The role of interferons type I, II and III in myositis: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The classification of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) is based on clinical, serological and histological criteria. The identification of myositis-specific antibodies has helped to define more homogeneous groups of myositis into four dominant subsets: dermatomyositis (DM), antisynthetase syndrome (ASyS), sporadic inclusion body myositis (sIBM) and immune-mediated necrotising myopathy (IMNM). sIBM and IMNM patients present predominantly with muscle involvement, whereas DM and ASyS patients present additionally with other extramuscular features, such as skin, lung and joints manifestations. Moreover, the pathophysiological mechanisms are distinct between each myositis subsets. Recently, interferon (IFN) pathways have been identified as key players implicated in the pathophysiology of myositis. In DM, the key role of IFN, especially type I IFN, has been supported by the identification of an IFN signature in muscle, blood and skin of DM patients. In addition, DM-specific antibodies are targeting antigens involved in the IFN signalling pathways. The pathogenicity of type I IFN has been demonstrated by the identification of mutations in the IFN pathways leading to genetic diseases, the monogenic interferonopathies. This constitutive activation of IFN signalling pathways induces systemic manifestations such as interstitial lung disease, myositis and skin rashes. Since DM patients share similar features in the context of an acquired activation of the IFN signalling pathways, we may extend underlying concepts of monogenic diseases to acquired interferonopathy such as DM. Conversely, in ASyS, available data suggest a role of type II IFN in blood, muscle and lung. Indeed, transcriptomic analyses highlighted a type II IFN gene expression in ASyS muscle tissue. In sIBM, type II IFN appears to be an important cytokine involved in muscle inflammation mechanisms and potentially linked to myodegenerative features. For IMNM, currently published data are scarce, suggesting a minor implication of type II IFN. This review highlights the involvement of different IFN subtypes and their specific molecular mechanisms in each myositis subset.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".