRI contributes to assessing muscle involvement. Remission was achieved in most patients receiving corticosteroids and, in most cases, methotrexate.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Gunes, A. S., Aydın, D., Kara, B., Sönmez, H. E. (2026). JUVENİL DERMATOMİYOZİTLİ HASTALARIN KLİNİK, LABORATUVAR VE TEDAVİ ÖZELLİKLERİ: TEK MERKEZ DENEYİMİ. Acta Medica Nicomedia, Cilt: 9, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.53446/actamednicomedia.1954663

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (35)

  1. Pachman LM, Nolan BE, DeRanieri D, Khojah AM. Juvenile dermatomyositis: new clues to diagnosis and therapy. Curr Treatm Opt Rheumatol. 2021;7(1):39-62. doi:10.1007/s40674-020-00168-5.
  2. Mendez EP, Lipton R, Ramsey‐Goldman R, et al. US incidence of juvenile dermatomyositis, 1995-1998: results from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Registry. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;49(3):300-305. doi:10.1002/art.11122
  3. Wienke J, Deakin CT, Wedderburn LR, van Wijk F, van Royen-Kerkhof A. Systemic and tissue inflammation in juvenile dermatomyositis: from pathogenesis to the quest for monitoring tools. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2951. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.02951.
  4. Kim H. Juvenile dermatomyositis: updates in pathogenesis and biomarkers, current treatment, and emerging targeted therapies. Paediatr Drugs. 2025;27(1):57-72. doi:10.1007/s40272-024-00658-2.
  5. Kobayashi I. Advances in Juvenile Dermatomyositis: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Treatment and Interstitial Lung Diseases—A Narrative Review. Children. 2024;11(9):1046. doi:10.3390/children11091046
  6. Feldman BM, Rider LG, Reed AM, Pachman LM. Juvenile dermatomyositis and other idiopathic inflammatory myopathies of childhood. The Lancet. 2008;371(9631):2201-2212. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)60955-1
  7. Carriquí-Arenas S, Mosquera JM, Quesada-Masachs E, et al. Clinical characteristics and prognostic factor in juvenile dermatomyositis: data of the Spanish registry. Pediatr Rheumatol. 2024;22(1):66. doi:10.1186/s12969-024-00999-9
  8. Bohan A, Peter JB. Polymyositis and dermatomyositis (first of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1975;292(7):344-347. doi:10.1056/nejm197502132920706
  9. Bohan A, Peter JB. Polymyositis and dermatomyositis (second of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1975;292(8):403-407. doi:10.1056/nejm197502202920807
  10. Lundberg IE, Tjärnlund 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. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-211468
  11. Brown VE, Pilkington CA, Feldman BM, Davidson JE. An international consensus survey of the diagnostic criteria for juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM). Rheumatology. 2006;45(8):990-993. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kel025
  12. Davis WR, Halls JE, Offiah AC, Pilkington C, Owens CM, Rosendahl K. Assessment of active inflammation in juvenile dermatomyositis: a novel magnetic resonance imaging-based scoring system. Rheumatology. 2011;50(12):2237-2244. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/ ker262
  13. Schmeling H, Stephens S, Goia C, et al. Nailfold capillary density is importantly associated over time with muscle and skin disease activity in juvenile dermatomyositis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(5):885-893. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keq407.
  14. Tansley SL, Simou S, Shaddick G, et al. Autoantibodies in juvenile-onset myositis: their diagnostic value and associated clinical phenotype in a large UK cohort. J Autoimmun. 2017;84:55-64. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2017.06.007.
  15. Enders FB, Bader-Meunier B, Baildam E, et al. Consensus-based recommendations for the management of juvenile dermatomyositis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(2):329-340. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209247.
  16. Kim S, El‐Hallak M, Dedeoglu F, Zurakowski D, Fuhlbrigge RC, Sundel RP. Complete and sustained remission of juvenile dermatomyositis resulting from aggressive treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;60(6):1825-1830. doi:10.1002/art.24571
  17. Huber AM, Feldman BM, Rennebohm RM, et al. Validation and clinical significance of the Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale for assessment of muscle function in the juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(5):1595-1603. doi:10.1002/art.20179
  18. Lazarevic D, Pistorio A, Palmisani E, et al. The PRINTO criteria for clinically inactive disease in juvenile dermatomyositis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(5):686-693. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-201483
  19. Kasapcopur O, Barut K, Avar PO, Caliskan S, Sever L, Arisoy N. Juvenile dermatomyositis: clinical features, laboratory findings, treatment modalities and disease course (a single center experience). Pediatr Rheumatol Online J. 2014;12(Suppl 1):P276. doi:10.1186/1546-0096-12-S1-P276.
  20. Martin N, Krol P, Smith S, et al. A national registry for juvenile dermatomyositis and other paediatric idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: 10 years’ experience; the Juvenile Dermatomyositis National (UK and Ireland) Cohort Biomarker Study and Repository for Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(1):137-145. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keq261
  21. Hoeltzel MF, Oberle EJ, Robinson AB, Agarwal A, Rider LG. The presentation, assessment, pathogenesis, and treatment of calcinosis in juvenile dermatomyositis. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2014;16(12):467. doi:10.1007/s11926-014-0467-y
  22. Fisler RE, Liang MG, Fuhlbrigge RC, Yalcindag A, Sundel RP. Aggressive management of juvenile dermatomyositis results in improved outcome and decreased incidence of calcinosis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;47(4):505-511. doi:10.1067/mjd.2002.122196
  23. Volochayev R, Csako G, Wesley R, Rider LG, Miller FW. Laboratory test abnormalities are common in polymyositis and dermatomyositis and differ among clinical and demographic groups. Open Rheumatol J. 2012;6:54-63. doi:10.2174/1874312901206010054.
  24. Smith RL, Sundberg J, Shamiyah E, Dyer A, Pachman LM. Skin involvement in juvenile dermatomyositis is associated with loss of end row nailfold capillary loops. J Rheumatol. 2004;31(8):1644-9.
  25. Sharma A, Bhattarai D, Gupta A, et al. Autoantibody Profile of Children with Juvenile Dermatomyositis. Indian J Pediatr. 2021;88(12):1170-1173. doi:10.1007/s12098-021-03680-1
  26. Rider LG, Shah M, Mamyrova G, et al. The Myositis Autoantibody Phenotypes of the Juvenile Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies. Medicine. 2013;92(4):223-243. doi:10.1097/md.0b013e31829d08f9
  27. Lilleker JB, Vencovsky J, Wang G, et al. The EuroMyositis registry: an international collaborative tool to facilitate myositis research. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(1):30-39. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-211868
  28. Schwartz T, Sanner H, Husebye T, Flatø B, Sjaastad I. Cardiac dysfunction in juvenile dermatomyositis: a case-control study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(5):766-771. doi:10.1136/ard.2010.137968
  29. Cantez S, Gross GJ, Maclusky I, Feldman BM. Cardiac findings in children with juvenile Dermatomyositis at disease presentation. Pediatr Rheumatol. 2017;15(1):54. doi:10.1186/s12969-017-0182-0
  30. Tansley SL, Betteridge ZE, Gunawardena H, et al. Anti-MDA5 autoantibodies in juvenile dermatomyositis identify a distinct clinical phenotype: a prospective cohort study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2014;16(4):R138. doi:10.1186/ar4600
  31. Marie I, Lahaxe L, Benveniste O, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with polymyositis/dermatomyositis and anti-PM-Scl antibody. Br J Dermatol. 2010;162(2):337-344. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09484.x.
  32. Huber AM, Giannini EH, Bowyer SL, et al. Protocols for the initial treatment of moderately severe juvenile dermatomyositis: Results of a Children’s Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Consensus Conference. Arthritis Care Res. 2010;62(2):219-225. doi:10.1002/acr.20071
  33. Ruperto N, Pistorio A, Oliveira S, et al. Prednisone versus prednisone plus ciclosporin versus prednisone plus methotrexate in new-onset juvenile dermatomyositis: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10019):671-678. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01021-1.
  34. Ravelli A, Rosina S, MacMahon JM, et al. Treating juvenile dermatomyositis to target: Paediatric Rheumatology European Society/Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance-endorsed recommendations from an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2025;84(7):1055-1067. doi:10.1016/j.ard.2025.04.024
  35. Ravelli A, Trail L, Ferrari C, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic factors of juvenile dermatomyositis: a multinational, multicenter study of 490 patients. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62(1):63-72. doi:10.1002/acr.20015.