Search

ObjectivesA perception derived from cross-sectional studies of small systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohorts is that there is a marked discrepancy between antinuclear antibody (ANA) assays, which impacts on clinicians' approach to diagnosis and follow-up. We compared three ANA assays in a longitudinal analysis of a large international incident SLE cohort retested regularly and followed for 5 years.MethodsDemographic, clinical and serological data was from 805 SLE patients at enrolment, year 3 and 5. Two HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFA1, IFA2), an ANA ELISA, and SLE-related autoantibodies were performed in one laboratory. Frequencies of positivity, titres or absorbance units (AU), and IFA patterns were compared using McNemar, Wilcoxon and kappa statistics, respectively.ResultsAt enrolment, ANA positivity (≥1:80) was 96.1% by IFA1 (median titre 1:1280 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)), 98.3% by IFA2 (1:2560 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)) and 96.6% by ELISA (176.3 AU (IQR 106.4 AU-203.5 AU)). At least one ANA assay was positive for 99.6% of patients at enrolment. At year 5, ANA positivity by IFAs (IFA1 95.2%; IFA2 98.9%) remained high, while there was a decrease in ELISA positivity (91.3%, p91% agreement in ANA positivity at all time points and ≥71% agreement in IFA patterns between IFA1 and IFA2.ConclusionIn recent-onset SLE, three ANA assays demonstrated commutability with a high proportion of positivity and titres or AU. However, over 5 years follow-up, there was modest variation in ANA assay performance. In clinical situations where the SLE diagnosis is being considered, a negative test by either the ELISA or HEp-2 IFA may require reflex testing.

ObjectivesIn the anifrolumab systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) trial programme, there was one trial (TULIP-1) in which BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) responses favoured anifrolumab over placebo, but the SLE Responder Index (SRI(4)) treatment difference was not significant. We investigated the degree of concordance between BICLA and SRI(4) across anifrolumab trials in order to better understand drivers of discrepant SLE trial results.MethodsTULIP-1, TULIP-2 (both phase 3) and MUSE (phase 2b) were randomised, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks, 48 weeks; TULIP-1/TULIP-2: n=180; MUSE: n=99) or placebo (TULIP-1: n=184, TULIP-2: n=182; MUSE: n=102). Week 52 BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes were assessed for each patient.ResultsMost patients (78%-85%) had concordant BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes (Cohen's Kappa 0.6-0.7, nominal p

ObjectivesTo characterise the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) according to interferon gene signature (IFNGS), demographic and clinical subgroups.MethodsWe performed post hoc analyses of pooled data from the 52-week phase III TULIP-1/TULIP-2 placebo-controlled trials of intravenous anifrolumab in moderate-to-severe SLE. Outcomes were assessed in predefined subgroups: IFNGS (high/low), age, sex, body mass index, race, geographic region, age of onset, glucocorticoid use, disease activity and serological markers.ResultsIn pooled data, patients received anifrolumab 300 mg (360/726) or placebo (366/726); 82.6% were IFNGS-high. IFNGS-high patients had greater baseline disease activity and were more likely to have abnormal serological markers versus IFNGS-low patients. In the total population, a greater proportion of patients treated with anifrolumab versus placebo achieved British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response at week 52 (difference 16.6%; nominal p

ObjectivesTo evaluate systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares following hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) reduction or discontinuation versus HCQ maintenance.MethodsWe analysed prospective data from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) cohort, enrolled from 33 sites within 15 months of SLE diagnosis and followed annually (1999-2019). We evaluated person-time contributed while on the initial HCQ dose ('maintenance'), comparing this with person-time contributed after a first dose reduction, and after a first HCQ discontinuation. We estimated time to first flare, defined as either subsequent need for therapy augmentation, increase of ≥4 points in the SLE Disease Activity Index-2000, or hospitalisation for SLE. We estimated adjusted HRs (aHRs) with 95% CIs associated with reducing/discontinuing HCQ (vs maintenance). We also conducted separate multivariable hazard regressions in each HCQ subcohort to identify factors associated with flare.ResultsWe studied 1460 (90% female) patients initiating HCQ. aHRs for first SLE flare were 1.20 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.38) and 1.56 (95% CI 1.31 to 1.86) for the HCQ reduction and discontinuation groups, respectively, versus HCQ maintenance. Patients with low educational level were at particular risk of flaring after HCQ discontinuation (aHR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.87). Prednisone use at time-zero was associated with over 1.5-fold increase in flare risk in all HCQ subcohorts.ConclusionsSLE flare risk was higher after HCQ taper/discontinuation versus HCQ maintenance. Decisions to maintain, reduce or stop HCQ may affect specific subgroups differently, including those on prednisone and/or with low education. Further study of special groups (eg, seniors) may be helpful.

BACKGROUND:Targeted inhibitors of B-cell activating factor (BAFF) have been evaluated in phase III trials in over 4000 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Post hoc analyses of these studies identify greater treatment effect in patients entering with higher disease activity, greater corticosteroid doses, anti double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) and low complement C3 or C4. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of blisibimod, a BAFF inhibitor, in a population of patients with SLE enriched for high disease activity. METHODS:442 patients with SLE with antinuclear antibodies or anti-dsDNA and Safety of Estrogen in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment - Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) score ≥10 on standard-of-care medications were randomised to receive weekly subcutaneous blisibimod (200 mg) or placebo. Corticosteroid taper was encouraged from week 8. The primary end point was the week 52 SLE Responder Index-6 (SRI-6). RESULTS:The SRI-6 primary end point was not met. There was a statistically significant steroid-sparing effect, and significantly more blisibimod-treated subjects achieved corticosteroid taper. Increased blisibimod treatment effect on SRI-6 was observed in subjects who achieved a concomitant decrease in corticosteroid dose from baseline. In subjects with baseline urinary protein:creatinine ratio (UPCR) ≥56.5 mg/mmol, significantly higher proportions of blisibimod subjects achieved >50% reduction in UPCR and/or UPCR

ObjectivesThe efficacy and safety of sifalimumab were assessed in a phase IIb, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT01283139) of adults with moderate to severe active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).Methods431 patients were randomised and received monthly intravenous sifalimumab (200 mg, 600 mg or 1200 mg) or placebo in addition to standard-of-care medications. Patients were stratified by disease activity, interferon gene-signature test (high vs low based on the expression of four genes) and geographical region. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage of patients achieving an SLE responder index response at week 52.ResultsCompared with placebo, a greater percentage of patients who received sifalimumab (all dosages) met the primary end point (placebo: 45.4%; 200 mg: 58.3%; 600 mg: 56.5%; 1200 mg 59.8%). Other improvements were seen in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index score (200 mg and 1200 mg monthly), Physician's Global Assessment (600 mg and 1200 mg monthly), British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (1200 mg monthly), 4-point reductions in the SLE Disease Activity Index-2000 score and reductions in counts of swollen joints and tender joints. Serious adverse events occurred in 17.6% of patients on placebo and 18.3% of patients on sifalimumab. Herpes zoster infections were more frequent with sifalimumab treatment.ConclusionsSifalimumab is a promising treatment for adults with SLE. Improvement was consistent across various clinical end points, including global and organ-specific measures of disease activity.Trial registration numberNCT01283139; Results.

Background and aimsWe studied damage accrual and factors determining development and progression of damage in an international cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients.MethodsThe Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) Inception Cohort recruited patients within 15 months of developing four or more 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for SLE; the SLICC/ACR damage index (SDI) was measured annually. We assessed relative rates of transition using maximum likelihood estimation in a multistate model. The Kaplan-Meier method estimated the probabilities for time to first increase in SDI score and Cox regression analysis was used to assess mortality.ResultsWe recruited 1722 patients; mean (SD) age 35.0 (13.4) years at cohort entry. Patients with damage at enrolment were more likely to have further worsening of SDI (SDI 0 vs ≥1; p

BackgroundThe metabolic syndrome (MetS) may contribute to the increased cardiovascular risk in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We examined the association between MetS and disease activity, disease phenotype and corticosteroid exposure over time in patients with SLE.MethodsRecently diagnosed (1, higher disease activity, increasing age and Hispanic or Black African race/ethnicity were independently associated with MetS over the first 2 years of follow-up in the cohort.ConclusionsMetS is a persistent phenotype in a significant proportion of patients with SLE. Renal lupus, active inflammatory disease and damage are SLE-related factors that drive MetS development while antimalarial agents appear to be protective from early in the disease course.

