Search

Objectives Perform a systematic literature review (SLR) on risk and prognosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods Literature was searched up to 31 May 2021, including (randomised) controlled trials and observational studies with patients with RMD. Pending quality assessment, data extraction was performed and risk of bias (RoB) was assessed. Quality assessment required provision of (1) an appropriate COVID-19 case definition, and (2a) a base incidence (for incidence data) or (2b) a comparator, >10 cases with the outcome and risk estimates minimally adjusted for age, sex and comorbidities (for risk factor data). Results Of 5165 records, 208 were included, of which 90 passed quality assessment and data were extracted for incidence (n=42), risk factor (n=42) or vaccination (n=14). Most studies had unclear/high RoB. Generally, patients with RMDs do not face more risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 (n=26 studies) or worse prognosis of COVID-19 (n=14) than individuals without RMDs. No consistent differences in risk of developing (severe) COVID-19 were found between different RMDs (n=19). Disease activity is associated with worse COVID-19 prognosis (n=2), possibly explaining the increased risk seen for glucocorticoid use (n=13). Rituximab is associated with worse COVID-19 prognosis (n=7) and possibly Janus kinase inhibitors (n=3). Vaccination is generally immunogenic, though antibody responses are lower than in controls. Vaccine immunogenicity is negatively associated with older age, rituximab and mycophenolate. Conclusion This SLR informed the July 2021 update of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for the management of RMDs in the context of SARS-CoV-2.

Objective To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist. Methods Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters. Results The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist € s diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found. Conclusion These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations.

Contains fulltext : 174409.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Background Inclusion body myositis is an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and the most common myopathy affecting people older than 50 years. To date, there are no effective drug treatments. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of bimagrumab-a fully human monoclonal antibody-in individuals with inclusion body myositis. Methods We did a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (RESILIENT) at 38 academic clinical sites in Australia, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Individuals (aged 3685 years) were eligible for the study if they met modified 2010 Medical Research Council criteria for inclusion body myositis. We randomly assigned participants (1:1:1:1) using a blocked randomisation schedule (block size of four) to either bimagrumab (10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, or 1 mg/kg) or placebo matched in appearance to bimagrumab, administered as intravenous infusions every 4 weeks for at least 48 weeks. All study participants, the funder, investigators, site personnel, and people doing assessments were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome measure was 6-min walking distance (6MWD), which was assessed at week 52 in the primary analysis population and analysed by intention-to-treat principles. We used a multivariate normal repeated measures model to analyse data for 6MWD. Safety was assessed by recording adverse events and by electrocardiography, echocardiography, haematological testing, urinalysis, and blood chemistry. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01925209; this report represents the final analysis. Findings Between Sept 26, 2013, and Jan 6, 2016, 251 participants were enrolled to the study, of whom 63 were assigned to each bimagrumab group and 62 were allocated to the placebo group. At week 52, 6MWD change from baseline did not differ between any bimagrumab dose and placebo (least squares mean treatment difference for bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 17.6 m, SE 14.3, 99% CI -19.6 to 54.8; p=0.22; for 3 mg/kg group, 18.6 m, 14.2, -18.2 to 55.4; p=0.19; and for 1 mg/kg group, 1.3 m, 14.1, -38.0 to 35.4; p=0.93). 63 (100%) participants in each bimagrumab group and 61 (98%) of 62 in the placebo group had at least one adverse event. Falls were the most frequent adverse event (48 [76%] in the bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 55 [87%] in the 3 mg/kg group, 54 [86%] in the 1 mg/kg group, and 52 [84%] in the placebo group). The most frequently reported adverse events with bimagrumab were muscle spasms (32 [51%] in the bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 43 [68%] in the 3 mg/kg group, 25 [40%] in the 1 mg/kg group, and 13 [21%] in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (33 [52%], 28 [44%], 20 [32%], and 11 [18%], respectively). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported in four (6%) participants in each bimagrumab group compared with one (2%) participant in the placebo group. At least one serious adverse event was reported by 21 (33%) participants in the 10 mg/kg group, 11 (17%) in the 3 mg/kg group, 20 (32%) in the 1 mg/kg group, and 20 (32%) in the placebo group. No significant adverse cardiac effects were recorded on electrocardiography or echocardiography. Two deaths were reported during the study, one attributable to subendocardial myocardial infarction (secondary to gastrointestinal bleeding after an intentional overdose of concomitant sedatives and antidepressants) and one attributable to lung adenocarcinoma. Neither death was considered by the investigator to be related to bimagrumab. Interpretation Bimagrumab showed a good safety profile, relative to placebo, in individuals with inclusion body myositis but did not improve 6MWD. The strengths of our study are that, to the best of our knowledge, it is the largest randomised controlled trial done in people with inclusion body myositis, and it provides important natural history data over 12 months. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) is a measure of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) disease activity with validated cut-offs endorsed by the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT).1 2 In the 2016 update of the ASAS-European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) management recommendations for axSpA, it is recommended that biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs should be considered in patients with persistently high disease activity despite conventional treatments, and that the preferred measure to define active disease should be the ASDAS (ASDAS of at least 2.1, ie, high disease activity).3 The 2017 update of treat-to-target recommendations in axial and peripheral SpA recommends that the treatment target should be inactive disease/clinical remission and that low/minimal disease activity may be an alternative treatment target. The same recommendations state that the preferred measure to define the target in axSpA is the ASDAS.4 ASDAS cut-offs for disease activity states are 1.3, separating ‘inactive disease’ from ‘moderate disease activity’, 2.1, …

Trabalho apresentado no Annual European Congress of Rheumatology (EULAR 2017), 14-17 junho de 2017, Madrid, Espanha N/A

This thesis focuses on the assessment and monitoring of health and imaging outcomes in axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and the relationship between these outcomes. Four major contributions to the understanding and management of axial SpA were made: 1) the improvement and facilitation of the assessment of disease activity using the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), for which we defined disease activity cut-offs and response criteria and provided guidance about the calculation of the score; 2) the increase in the knowledge about the mutual relationships between health outcomes in axial SpA, namely health related quality of life, physical function, clinical disease activity, spinal mobility, structural damage and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine; 3) the increase in the knowledge about the factors that influence phenotypic variability in axial SpA, namely Human Leukocyte Antigen B27 (HLA-B27) positivity (a genetic factor), smoking (an environmental factor) and the presence of psoriasis (an extra-articular manifestation); and 4) the insight into the processes that drive structural progression in axial SpA and into the link between inflammation and structural damage, by specifically looking at the relationship between MRI inflammation, MRI fat deposition and new bone formation in axial SpA.

Objective. Ten years ago, the METEOR tool was developed to simulate treatment-to-target and create an international research database. The development of the METEOR tool and database, research opportunities and future perspectives are described.Methods. The METEOR tool is a free, online, internationally available tool in which daily practice visits of all rheumatoid arthritis patients visiting a rheumatologist can be registered. In the tool, disease characteristics, patient- and physician-reported outcomes and prescribed treatment could be entered. These can be subsequently displayed in powerful graphics, facilitating treatment decisions and patient-physician interactions. An upload facility is also available, by which data from local electronic health record systems or registries can be integrated into the METEOR database. This is currently being actively used in, among other countries, the Netherlands, Portugal and India.Results. Since an increasing number of hospitals use electronic health record systems, the upload facility is being actively used by an increasing number of sites, enabling them to benefit from the benchmark and research opportunities of METEOR. Enabling a connection between local registries and METEOR is a well established but time-consuming process for which an IT-specialist of METEOR and the local registry are necessary. However, once this process has been finished, data can be uploaded regularly and relatively easily according to a pre-specified format. The METEOR database currently contains data from > 39,000 patients and > 200,000 visits, from 32 different countries and is ever increasing. Continuous efforts are being undertaken to increase the quality of data in the database.Conclusion. Since METEOR was founded 10 years ago, many rheumatologists worldwide have used the METEOR tool to follow-up their patients and improve the quality of care they provide to their patients. Combined with uploaded data, this has led to an extensive growth of the database. It now offers a unique opportunity to study daily practice care and to perform research regarding cross-country differences in a large, worldwide setting, which could provide important knowledge about disease and its treatment in different geographic and clinical settings.

This work was funded by European League Against Rheumatism (CLI122). PMM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). JDI is a NIHR Senior Investigator and his work is supported by the NIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre in Ageing and Long- Term Conditions, and the Research Into Inflammatory Arthritis Centre versus Arthritis. AVR is a member of the paediatric steering committee of RECOVERY, the steering committee of COVINTOC study and the steering committee of baricitinib in COVID-19., Alunno, A., Najm, A., MacHado, P.M., Bertheussen, H., Burmester, G.R., Carubbi, F., De Marco, G., Giacomelli, R., Hermine, O., Isaacs, J.D., Koné-Paut, I., Magro-Checa, C., McInnes, I., Meroni, P.L., Quartuccio, L., Ramanan, A.V., Ramos-Casals, M., Carrio, J.R., Schulze-Koops, H., Stamm, T.A., Tas, S.W., Terrier, B., McGonagle, D.G., Mariette, X.