Loading...
 

Volume 35, Issue 1, March 2024



Sign in to download the Issue in PDF format.

Back to the list
Mediterr J Rheumatol 2022;33(4):437-43
Article Links
Anti-Jo1 Syndrome: Understanding a Rare Cause of Interstitial Lung Disease
Arun Hegde2, Vikas Marwah1, Shrinath V1, Robin Choudhary1, Virendra Malik3
Authors Information
  1. Department of Respiratory Medicine, AICTS, Pune, India
  2. Department of Rheumatology, Command Hospital, Lucknow, India
  3. Department of Radiology, AICTS, Pune, India

 A Hegde, V Marwah, Shrinath V, R Choudhary, V Malik

Abstract

Background: Anti-Jo1 syndrome is one of the most common amongst the various anti synthetase syndromes (ASS), which forms a subgroup of the idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM). It is characterised by myositis, interstitial lung disease (ILD), fever, Raynaud’s phenomenon, and mechanic’s hands; associated with the presence of anti-Jo1 antibodies in serum. Being an orphan disease, the clinical diagnosis is often delayed. Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, all patients diagnosed as Anti-Jo1 syndrome, from two tertiary care hospitals in Western Maharashtra, between 01 January 2019 – 31 December 2020, were enrolled. The parameters studied included demographic data, clinical features at presentation, laboratory parameters, spirometry, and radiographic findings, along with treatment instituted. Result: A total of 17 patients (8 males, 9 females) qualified for inclusion in the study. The mean age of diagnosis was 40 (±13) years with mean time to diagnosis being 2 years (± 0.6 years), from first clinical presentation. The most common presenting symptoms encountered were arthritis (n = 12, 70.5%), fever (n = 16, 70.5%), myositis (n=11, 64.7%) and breathlessness (n=10, 58.8%).10 patients had ILD at presentation on high resolution computerised tomography of chest (n=10, 58.8%) with restrictive lung defect on spirometry. Six patients required induction of immunosuppression using pulse methylprednisolone (n=6) and Rituximab (n=6), while 11 were managed with oral steroids. Mycophenolate mofetil (n=10) and Azathioprine (n=7) were used as maintenance immunosuppression. Conclusion: Anti-Jo1 syndrome is a myositis syndrome, presenting with a multitude of clinical features. Steroids and disease modifying anti rheumatic drugs form mainstay of therapy.

Cite this article as: Hegde A, Marwah V, Shrinath V, Choudhary R, Malik V. Anti-Jo1 Syndrome: Understanding a Rare Cause of Interstitial Lung Disease. Mediterr J Rheumatol 2022;33(4):437-43.

Article Submitted: 3 Dec 2021; Revised Form: 14 Jun 2022; Article Accepted: 30 Jun 2022; Available Online: 31 Dec 2022

https://doi.org/10.31138/mjr.33.4.437

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

©2022 The Author(s).

Keywords: anti-synthetase syndrome, idiopathic inflammatory myositis, anti-Jo1 antibody, interstitial lung disease
Full Text

INTRODUCTION

Anti-synthetase syndrome (ASS) is a clinical subset of idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM), manifesting with various combinations of fever, myositis, arthritis, interstitial lung disease (ILD), Raynaud’s phenomenon and mechanic hands, along with the presence of anti-aminoacyl-tRNA synthase (anti-ARS) antibodies in the serum. Anti Jo 1 syndrome is the commonest amongst the subset of ASS, with anti-Jo 1 antibody being the most common anti-ARS antibody. The disease commonly manifests in the fifth decade of life.1-3 Certain Indian studies have observed the commonest clinical manifestations to be arthritis (59%), myositis (59%), fever (41%), proximal muscle weakness (41%) and ILD (52%); out of which ILD contributes significantly to mortality and morbidity.4 The American, European Network of Antisynthetase Syndrome (AENEAS) collaborative group observed a mean diagnostic delay of ten years amongst patients who did not present with the complete triad of arthritis, myositis and ILD.5 Considering the heterogeneous nature of the disease, we attempted to study the demographic profile, clinical features, spirometry findings, radiological ILD patterns and management strategies, amongst patients with Anti-Jo1 syndrome presenting to two different tertiary care hospitals in Western India

 

METHODS

Study design

This was a retrospective study.