ObjectivesThe Xq28 region containing IRAK1 and MECP2 has been identified as a risk locus for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in previous genetic association studies. However, due to the strong linkage disequilibrium between IRAK1 and MECP2, it remains unclear which gene is affected by the underlying causal variant(s) conferring risk of SLE.MethodsWe fine-mapped ≥136 SNPs in a ∼227 kb region on Xq28, containing IRAK1, MECP2 and seven adjacent genes (L1CAM, AVPR2, ARHGAP4, NAA10, RENBP, HCFC1 and TMEM187), for association with SLE in 15 783 case-control subjects derived from four different ancestral groups.ResultsMultiple SNPs showed strong association with SLE in European Americans, Asians and Hispanics at p

Objectives: A perception derived from cross-sectional studies of small systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohorts is that there is a marked discrepancy between antinuclear antibody (ANA) assays, which impacts on clinicians' approach to diagnosis and follow-up. We compared three ANA assays in a longitudinal analysis of a large international incident SLE cohort retested regularly and followed for 5 years.Methods: Demographic, clinical and serological data was from 805 SLE patients at enrolment, year 3 and 5. Two HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFA1, IFA2), an ANA ELISA, and SLE-related autoantibodies were performed in one laboratory. Frequencies of positivity, titres or absorbance units (AU), and IFA patterns were compared using McNemar, Wilcoxon and kappa statistics, respectively.Results: At enrolment, ANA positivity (≥1:80) was 96.1% by IFA1 (median titre 1:1280 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)), 98.3% by IFA2 (1:2560 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)) and 96.6% by ELISA (176.3 AU (IQR 106.4 AU-203.5 AU)). At least one ANA assay was positive for 99.6% of patients at enrolment. At year 5, ANA positivity by IFAs (IFA1 95.2%; IFA2 98.9%) remained high, while there was a decrease in ELISA positivity (91.3%, p<0.001). Overall, there was >91% agreement in ANA positivity at all time points and ≥71% agreement in IFA patterns between IFA1 and IFA2.Conclusion: In recent-onset SLE, three ANA assays demonstrated commutability with a high proportion of positivity and titres or AU. However, over 5 years follow-up, there was modest variation in ANA assay performance. In clinical situations where the SLE diagnosis is being considered, a negative test by either the ELISA or HEp-2 IFA may require reflex testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The efficacy and safety of sifalimumab were assessed in a phase IIb, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT01283139) of adults with moderate to severe active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).Methods: 431 patients were randomised and received monthly intravenous sifalimumab (200 mg, 600 mg or 1200 mg) or placebo in addition to standard-of-care medications. Patients were stratified by disease activity, interferon gene-signature test (high vs low based on the expression of four genes) and geographical region. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage of patients achieving an SLE responder index response at week 52.Results: Compared with placebo, a greater percentage of patients who received sifalimumab (all dosages) met the primary end point (placebo: 45.4%; 200 mg: 58.3%; 600 mg: 56.5%; 1200 mg 59.8%). Other improvements were seen in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index score (200 mg and 1200 mg monthly), Physician's Global Assessment (600 mg and 1200 mg monthly), British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (1200 mg monthly), 4-point reductions in the SLE Disease Activity Index-2000 score and reductions in counts of swollen joints and tender joints. Serious adverse events occurred in 17.6% of patients on placebo and 18.3% of patients on sifalimumab. Herpes zoster infections were more frequent with sifalimumab treatment.Conclusions: Sifalimumab is a promising treatment for adults with SLE. Improvement was consistent across various clinical end points, including global and organ-specific measures of disease activity.Trial Registration Number: NCT01283139; Results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a sexually dimorphic autoimmune disease which is more common in women, but affected men often experience a more severe disease. The genetic basis of sexual dimorphism in SLE is not clearly defined. A study was undertaken to examine sex-specific genetic effects among SLE susceptibility loci. Methods A total of 18 autosomal genetic susceptibility loci for SLE were genotyped in a large set of patients with SLE and controls of European descent, consisting of 5932 female and 1495 male samples. Sex-specific genetic association analyses were performed. The sex-gene interaction was further validated using parametric and non-parametric methods. Aggregate differences in sex-specific genetic risk were examined by calculating a cumulative genetic risk score for SLE in each individual and comparing the average genetic risk between male and female patients. Results A significantly higher cumulative genetic risk for SLE was observed in men than in women. (P=4.52x10-8) A significant sex-gene interaction was seen primarily in the human leucocyte antigen (HLA) region but also in IRF5, whereby men with SLE possess a significantly higher frequency of risk alleles than women. The genetic effect observed in KIAA1542 is specific to women with SLE and does not seem to have a role in men. Conclusions The data indicate that men require a higher cumulative genetic load than women to develop SLE. These observations suggest that sex bias in autoimmunity could be influenced by autosomal genetic susceptibility loci. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Altered signalling in B cells is a predominant feature of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The genes BANK1 and BLK were recently described as associated with SLE. BANK1 codes for a B-cell-specific cytoplasmic protein involved in B-cell receptor signalling and BLK codes for an Src tyrosine kinase with important roles in B-cell development. To characterise the role of BANK1 and BLK in SLE, a genetic interaction analysis was performed hypothesising that genetic interactions could reveal functional pathways relevant to disease pathogenesis. Methods The GPAT16 method was used to analyse the gene-gene interactions of BANK1 and BLK. Confocal microscopy was used to investigate co-localisation, and immunoprecipitation was used to verify the physical interaction of BANK1 and BLK. Results Epistatic interactions between BANK1 and BLK polymorphisms associated with SLE were observed in a discovery set of 279 patients and 515 controls from northern Europe. A meta-analysis with 4399 European individuals confirmed the genetic interactions between BANK1 and BLK. As BANK1 was identified as a binding partner of the Src tyrosine kinase LYN, the possibility that BANK1 and BLK could also show a protein-protein interaction was tested. The co-immunoprecipitation and co-localisation of BLK and BANK1 were demonstrated. In a Daudi cell line and primary naive B cells endogenous binding was enhanced upon B-cell receptor stimulation using anti-IgM antibodies. Conclusions This study shows a genetic interaction between BANK1 and BLK, and demonstrates that these molecules interact physically. The results have important consequences for the understanding of SLE and other autoimmune diseases and identify a potential new signalling pathway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Observations of familial aggregation (λs=8–29) and a 40% identical twin concordance rate prompted recent work towards a comprehensive genetic analysis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Since 2007, the number of genetic effects known to be associated with human lupus has increased by fivefold, underscoring the complexity of inheritance that probably contributes to this disease. Approximately 35 genes associated with lupus have either been replicated in multiple samples or are near the threshold for genome-wide significance (p>5×10). Some are rare variants that convincingly contribute to lupus only in specific subgroups. Strong associations have been found with a large haplotype block in the human leucocyte antigen region, with Fcγ receptors, and with genes coding for complement components, in which a single gene deletion may cause SLE in rare familial cases and copy number variation is more common in the larger population of SLE patients. Examples of newly discovered genes include , and /. Ongoing studies to build models in which combinations of associated genes might contribute to specific disease manifestations should contribute to improved understanding of disease pathology. In addition, pharmacogenomic components of ongoing clinical trials are likely to provide insights into fundamental disease pathology as well as contributing to informed patient selection for targeted treatments and biomarkers to guide dosing and gauge responsiveness. Besides these potentially valuable new insights into the pathophysiology of an enigmatic, potentially deadly, and, as yet, unsolved disease, genetic studies are likely to suggest novel molecular targets for strategic development of safer and more effective therapeutics. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objectives: This study aims to determine the independent impact of definitions of remission/low disease activity (LDA) on direct/indirect costs (DCs, ICs) in a multicentre inception cohort., Methods: Patients from 31 centres in 10 countries were enrolled within 15 months of diagnosis and assessed annually. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states (DAS) were defined as (1) remission off-treatment: clinical (c) SLEDAI-2K=0, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (2) remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; (3) LDA-Toronto Cohort (TC): cSLEDAI-2K≤2, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (4) modified lupus LDA state (mLLDAS): SLEDAI-2K≤4, no activity in major organs/systems, no new activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants and (5) active: all remaining assessments.At each assessment, patients were stratified into the most stringent DAS fulfilled and the proportion of time in a DAS since cohort entry was determined. Annual DCs/ICs (2021 Canadian dollars) were based on healthcare use and lost workforce/non-workforce productivity over the preceding year.The association between the proportion of time in a DAS and annual DC/IC was examined through multivariable random-effects linear regressions., Results: 1692 patients were followed a mean of 9.7 years; 49.0% of assessments were active. Remission/LDA (per 25% increase in time in a remission/LDA state vs active) were associated with lower annual DC/IC: remission off-treatment (DC -$C1372; IC -$C2507), remission on-treatment (DC -$C973; IC -$C2604,) LDA-TC (DC -$C1158) and mLLDAS (DC -$C1040). There were no cost differences between remission/LDA states., Conclusions: Our data suggest that systemic lupus erythematosus patients who achieve remission, both off and on-therapy, and reductions in disease activity incur lower costs than those experiencing persistent disease activity., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MRWB has received consulting fees, speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen and Sanofi Genzyme. MFU-G has received consulting and/or speaking fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Ferrer and a research grant from Janssen. CG has received consulting fees, speaking fees, and/or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Amgen, Sanofi, and UCB (less than $10 000 each). DJW has received consulting fees from Merck, EMD Serono, Pfizer, Lilly and Glenmark (less than $10 000 each). PRF has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline (less than $10 000 each). DDG received consulting fees and/or honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca (less than $10 000). INB has received consulting fees, speaking fees, and/or honoraria from Eli Lilly, UCB, Roche, Merck Serono, MedImmune (less than $10 000 each) and grants from UCB, Genzyme Sanofi, and GlaxoSmithKline. EMG has paid consultation with investment analysts Guidepoint Global Gerson Lerman Group. RR-G has received consulting fees from Cabaletta, BristolMyersSquibb, Biogen, Merck, and Ampel Solutions (all less than $10 000 each). RFvV has received consulting fees, speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biotest, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB (less than $10 000 each) and research support from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and UCB. MI has received consulting fees from UCB and Amgen (less than $10 000 each). KK has received grants from UCB, Human Genome Sciences/GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Ablynx, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Kyowa Hakko Kirin, and has received consulting fees from Exagen Diagnostics, Genentech, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Anthera (less than $10 000 each). AEC has received consulting fees, speaking fees, and/or honoraria from AstraZeneca, BristolMyersSquibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche and Otsuka (less than $10 000 each) and a research grant from GlaxoSmithKline. No other disclosures relevant to this article were reported., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ on behalf of EULAR.)

