Revisiting the link between oropharyngeal dysphagia and cancer in autoimmune myositis: a descriptive study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the link between moderate to severe oropharyngeal dysphagia and cancer in autoimmune myositis (AIM) other than inclusion body myositis (IBM). METHODS: The medical records of patients with AIM seen in rheumatology in two university hospitals from January 2000 to December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Using an updated AIM subclassification, patients were classified by expert opinion as pure dermatomyositis (DM), immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM), scleromyositis, lupomyositis, anti-MDA-5 syndrome, antisynthetase syndrome (ASyS) or polymyositis syndrome. Objective oropharyngeal dysphagia at myositis diagnosis was defined by an abnormal videofluoroscopic swallowing study and/or the need for percutaneous gastrojejunostomy. The presence of cancer within 3 years of myositis diagnosis was recorded. RESULTS: Pure DM accounted for 50% (n = 20/40) of the cases of objective oropharyngeal dysphagia, while anti-MDA-5 syndrome and ASyS together represented 8% (n = 3/40). Cancers occurred predominantly in pure DM (n = 27/33), and rarely in scleromyositis (n = 1/53), anti-MDA-5 syndrome and ASyS (n = 0/62). Among patients 50 years of age or older with pure DM (n = 50), cancer was present in 40% (n = 4/10) of patients with no muscle weakness, 45% (n = 10/22) in those with proximal weakness alone, 44% (n = 4/9) in those with moderate dysphagia and 100% of those with severe dysphagia (n = 9/9) (p = 0.02 by two-sided Fisher's exact test). CONCLUSION: Recognizing scleromyositis, anti-MDA-5 and ASyS as distinct from pure DM improves risk stratification for cancer screening. In patients ≥ 50 years with pure DM, severe oropharyngeal dysphagia is strongly associated with cancer, suggesting a paraneoplastic myopathy with an ineffective anticancer immune response.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".