 

Study setting

The study was carried out at two tertiary care hospitals located in Western Maharashtra.

 

Study duration

01 Jan 2019 to 31 Dec 2020.

 

Study population

The study population comprised of all patients who presented to the out-patient departments with a combination of complaints comprising arthritis, breathlessness on exertion, Raynaud’s phenomenon, mechanic’s hands, and fever (not attributable to other causes).

 

Inclusion criteria

Patients who were diagnosed with ASS, as per Connor’s criteria were included in the study.6 (Table 1)


Table 1. Connor et al. 2010 criteria for diagnosis of anti-synthetase syndrome.8
 

 

Exclusion criteria

Patients with arthritis and ILD, but not positive for anti-Jo1 antibody.

 

Study variables

Demographic data, clinical features on presentation, laboratory data, spirometry finding, radiographic findings, and treatment instituted were taken from rheumatology and respiratory medicine OPD records. Patients with clinical suspicion underwent evaluation for anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) by indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIF), extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and rheumatoid factor (RF), using nephelometry. Patients also underwent testing for muscle enzymes including creatine kinase (normal range: 24 - 173 U/L), lactic dehydrogenase (normal range: 20 - 350 U/L), aminotransferase alanine (normal range: 10-36 U/L), and aminotransferase aspartate (normal range: 10-36 U/L). Acute phase reactants like C-reactive protein (normal range: < 7mg/dl), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (normal range: 0 – 30 mm/hr), complement levels (C3 normal range: 90-180 mg/dl, C4 normal range: 15 -45 mg/dl) were carried out for nine out of the total seventeen patients.

Patients satisfying Connor’s criteria for anti-synthetase syndrome were screened for ILD with high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and spirometry. HRCT on full inspiration was taken from lung apices to base with patient in supine position. Axial, coronal, and sagittal sections of 1mm thickness were obtained. ILD pattern on HRCT were classified as per joint American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society classification of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia.7,8 Patients were considered to have ILD if there were features of inter/intra lobular septal thickening, ground glass opacities, honey combing or traction bronchiectasis with or without clinical symptoms.3 Spirometry was conducted as per 2019 ATS and ERS technical statement. 9 Impairment of pulmonary function was categorised as mild, moderate, and severe when FEV1 is ≥ 70%, 50 – 69% and < 50% respectively.10


Statistical methods

Categorical variables in the data have been reported as numbers and percentages, and continuous variables as mean (standard deviation) or median (range).

 

Ethical clearance

The institutional ethics committee approved the study. Waiver for consent was taken from ethics committee.

 

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients were diagnosed with ASS during the time period of the study and were included. Eight were male (47%) and nine were female (53%). Mean age at diagnosis was 40 (±13) years with mean time to diagnosis being 2 (± 0.6) years, from first clinical presentation.

Analysis of patient’s symptoms on presentation (Table 2) showed that 12 (70.5%) patients had fever on presentation, 14 (82.4%) patients had musculoskeletal symptoms (out of which 12 had arthritis and 11 had myositis), 11 (64.7%) had cutaneous signs while 10 (58.8%) cases had respiratory symptoms. The most common presenting symptoms were arthritis (n = 12, 70.5%), fever (n = 16, 70.5%) myositis (n=11, 64.7%) and breathlessness (n=10, 58.8%). Other findings included Raynaud’s phenomenon (n= 10, 58.8%), mechanic’s hand (n= 5, 29.4%), heliotrope rash (n= 4, 23.5%), Shawl sign (n= 1, 5%) and malar rash (n = 1, 5%). The classic triad of arthritis, myositis and ILD was seen only in 4 (23.5%) patients. The most common duad of symptoms was arthritis and myositis (n= 9, 53%).


Table 2. Clinical characteristics of patients with anti-synthetase syndrome (n = 17).

 



All patients underwent an anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) test, using immunofluorescence (IIF), out of 17 patients 15 (88%) had a positive ANA. The most common staining pattern was cytoplasmic (n= 10, 67%), followed by speckled (n = 5, 33%). All patients were positive for anti – Jo1 antibodies. Apart from anti-Jo1, patients also tested positive for anti-Ro 52 (n = 8, 47%), Ro 60 (n = 5, 29%) and AMA M2 (n = 1, 5%)

Baseline spirometry was carried out in all patients, out of which ten showed restrictive defect and seven had normal spirometry. All 10 patients who presented with shortness of breath had restrictive defect on spirometry. Six patients had mild restriction, moderate and severe restriction were noted in two patients each. HRCT was done for all the patients. Out of the 17 patients, 10 patients who had shortness of breath were diagnosed with ILD on HRCT. The most common pattern was NSIP (n = 6, 60%) followed by UIP (n = 4, 40%). All the ten patients who had shortness of breath were diagnosed with ILD on HRCT. The seven patients who didn’t have shortness of breath had a normal HRCT finding.

All patients were managed with induction phase of immunosuppression followed by maintenance immunosuppression. Induction was achieved using pulse methylprednisolone and rituximab (both, n=6) or oral steroids alone (n=11). The dose used for glucocorticoid pulse therapy was IV methylprednisolone 30 mg/kg/day for three days. Rituximab was given as two 375 mg/m2, IV doses, spaced over two weeks and oral steroid induction was with tablet prednisolone 1mg/kg daily. Tapering dose of oral prednisolone along with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) like mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (n=13) or azathioprine (n=4) were used for maintenance therapy.

 

DISCUSSION

Our study comprised of patients with anti-Jo1 syndrome, a subset of ASS. Due to the high frequency of non-specific signs associated with anti-Jo1 syndrome, criteria proposed by Connor et al, ae used the world over, for diagnosis.6 The same criteria were applied to patients in our study. The mean age at presentation in our study (40 ± 13 years) was comparable to the findings of a study by Kumar et al. (40 ± 9.2).4 The largest international study on patients with anti-Jo1syndrome, revealed mean age at presentation to be 53 years.11 The Indian population seems to have an earlier onset of symptoms when compared to American and European population based on these results. The exact reason for the same is not known. The disease has a predisposition for the female sex, as was observed by Kumar et al, and in the AENEAS cohort.4,11 Our study showed an equal sex predisposition, which could be due to a small sample size.

The most common presenting symptoms in our study were fever and arthritis, which was similar to the findings of Kumar et al. The classic triad of ILD, myositis and arthritis were less frequent in Indian patients on initial presentation, as per our study (23.5%) and that by Kumar et al, (15%).  Our study observed that 53% presented with two manifestations amongst the classic triad of symptoms (most common being arthritis along with myositis), while 17.6% had just one feature (most common being arthritis) and 1 patient was diagnosed with ASS without exhibiting even one amongst the classic triad of clinical features. This aforementioned patient was a 29-year-old male who presented with Raynaud’s phenomenon without any features of arthritis, myositis and ILD and who on evaluation was found to be anti-Jo-1 positive by immunoblot assay. The dermatological features which were observed in these patients were Mechanic’s hands, heliotrope rash, shawl sign, Gottron papules, and malar rash. Dermatological manifestations on presentation were seen in 11 (64.7%) cases in our study as compared to 37% cases in Kumar et al. study. The most common dermatological manifestation noted were mechanic’s hand and Gottron papules as per our study and the study by Kumar et al. This shows the heterogenicity of clinical presentation of anti-Jo 1 syndrome. Patients who have ASS antibodies can present with combinations of the classic triad, or may even present with a single non-specific minor clinical feature.


Table 3. Laboratory characteristics of patients with anti-synthetase syndrome (n = 17).

