Search

Introduction: The use of Janus Kinase Inhibitors (JAK-Is) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has entered in daily practice. In consideration of ORAL-Surveillance trial and the new EULAR recommendations, real-world data are needed to assess Jak-Is safety and effectiveness. The multicenter study presented here aimed to evaluate effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib in a real-life cohort. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed from September 2021 to December 2022. Data were collected when tofacitinib was started (T0) and after 3 (T3), 6 (T6) and 12 (T12) months of treatment. The primary objective was to analyze the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib. Safety was assessed by recording adverse events (AEs) with and without discontinuation. The secondary objective was to assess the difference between Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity (PhGA). Results: 122 patients were included in the study from the following rheumatology Centers: Pisa, Ancona, Florence (two Centers), Siena, and Sardinia. A statistically significant improvement in DAS-28-CRP, CDAI and SDAI score was observed at T3, T6, compared to baseline (p < 0.001). Improvement was confirmed in patients who reach T12. Patients naïve to bDMARDs showed a shorter remission time and higher remission rates. There was also a statistically significant improvement in PROs compared to baseline (p < 0.001). The improvement was rapid and was consistent with PhGA. The 12-month retention rate for tofacitinib was 89.35%. Reasons to stop tofacitinib were: insufficient response (7), gastrointestinal symptoms (2), infection (1), malignancy (1), Zoster (1), pruritus sine materia (1). Conclusions: Tofacitinib is safe and effective in our RA cohort. It induces higher remission rates in patients naive to bDMARDs, suggesting that there may be a benefit using it as first-line therapy. Additionally, improvement in PROs was consistent with PhGA scores, demonstrating how tofacitinib affects both the objective and subjective components of disease activity. Key Points 1. JAK inhibitors are considered at a similar level as biologic agents in terms of effectiveness. 2. After ORAL-Surveillance results, real-world data are needed to assess the benefit/risk profile of Jaki. 3. Disagreement between patients and physicians has been previously reported with biologic therapy among patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with patients rating disease activity higher than physicians. 4. Jak inhibitors could reduce this discrepancy, due to their mechanism of action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients and health workers were at high risk of infection during the Sars-Cov-2 pandemic lockdown. For this reason, other medical and clinical approaches such as Telemedicine were necessary. Despite Telemedicine was born before COVID-19, the pandemic was the opportunity to accelerate a process already underway for at least a decade and to blow all the barriers away. Our aim is to describe the experience of Telemedicine during and immediately after the first lockdown to assure the follow-up in a 'virtual' outpatient clinic dedicated to Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs) and to give an overview of Telemedicine in the rheumatology field. We retrospectively evaluated the patient flow to our rheumatology division from March to September 2020 and, in accordance with local restrictions, three periods were selected. In the 1st period, 96.96% of the outpatient clinic cases were shifted to Telemedicine; these decreased to 52.45% in the 2nd period, while the 3rd period was characterized by the return of the patients at the clinic (97.6%). Diagnostic procedures were postponed during the 1st period, reduced drastically during the 2nd and performed regularly during the third period. Intravenous infusions were maintained as much as possible during the three periods, to assure therapeutic continuity. Shifting stable patients to Telemedicine has the potential to allow continuity of care, while reducing the risk of contagion during a pandemic. In the next future, the integration of Telemedicine as standard of care for specific clinical applications might assure assistance for RMDs patients also in non-pandemic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/objectives: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is frequent and highly disabling in systemic sclerosis (SSc). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not routinely used to evaluate the lung, due to poorer spatial resolution compared to high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT). We aimed to compare lung MRI signal with HRCT and evaluate the role of MRI in predicting ILD progression. Methods: Thirty SSc patients underwent lung MRI and HRCT. STIR and T1 mapping sequences were acquired before and after gadolinium injection. Patients were classified as normal (group 1 with normal HRCT and MRI), discordant (group 2 without ILD signs on HRCT but areas of hyperintensity on MRI), and abnormal (group 3 with ILD signs on HRCT and areas of hyperintensity on MRI). Patients were followed up for ILD progression. Results: Mean STIR and T1 values were different between the three groups (p < 0.0001). STIR values correlated with HRCT score (R = 0.79, p < 0.0001), lung ultrasound B-lines (R = 0.73, p < 0.0001), and %DLco (R = − 0.63, p = 0.0001). Nine events were recorded during a follow-up of 25 ± 20 months. Continuous STIR values were independently associated with events (HR 1.018; CI 1.005–1.031, p = 0.005). A STIR value >90 ms discriminated patients at a higher risk of worsening pulmonary involvement (HR 8.80; CI 1.81–42.74; p < 0.007). Conclusions: Lung MRI can detect SSc-related ILD, with good correlations with other ILD markers. STIR values, independently of HRCT appearance, may predict worsening lung involvement. Lung MRI, although very preliminary, is a promising tool that in a near future could help selecting patients for an early treatment of SSc-related ILD and a more appropriate use of HRCT. Key points • Lung MRI has the potential to differentiate inflammation-predominant versus fibrosis-predominant lesions, but it is not currently used in routine clinical practice to assess SSc-related ILD. • Lung MRI STIR and T1 values are significantly different between patients with and without SSc-related ILD. STIR values, independently of HRCT appearance, are also able to predict worsening lung involvement over time. • These preliminary data suggest that, in a near future, MRI could support the choice for an early treatment of SSc-related ILD, as well as a more appropriate use of HRCT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Covid-19 infection poses a serious challenge for immune-compromised patients with inflammatory autoimmune systemic diseases. We investigated the clinical-epidemiological findings of 1641 autoimmune systemic disease Italian patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. Method: This observational multicenter study included 1641 unselected patients with autoimmune systemic diseases from three Italian geographical areas with different prevalence of Covid-19 [high in north (Emilia Romagna), medium in central (Tuscany), and low in south (Calabria)] by means of telephone 6-week survey. Covid-19 was classified as (1) definite diagnosis of Covid-19 disease: presence of symptomatic Covid-19 infection, confirmed by positive oral/nasopharyngeal swabs; (2) highly suspected Covid-19 disease: presence of highly suggestive symptoms, in absence of a swab test. Results: A significantly higher prevalence of patients with definite diagnosis of Covid-19 disease, or with highly suspected Covid-19 disease, or both the conditions together, was observed in the whole autoimmune systemic disease series, compared to "Italian general population" (p =.030, p =.001, p =.000, respectively); and for definite + highly suspected diagnosis of Covid-19 disease, in patients with autoimmune systemic diseases of the three regions (p =.000, for all comparisons with the respective regional general population). Moreover, significantly higher prevalence of definite + highly suspected diagnosis of Covid-19 disease was found either in patients with various "connective tissue diseases" compared to "inflammatory arthritis group" (p <.000), or in patients without ongoing conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs treatments (p =.011). Conclusions: The finding of a higher prevalence of Covid-19 in patients with autoimmune systemic diseases is particularly important, suggesting the need to develop valuable prevention/management strategies, and stimulates in-depth investigations to verify the possible interactions between Covid-19 infection and impaired immune-system of autoimmune systemic diseases. Key Points • Significantly higher prevalence of Covid-19 is observed in a large series of patients with autoimmune systemic diseases compared to the Italian general population, mainly due to patients' increased susceptibility to infections and favored by the high exposure to the virus at medical facilities before the restriction measures on individual movement. • The actual prevalence of Covid-19 in autoimmune systemic diseases may be underestimated, possibly due to the wide clinical overlapping between the two conditions, the generally mild Covid-19 disease manifestations, and the limited availability of virological testing. • Patients with "connective tissue diseases" show a significantly higher prevalence of Covid-19, possibly due to deeper immune-system impairment, with respect to "inflammatory arthritis group". • Covid-19 is more frequent in the subgroup of autoimmune systemic diseases patients without ongoing conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, mainly hydroxyl-chloroquine and methotrexate, which might play some protective role against the most harmful manifestations of Covid-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

B Correction to: Clinical Rheumatology b https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-023-06520-z The last name of the co-author, "Khadija El Aoufy", presented in the original published version of the above paper was incorrect. The last name should have been "El Aoufy" instead of "Aoufy". [Extracted from the article]