Search

ObjectiveWe assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine uptake among individuals with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) and the Ontario general population.MethodsWe studied all residents aged ≥ 16 years who were alive and enrolled in the Ontario Health Insurance Plan as of December 14, 2020, when vaccination commenced (n = 12,435,914). Individuals with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), psoriasis (PsO), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) were identified using established disease-specific case definitions applied to health administrative data. Vaccination status was extracted from the provincial COVaxON registry. Weekly cumulative proportions of first and second doses up until October 3, 2021, were expressed as the vaccinated percentage of each disease group, compared to the general Ontario population, and stratified by age.ResultsBy October 3, 2021, the cumulative percentage with at least 1 dose was 82.1% for the general population, 88.9% for those with RA, 87.4% for AS, 90.6% for PsA, 87.3% for PsO, and 87.0% for IBD. There was also a higher total cumulative percentage with 2 doses among IMIDs (83.8–88.2%) vs the general population (77.9%). The difference was also evident when stratifying by age. Individuals with IMIDs in the youngest age group initially had earlier uptake than the general population but remain the lowest age group with 2 doses (70.6% in the general population vs. 73.7–79.2% across IMID groups).ConclusionWhile implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programs has differed globally, these Canadian estimates are the first to reassuringly show higher COVID-19 vaccine uptake among individuals with IMIDs.

ObjectiveTo understand how people with chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) trade off the benefits and risks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine options.MethodsWe conducted an online discrete-choice experiment in people with IMIDs to quantify the relative importance (RI) of attributes relevant to COVID-19 vaccination. Participants were recruited between May and August 2021 through patient groups and clinics in Canada, and completed 10 choices where they selected 1 of 2 hypothetical vaccine options or no vaccine. The RI of each attribute was estimated and heterogeneity was explored through latent class analysis.ResultsThe survey was completed by 551 people (89% female, mean age 46 yrs) with a range of IMIDs (inflammatory bowel disease [48%], rheumatoid arthritis [38%], systemic lupus erythematosus [16%]). Most had received 1 (94%) or 2 (64%) COVID-19 vaccinations. Across the ranges of levels considered, vaccine effectiveness was most important (RI = 66%), followed by disease flare (21%), rare but serious risks (9%), and number/timing of injections (4%). Patients would accept a risk of disease flare requiring a treatment change of ≤ 8.8% for a vaccine with a small absolute increase in effectiveness (10%). Of the 3 latent classes, the group with the greatest aversion to disease flare were more likely to be male and have lower incomes, but this group still valued effectiveness higher than other attributes.ConclusionPatients perceived the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination to outweigh rare serious risks and disease flare. This supports COVID-19 vaccine strategies that maximize effectiveness, while recognizing the heterogeneity in preferences that exists.

Objective.Anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) is as sensitive as, but more specific than, rheumatoid factor (RF) and is detected earlier in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although part of the RA classification criteria, ACPA testing is not routinely paid for/accessible in all jurisdictions. The effect of missing ACPA testing was studied to determine whether failure to perform ACPA testing could cause a care gap in early inflammatory arthritis.Methods.Nearly 2000 patients (n = 1998) recruited to an early inflammatory arthritis cohort were allocated into 3 groups: (1) seropositive (either RF+ or ACPA+), (2) seronegative (RF− and ACPA−), and (3) missing ACPA and RF−. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, symptom duration, and smoking status if p < 0.1. Disease Activity Score at 28 joints (DAS28) at 3 months was studied, because beyond then, disease activity is expected to determine ongoing treatment.Results.More seropositive patients fulfilled the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism RA criteria than seronegative patients. Group 3 was slightly older and had a smaller percentage of females, as well as shorter symptom duration and less smoking. At 3 months, group 3 was treated with fewer disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and methotrexate (p < 0.00002) than groups 1 and 2, but there were no significant differences in DAS28, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), proportion receiving corticosteroids, or physician’s/patient’s global assessments.Conclusion.There was no care gap in the RF-negative, unknown ACPA group because there were no significant differences in the DAS28, 3-month change in DAS28, or HAQ-DI, despite less treatment. Cost-effectiveness of ensuring ACPA testing availability in suspected RA is unknown because early outcomes did not differ, whether or not ACPA was available.

Objective.To evaluate the prevalence and predictive factors of sustained remission in an early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA) population. Predictive factors of sustained remission in ERA are unknown. We hypothesized that a short time to remission is an important predictor of sustained clinical remission.Methods.Patients in the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort were included. Remission was defined by Boolean-based American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism clinical trial and clinical practice definitions and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI). Logistic regression analysis identified predictors of sustained remission and influence of time to remission.Results.Of 1840 patients, 633 (34%) achieved clinical trial remission, 759 (41%) clinical practice remission, and 727 (39%) SDAI remission. Over half of those meeting remission criteria achieved sustained remission based on clinical trial (55%), clinical practice (60%), and/or SDAI (58%). Corticosteroid use and lack of initial disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) were associated with decreased probability of sustained remission, while initial combination DMARD increased this probability. Female sex, greater pain, and longer time to first remission made sustained remission less likely.Conclusion.Female sex, greater pain, and lack of initial DMARD therapy reduced the probability of sustained remission. A shorter time to remission is related to sustainability and supports striving for early remission.

Objective.To determine the factors most strongly associated with an increase in therapy of early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA).Methods.Data from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH) were included if the patient had ≥ 2 visits and baseline and 6 months data. A regression analysis was done to determine factors associated with treatment intensification.Results.Of 1145 patients with ERA, 790 met inclusion criteria; mean age was 53.4 years (SD 14.7), mean disease duration 6.1 months (SD 2.8), 75% were female, baseline Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28) was 4.7 (SD 1.8) and 2.9 (SD 1.8) at 6 months for included patients. Univariate factors for intensifying treatment were physician global assessment (MDGA; OR 7.8 and OR 7.4 at 3 and 6 months, respectively, p < 0.0005), swollen joint count (SJC; OR 4.7 and OR 7.3 at 3 and 6 months, p < 0.0005), and DAS28 (OR 3.0 and OR 4.6 at 3 and 6 months, p < 0.0005). In the regression model only MDGA was strongly associated with treatment intensification (OR 1.5 and OR 1.2 at 3 and 6 months, p < 0.0005); DAS28 was not consistently predictive (OR 1.0, p = 0.987, and OR 1.2, p = 0.023, at 3 and 6 months). DAS28 was the reason for treatment intensification 2.3% of the time, compared to 51.7% for SJC, 49.9% for tender joint count, and 23.8% for MDGA. For the same SJC, larger joint involvement was more likely to influence treatment than small joints at 3 months (OR 1.4, p = 0.027).Conclusion.MDGA was strongly associated with an increase in treatment at 3 and 6 months in ERA, whereas DAS28 was not. Physicians rarely stated that DAS28 was the reason for increasing treatment.

To evaluate whether rheumatologists experienced in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) assess peripheral and axial involvement in the same way and to consider core clinical measurements that should be included in clinical trials in PsA.Ten patients with PsA, representing a broad range of joint inflammation, joint damage, and spinal involvement, were selected for the study. Each patient was examined by each of 10 rheumatologists, members of the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada, according to a Latin Square design. Assessments included scoring actively inflamed joints and damaged joints, dactylitis, enthesitis, and spinal measurements. Variance components analyses were conducted for continuous measurements based on models with observer, patient, and order effects. Estimates of intraclass correlation coefficients and associated 95% confidence intervals were obtained.There was substantial reliability in the assessment of the number of actively inflamed joints and excellent agreement in the number of damaged joints. Only moderate agreement was found for the number of digits with dactylitis. There was excellent agreement among observers in the intermalleolar distance measurements, but there was not as good agreement in the other measurements of spinal mobility. There was good agreement among the observers in detecting plantar fasciitis, however, the other entheses did not fare as well.In this first multicenter study of the assessment of clinical evaluation of patients with PsA we found that the assessment of peripheral joint disease is reliable although training should be performed prior to initiation of drug trials or comparative studies in this disease. The assessment of back measurements in PsA and other spondyloarthritis requires further study.