 



Even though musculoskeletal complaints and fever comprise the chief presenting complaints in Indian patients; as per our study (82.4%, 70.5%) and as per the study by Kumar and associates, (59% and 41%), pulmonary manifestations are the most important determinants of morbidity.4 The current study demonstrated a prevalence of ILD of 58.8% in anti-Jo1 positive patients at presentation, as compared to 52% in Kumar et al and 50% in AENEAS cohort. These studies reveal that about 50% of patients who are positive for anti-Jo 1 antibodies have ILD at presentation. The typical findings on HRCT chest are bibasilar fibrosis, ground glass opacities, interlobular reticulations, and traction bronchiectasis. The most common radiological pattern observed was NSIP (our study [60%], Kumar et al. [81%]), followed by UIP (our study [40%] and Kumar et al. study [9%]). There was no organising pneumonia pattern on HRCT in our study but Kumar et al observed 9% of anti-Jo 1 patients to be having an organising pneumonia pattern. The most common functional pattern was a restriction defect on spirometry with all patients diagnosed to have ILD showing a restrictive pattern and none showing obstructive defect. Spirometry, 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and HRCT were used to screen asymptomatic patients as interstitial involvement could often be subclinical. In our study the 7 patients who didn’t have breathlessness on exertion had normal HRCT, 6-MWT and spirometry. Comparison of our clinical finding with existing Indian and international data is given in Table 4.


Table 4. Comparison of clinical presentation of anti-synthetase syndrome (anti-Jo1 positive) in the present study, a leading Indian study, and an international study.

 


In our study, patients manifesting with severe ILD (hypoxic on presentation with extensive lung involvement) and those with elevated muscle enzyme levels were managed with steroid pulse therapy and rituximab, while the rest were managed with only oral steroids and MMF/azathioprine. There is very little literature on either the choice of drugs, or the duration of treatment for ASS. Corticosteroids have long been the corner stone for managing patients with IIM, and associated ILDs. When used alone it is rarely sufficient to control the disease activity with high incidence of ILD recurrence being reported with steroid monotherapy.12 A multicentric cohort study from India showed the prevalence of anti-Jo1 antibodies to be 10% among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myositis.13 Additional immunosuppressive agents are usually added in case of ILD, refractory myositis or as steroid sparing drugs. Although there is no consensus on the particular kind of immunosuppression use, DMARDs in form of azathioprine, MMF, tacrolimus, rituximab and cyclophosphamide are being commonly used for management of refractory myositis and ILD. Few retrospective case series have shown modest improvement in lung function with azathioprine.14-16 Significant improvement in lung function was demonstrated in a retrospective study of 125 patients with use of MMF in connective tissue disease associated ILDs.17 There are a significant number of retrospective studies which have demonstrated the benefit of rituximab in managing ILD associated with ASS.18-28 These studies have demonstrated a significant improvement of lung function test and radiological clearance in patients managed with rituximab. Our management protocol was similar to the one used in the studies by Huang and Aggarwal.12     

Our study had a few limitations. The patients were not screened for pulmonary artery hypertension. MRI thighs and electromyography couldn’t be carried out in all patients. Patients were not screened for other myositis specific antibodies apart from anti-Jo-1.



Figure 1. A bar chart showing the percentage of patients having the characteristic clinical symptoms and signs on presentation.
 




Figure 2. A compound-bar chart showing the clinical, spirometry and HRCT finding of ILD in patients with anti-synthetase syndrome.
 

 

CONCLUSION

Anti-Jo1 syndromes are a subset of IIM that can have a heterogenous presentation. ILD is one of the major presenting symptoms and the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in the disease. As the disease entity is rarely diagnosed, a high index of suspicion needs to be entertained while assessing patients with a combination of symptoms comprising of arthritis, myositis, Raynaud’s phenomenon, and mechanic’s hand with underlying ILD.  