Objectives: This phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of telitacicept, a novel fusion protein that neutralises signals of B lymphocyte stimulator and a proliferation-inducing ligand, in active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: Adult patients with active SLE (n=249) were recruited from 29 hospitals in China and randomised 1:1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous telitacicept at 80 mg (n=62), 160 mg (n=63), 240 mg (n=62) or placebo (n=62) once weekly in addition to standard therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI-4) response at week 48. Missing data were imputed using the last observation carried forward method., Results: At week 48, the proportion of patients achieving an SRI-4 response was 75.8% in the 240 mg telitacicept group, 68.3% in the 160 mg group, 71.0% in the 80 mg group and 33.9% in the placebo group (all p<0.001). Significant treatment responses were observed in secondary endpoints, including a ≥4-point reduction on the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index, a lack of Physician's Global Assessment score worsening and a glucocorticoid dose reduction in the 240 mg group. Telitacicept was well tolerated, and the incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events was similar between the telitacicept and placebo groups., Conclusions: This phase 2b clinical trial met the primary endpoint. All telitacicept groups showed a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving an SRI-4 response than the placebo group at week 48, and all doses were well tolerated. These results support further investigations of telitacicept in clinical trials involving more diverse populations and larger sample sizes., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02885610)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JF is an employee of RemeGen Co and holds shares of the company. JTM reports medical writing and article processing from RemeGen; speaker honoraria from RemeGen, BMS and AbbVie; chief advisor for Clinical Development Lupus Foundation of America; medical writing support from AbbVie, GSK, BMS, Zenas, Kezar and Idorsia; grants from AstraZeneca, NIH: NIAID Autoimmunity Centers of Excellence, NIH/NIAMS 5 P30 AR073750-01, Oklahoma Cohort for the Rheumatic Diseases, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics and AMP/AIM; consulting honoraria from AbbVie, Alexion, Alumis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia, BMS, EMD Serono, Equillium, Gilead, Genentech, GSK, Janssen, Kezar, Lilly, Merck (MSD), Pfizer, Provention, RemeGen, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB and Zenas; and advisory boards from Alexion, Alumis, Aurinia, Equillium, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly and Merck. RFvV reports receiving research support (institutional grants) from BMS and UCB; educational support (institutional grants) from AstraZeneca, Galapagos, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB; consulting honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, BMS, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, RemeGen and UCB; speaker honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)