Why is delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis of CIDP so common?

So I think there's a lot of reasons that the diagnosis of CITP is delayed.

I think one, it's hard sometimes for primary care providers and neurologists to recognize the clinical syndrome, specifically if it's a progressive neuropathy worsening over at least eight weeks with proximal and distal weakness predominantly.

And it can take a long time actually to get electrodiagnostics for certain patients.

So I think that ends up leading to a lot of delayed diagnosis.

The misdiagnosis of CIDP, I think, is also quite common.

I think things are misinterpreted, perhaps, electrodiagnostics with diabetic neuropathy, for instance, or something doesn't really quite fit and patients get started on treatments, but in fact, they have a different diagnosis altogether.

Kind of getting into how we make this diagnosis and how do we make it as accurately as possible in light of, as you mentioned, there's no blood test or specific marker that gives us a yes, no answer in terms of, does this person have CIDP? Can you talk a little bit about the clinical features specifically that are expected or in the guidelines, maybe required even, and what features are common or think kind of ancillary symptoms that people have that maybe don't fall into that category if they have to have them, or that's something that you really expect in everyone?