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
  1. Lega JC, Fabien N, Reynaud Q, Durieu I, Durupt S, Dutertre M, et al. The clinical phenotype associated with myositis-specific and associated autoantibodies: a meta-analysis revisiting the so-called antisynthetase syndrome. Autoimmun Rev 2014 Sep 1;13(9):883-91.
  2. Watanabe K, Handa T, Tanizawa K, Hosono Y, Taguchi Y, Noma S, et al. Detection of antisynthetase syndrome in patients with idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Respir  Medicine 2011 Aug 1;105(8):1238-47.
  3. Katzap E, Barilla-LaBarca ML, Marder G. Antisynthetase syndrome. Cur Rheumatol Rep 2011 Jun 1;13(3):175.
  4. Kumar RR, Jha S, Dhooria A, Minz RW, Kumar S, Sharma SK, et al. Anti-Jo-1 Syndrome Often Misdiagnosed as Rheumatoid Arthritis (for Many Years): A Single-Center Experience. J Clin Rheumatol 2019 Dec 28.
  5. Satoh M, Tanaka S, Ceribelli A, Calise SJ, Chan EK. A comprehensive overview on myositis-specific antibodies: new and old biomarkers in idiopathic inflammatory myopathy. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2017; 52:1-19.
  6. Connors GR, Christopher Stine L, Oddis CV, Danoff SK. Interstitial lung disease associated with the idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: what progress has been made in the past 35 years. Chest 2010;138(6):1464-74.
  7. Travis WD, Costabel U, Hansell DM, King Jr TE, Lynch DA, Nicholson AG, et al. An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: update of the international multidisciplinary classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013 Sep 15;188(6):733-48.
  8. European RS, American Thoracic Society. American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society international multidisciplinary consensus classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. This joint statement of the American Thoracic Society (ATS), and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) was adopted by the ATS board of directors, June 2001 and by the ERS executive committee, June 2001. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002 Jan 15;165(2):277.
  9. Graham BL, Steenbruggen I, Miller MR, Barjaktarevic IZ, Cooper BG, Hall GL, et al. Standardization of spirometry 2019 update. An official American thoracic society and European respiratory society technical statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019 Oct 15;200(8):e70-88.
  10. Aggarwal AN, Agarwal R, Dhooria S, Prasad KT, Sehgal IS, Muthu V, et al. Joint Indian Chest Society-National College of Chest Physicians (India) guidelines for spirometry. Lung India 2019 Apr;36(Suppl 1):S1.
  11. Cavagna L, Nuno L, Scire CA, Govoni M, Longo FJ, Franceschini F, et al. Clinical spectrum time course in anti Jo-1 positive antisynthetase syndrome: results from an international retrospective multicenter study. Medicine 2015 Aug;94(32).
  12. Huang K, Aggarwal R. Antisynthetase syndrome: A distinct disease spectrum. J Scleroderma Relat Disord 2020 Oct;5(3):178-91.
  13. Watanabe K, Handa T, Tanizawa K, Hosono Y, Taguchi Y, Noma S, Kobashi Y, Kubo T, Aihara K, Chin K, Nagai S. Detection of antisynthetase syndrome in patients with idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Respir Med 2011 Aug 1;105(8):1238-47.
  14. Marie I, Hachulla E, Cherin P, Dominique S, Hatron PY, Hellot MF, et al. Interstitial lung disease in polymyositis and dermatomyositis. Arthritis Rheum 2002;47:614-22.
  15. Douglas WW, Tazelaar HD, Hartman TE, Hartman RP, Decker PA, Schroeder DR, et al. Polymyositis-dermatomyositis-associated interstitial lung disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001;164:1182-5.
  16. Rowen AJ, Reichel J. Dermatomyositis with lung involvement, successfully treated with azathioprine. Respiration 1983;44(2):143-6.
  17. Fischer A, Brown KK, Du Bois RM, Frankel SK, Cosgrove GP, Fernandez-Perez ER, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil improves lung function in connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease. J Rheumatol 2013;40(5):640-6.
  18. Bauhammer J, Blank N, Max R, Lorenz HM, Wagner U, Krause D, et al. Rituximab in the treatment of Jo1 antibody-associated antisynthetase syndrome: anti-Ro52 positivity as a marker for severity and treatment response. J Rheumatol 2016;43(8):1566-74.
  19. Allenbach Y, Guiguet M, Rigolet A, Marie I, Hachulla E, Drouot L, et al. Efficacy of rituximab in refractory inflammatory myopathies associated with anti- synthetase auto-antibodies: an open-label, phase II trial. PLoS One 2015;10(11):e0133702.
  20. Andersson H, Sem M, Lund MB, Aaløkken TM, Günther A, Walle-Hansen R, et al. Long-term experience with rituximab in anti-synthetase syndrome-related interstitial lung disease. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2015;54(8):1420-8.
  21. Dasa O, Ruzieh M, Oraibi O. Successful treatment of life-threatening interstitial lung disease secondary to antisynthetase syndrome using rituximab: a case report and review of the literature. Am J Ther 2016;23(2):e639-e645.
  22. Lepri G, Avouac J, Airo P, Anguita Santos F, Bellando-Randone S, et al. Effects of rituximab in connective tissue disorders related interstitial lung disease. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2016; 34(5):181-5.
  23. Nalotto L, Iaccarino L, Zen M, Gatto M, Borella E, Domenighetti M, et al. Rituximab in refractory idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and antisynthetase syndrome: personal experience and review of the literature. Immunol Res 2013;56(2–3):362-70.
  24. Sem M, Molberg O, Lund MB, Gran JT. Rituximab treatment of the anti-synthetase syndrome: a retrospective case series. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2009;48(8):968-71.
  25. Sharp C, McCabe M, Dodds N, Edey A, Mayers L, Adamali H, et al. Rituximab in autoimmune connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2016;55:1318-24.
  26. Unger L, Kampf S, Luthke K, Aringer M. Rituximab therapy in patients with refractory dermatomyositis or polymyositis: differential effects in a real-life population. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2014; 53(9):1630-8.
  27. Yousem SA, Gibson K, Kaminski N, Oddis CV, Ascherman DP. The pulmonary histopathologic manifestations of the anti-Jo-1 tRNA synthetase syndrome. Mod Pathol 2010 Jun;23(6):874-80.
  28. Marie I, Josse S, Hatron PY, Dominique S, Hachulla E, Janvresse A, et al. Interstitial Lung Disease in Anti–Jo‐1 Patients With Antisynthetase Syndrome. Arthritis Care Res 2013 May;65(5):800-8.
  29. Marco JL, Collins BF. Clinical manifestations and treatment of antisynthetase syndrome. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2020 Apr 11:101503.
  30. Dalakas MC, Hohlfeld R. Polymyositis and dermatomyositis. Lancet 2003 Sep 20;362(9388):971-82.
  31. Lega JC, Reynaud Q, Belot A, Fabien N, Durieu I, Cottin V. Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and the lung. Eur Respir Rev 2015 Jun 1;24(136):216-38.
  32. Schmidt WA, Wetzel W, Friedländer R, Lange R, Sörensen HF, Lichey HJ, et al. Clinical and serological aspects of patients with anti-Jo-1 antibodies–an evolving spectrum of disease manifestations. Clin Rheumatol 2000 Aug;19(5):371-7.
  33. Zhang L, Wu G, Gao D, Liu G, Pan L, Ni L, et al. Factors associated with interstitial lung disease in patients with polymyositis and dermatomyositis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2016 May 12;11(5):e0155381.
  34. Witt LJ, Curran JJ, Strek ME. The diagnosis and treatment of antisynthetase syndrome. Clin Pulm Med 2016 Sep;23(5):218.
  35. Maturu VN, Lakshman A, Bal A, Dhir V, Sharma A, Garg M, et al. Antisynthetase syndrome: an under-recognized cause of interstitial lung disease. Lung India 2016 Jan;33(1):20.
  36. Fischer A, Swigris JJ, du Bois RM, Lynch DA, Downey GP, Cosgrove GP, et al. Anti-synthetase syndrome in ANA and anti-Jo-1 negative patients presenting with idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. Respir Med 2009 Nov 1;103(11):1719-24.
  37. Imbert-Masseau A, Hamidou M, Agard C, Halloun A, Delangle MH, Audrain M, et al. Antisynthetase syndrome. Three cases and a review of the literature. In Ann Med Interne (Paris) 2003 Nov 1;154(7):483-8.