Multicentre cohort analysis shows recommended corticosteroid dose improves survival in cardiac sarcoidosis, suggesting critical management implications.
Background Japanese guidelines recommend a corticosteroid maintenance dose of 5–10 mg/day for cardiac sarcoidosis (CS); however, the optimal dose remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of maintenance dose and corticosteroid re-escalation on prognosis in patients with CS. Methods This multicentre retrospective cohort study used data from a Japanese nationwide CS registry. A total of 352 patients diagnosed according to the Japanese Circulation Society 2016 guideline and treated with oral corticosteroids were included. Patients were grouped by maintenance dose: low (<5.0 mg/day), recommended (5.0–10.0 mg/day) and high (>10.0 mg/day). Clinical outcomes were analysed. The main outcome was all-cause mortality. Results The low-dose, recommended-dose and high-dose groups comprised 11% (n=40), 78% (n=276) and 10% (n=36) of patients, with mean maintenance doses of 2.2 mg/day, 6.7 mg/day and 16.2 mg/day, respectively. During a median follow-up of 5.12 years, 39 patients (11%) died. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed statistically better survival in the recommended dose group, with the high-dose group showing statistically significantly worse outcomes (log-rank p=0.012). Corticosteroid re-escalation occurred in 19% of patients (9% before and 11% after achieving maintenance dose). All-cause mortality was 8% in the recommended-dose group versus 25% in the low-dose and 17% in the high-dose groups. In univariable analyses, re-escalation after achieving maintenance was associated with mortality in the high-dose group (HR 4.34, 95% CI 1.24 to 98.3), whereas re-escalation before achieving maintenance was associated with mortality in the low-dose group (HR 19.41, 95% CI 2.71 to 138.5). Conclusions A recommended maintenance dose of corticosteroids was associated with better prognosis in patients with CS. Achieving and maintaining this dose appears critically important in clinical management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nishimura et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: