Search

Objective: To describe people with gout who were diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalized and to characterize their outcomes., Methods: Data on patients with gout hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 12, 2020, and October 25, 2021, were extracted from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographics, comorbidities, medication exposures, and COVID-19 outcomes including oxygenation or ventilation support and death., Results: One hundred sixty-three patients with gout who developed COVID-19 and were hospitalized were included. The mean age was 63 years, and 85% were male. The majority of the group lived in the Western Pacific Region (35%) and North America (18%). Nearly half (46%) had two or more comorbidities, with hypertension (56%), cardiovascular disease (28%), diabetes mellitus (26%), chronic kidney disease (25%), and obesity (23%) being the most common. Glucocorticoids and colchicine were used pre-COVID-19 in 11% and 12% of the cohort, respectively. Over two thirds (68%) of the cohort required supplemental oxygen or ventilatory support during hospitalization. COVID-19-related death was reported in 16% of the overall cohort, with 73% of deaths documented in people with two or more comorbidities., Conclusion: This cohort of people with gout and COVID-19 who were hospitalized had high frequencies of ventilatory support and death. This suggests that patients with gout who were hospitalized for COVID-19 may be at risk of poor outcomes, perhaps related to known risk factors for poor outcomes, such as age and presence of comorbidity., (© 2022 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

This study aims to characterize the effect of pre- and/or post-sintering pigmentation techniques on the fatigue behavior of a 4YSZ ceramic (4 mol% yttrium stabilized zirconia). First, 4YSZ ceramic discs (IPS e.max ZirCAD, 15 mm diameter, and 1.2 mm thickness) were obtained and allocated according to the 'pigmentation technique' factor into 5 groups: Ctrl - unshaded ceramic disc (IPS e.max ZirCAD BL); Manuf - ceramic discs shaded by the manufacturer at block formation (IPS e.max ZirCAD MT A2); Brush - unshaded ceramic disc pigmented in the pre-sintered stage using a brush; Stain - unshaded ceramic disc pigmented in the post-sintering stage using a stain glaze (shade A2); Brush + Stain - combination of Brush and Stain techniques. The specimens were sintered and analyzed by a spectrophotometer (VITA Easyshade) for color differences (ΔE 00 calculated according to CIEDE, 2000) to ensure that they present the same perceived color (ΔE 00  ≤ 1.77, acceptability threshold). The specimens (n = 15) were submitted to biaxial flexural fatigue testing using a cyclic fatigue method (frequency of 20 Hz; 10,000 cycles per step; initial stress of 200 MPa; and step-size of 25 MPa) until specimen fracture. Fatigue strength (FS) and number of cycles until failure (CFF) were recorded with statistical purposes. Fractographic, complementary topography, elemental and roughness analyses were performed. The Ctrl shown the highest FS, CFF, and survival rates compared to the other conditions (p < 0.05), being only statistically similar to Brush. Stain showed the lowest FS, CFF and survival rates (p < 0.05). The Manuf and Brush + Stain shown intermediary performance. In regards of Weibull moduli, Brush shown the lowest values (lowest structural reliability), for both FS and CFF, being only statistically similar to Manuf. Topography analysis shown a uniform size of zirconia crystals in Ctrl, Manuf and Brush. In addition, a smooth glassy surface with some spots of impregnated pigment was observed in the groups where glaze was applied (Stain and Brush + Stain). This finding was corroborated by elemental analysis. Despite that, Stain and Brush + Stain presented the roughest surface (p < 0.05). In summary, the pigmentation techniques used to provide a Vita classical A2 color shade have a detrimental effect on the mechanical fatigue properties of a 4YSZ ceramic, except for the technique performed with the brush in the block pre-sintering stage. Despite this, the brush technique presents great variability in mechanical performance, resulting in lower structural reliability., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Achievement of remission is a desirable outcome and the identification of predictors of remission may aid in the clinical management of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Our aim was to summarise predictors of remission in people with axSpA., Methods: In this systematic literature review (SLR), we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from their inception to May 20, 2022, and 2020-2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) meeting abstracts. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in which prognostic factors associated with remission were investigated by multivariable analysis., Results: The SLR comprised 21 articles from 4592 citations. Three studies investigated "sustained remission" (≥3 consecutive visits), while the other assessed "point remission" (at single points in time, varying from 12 weeks to 8 years). The most used remission criteria were Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) inactive disease (14 studies) and Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society partial remission criteria (11 studies). Younger age, HLA-B27 positivity, male gender, lower baseline Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), lower baseline Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), lower baseline ASDAS-C-reactive protein, treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), and concomitant use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), were the most consistent predictors of remission. Additionally, shorter disease duration, lower Health Assessment Questionnaire for the spondyloarthropathies and TNFi naivety were predictors of remission in two studies. Other factors were found to be predictors of remission in one study only., Conclusions: Predictors of remission in axSpA were identified. However, many of these predictors were only identified in 1-2 studies. Considering the differences in study design, further well-designed prognostic studies are needed to confirm and allow generalisation of these predictors to the general axSpA population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest P.M.M. has received consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. A.S.P: no conflicts of interest; B.F: no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Some patients with rheumatic diseases might be at higher risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to develop a prediction model for COVID-19 ARDS in this population and to create a simple risk score calculator for use in clinical settings., Methods: Data were derived from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry from March 24, 2020, to May 12, 2021. Seven machine learning classifiers were trained on ARDS outcomes using 83 variables obtained at COVID-19 diagnosis. Predictive performance was assessed in a US test set and was validated in patients from four countries with independent registries using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. A simple risk score calculator was developed using a regression model incorporating the most influential predictors from the best performing classifier., Results: The study included 8633 patients from 74 countries, of whom 523 (6%) had ARDS. Gradient boosting had the highest mean AUC (0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.88) and was considered the top performing classifier. Ten predictors were identified as key risk factors and were included in a regression model. The regression model that predicted ARDS with 71% (95% CI: 61%-83%) sensitivity in the test set, and with sensitivities ranging from 61% to 80% in countries with independent registries, was used to develop the risk score calculator., Conclusion: We were able to predict ARDS with good sensitivity using information readily available at COVID-19 diagnosis. The proposed risk score calculator has the potential to guide risk stratification for treatments, such as monoclonal antibodies, that have potential to reduce COVID-19 disease progression., (© 2022 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To investigate factors associated with severe COVID-19 in people with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM)., Methods: Demographic data, clinical characteristics and COVID-19 outcome severity of adults with IIM were obtained from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician-reported registry. A 3-point ordinal COVID-19 severity scale was defined: (1) no hospitalisation, (2) hospitalisation (and no death) and (3) death. ORs were estimated using multivariable ordinal logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were performed using a 4-point ordinal scale: (1) no hospitalisation, (2) hospitalisation with no oxygen (and no death), (3) hospitalisation with oxygen/ventilation (and no death) and 4) death., Results: Of 348 patients, 48% were not hospitalised, 39% were hospitalised (and did not die) and 13% died. Older age (OR=1.59/decade, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.91), high disease activity (OR=3.50, 95% CI 1.25 to 9.83; vs remission), ≥2 comorbidities (OR=2.63, 95% CI 1.39 to 4.98; vs none), prednisolone-equivalent dose >7.5 mg/day (OR=2.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 5.28; vs no intake) and exposure to rituximab (OR=2.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 5.72; vs conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs only) were independently associated with severe COVID-19. In addition to these variables, in the sensitivity analyses, male sex (OR range: 1.65-1.83; vs female) was also significantly associated with severe outcomes, while COVID-19 diagnosis after 1 October 2020 (OR range: 0.51-0.59; vs on/before 15 June 2020) was significantly associated with less severe outcomes, but these associations were not significant in the main model (OR=1.57, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.59; and OR=0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.00; respectively)., Conclusions: This is the first large registry data on outcomes of COVID-19 in people with IIM. Older age, male sex, higher comorbidity burden, high disease activity, prednisolone-equivalent dose >7.5 mg/day and rituximab exposure were associated with severe COVID-19. These findings will enable risk stratification and inform management decisions for patients with IIM., Competing Interests: Competing interests: S-AY is supported by vs Arthritis, Royal College of Physicians, Rosetrees Trust, University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and University College London Hospitals Charity, all unrelated to this manuscript. MG is a Pfizer employee as of March 2022. KLH has received support from EULAR for database maintenance and data extraction related to this manuscript, KLH has received grants from Pfizer and BMS for work unrelated to this manuscript, honoraria from Abbvie unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LC participates on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Lilly, and has a leadership or fiduciary role in EULAR, unrelated to this manuscript. CR receives consulting fees from AbbVie, Astra Zeneca, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, GSK, Pfizer, Biogen, BMS, Galapagos, Lilly, travel support from Amgen, Celltrion, Galapagos, patents planned, issued or pending by Astra Zeneca, and receipt of equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services by Biogen and Lilly, all unrelated to this manuscript. GJP-E has received grants from Janssen, consulting fees and honoraria from GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, Werfen, travel support from GSK, Montpellier, Boehringer Ingelheim, and participates on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Pfizer, GSK and Janssen, and has received equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services from Janssen, all unrelated to this manuscript. REV has received grants from BMS, Novartis, Pfizer and honoraria from Hexal, all unrelated to this manuscript. EV has received honoraria from AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen and travel support from AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, and participates on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen, and is President of Asociacion de Rumatologia del Noreste Argentino, all unrelated to this manuscript. ES receives honoraria from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance and non-financial support from Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, unrelated to this manuscript. JH receives grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation, salary support from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance, consulting fees from Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi and Biogen, all unrelated to this manuscript. MGM is a patient consultant for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb, all unrelated to this manuscript, and receives honoraria from Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, all unrelated to this study. RG has received honoraria from Janssen, Pfizer, AbbVie, Cornerstones, Novartis, travel support from Pfizer and Janssen, and is a member of the New Zealand Rheumatology Association executive and ACR Global Engagement Special Committee, all unrelated to this manuscript. SB is a Pfizer employee and has received honoraria from AbbVie, Horizon, Novartis, Pfizer, has received travel support from Pfizer, and owns restricted stock units with Pfizer as a Pfizer employee, all unrelated to this manuscript. PCR has received grants from Pfizer, Novartis, UCB, Janssen, all unrelated to this manuscript, consulting fees from AbbVie, Janssen, UCB, Roche, Lilly, Novartis, Atom Biosciences, Gilead, Kukdong, GSK, all unrelated to this manuscript, honoraria from AbbVie, UCB, Janssen, Novartis, Lilly, GSK, Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript, travel support from BMS, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, all unrelated to this manuscript. PCR reports participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Atom Biosciences, unrelated to this manuscript, and leadership role in the Australian Rheumatology Association and Arthritis Queensland, unrelated to this manuscript. JY has received support from NIH/NIAMS (grants to UCSF) for the present manuscript, grants from Gilead, Astra Zeneca, BMS Foundation, all unrelated to this manuscript, consulting fees from Astra Zeneca, Aurinia, Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. PMM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) and has received consulting fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The current COVID-19 pandemic raises several clinical challenges. Cases of COVID-19-associated arthritis have been reported, and inconsistently described as either COVID-19 viral arthritis or COVID-19 reactive arthritis. We aimed to review all the reported cases of 'COVID-19-associated arthritis', which we propose, is a better term to define the entire spectrum of new-onset arthritis believed to be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We performed a systematic literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to search for articles published up to 13 December 2021. We included cohort studies, case series and case reports describing patients diagnosed with COVID-19 reactive or viral arthritis by a physician, irrespective of fulfilment of classification criteria. To identify relevant studies, medical subject headings and keywords related to 'COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection' and 'reactive arthritis' were used. Our search retrieved 419 articles, of which 31 were included in the review. A total of 33 cases were reported in these 31 articles, the majority being adults (28/33=85%) with peripheral joint involvement (26/33=79%). Most of the patients responded well to treatment and the disease was self-limiting. These 33 case reports describe a possible causal relationship between exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the onset of arthritis. However, since these cases were reported during a pandemic, other aetiologies cannot be fully excluded. The exact mechanism through which SARS-CoV-2 might trigger arthritis is not fully understood and robust epidemiological data to support a causal relationship are still lacking., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. ASP and BF: no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Gender-affirming surgery is classically done using the penile inversion vaginoplasty technique, however in some patients it may not promote adequate depth. In patients whose vaginal conduits became short or stenotic, we propose to perform a secondary vaginoplasty using an abdominal free skin mesh graft. In this study, we present ours results of a series of cases using this technique., Methods: A retrospective review of patients undergoing secondary vaginoplasty with free skin mesh graft from 2000 to 2017 at our hospital was performed. Demographic data, surgical characteristics, complications, personal satisfaction and neovagina functionality (defined as the ability to have satisfactory sexual intercourse) were evaluated., Results: Of 186 patients who were submitted to primary vaginoplasty, 36 patients (19.3%) were then submitted to secondary vaginoplasty. This study sample included 35 patients. The average age of patients was 41.0 years (37.0 to 50.5) and the average time between gender affirmation surgery and secondary vaginoplasty was 6 months (4-24). Ten patients (28.6%) developed postoperative complication, the most frequent being: neovagina introitus stenosis (22.9%), rectal fistula (8.6%), tissue dehiscence (2.9%), and urethral fistula (2.9%). Subjective personal satisfaction and neovagina functionality of patients was reported by 77.1% of the sample., Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that secondary vaginoplasty surgery using a free skin mesh graft has good results and is a functional option with low complexity and low rate of serious complications., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tau.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tau-22-215/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2022 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.)

The majority of government authorities initially responded to COVID-19 pandemic by declaring lockdown to facilitate social distancing and minimize virus spreading. This period termed "anthropause" provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the recovery of wildlife in the absence of stressors on urban ecosystems. We assessed whether the anthropause associated with beach closures during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in repopulation of the Atlantic ghost crab Ocypode quadrata (Fabricius, 1787) on urban beaches. For this purpose, we compiled a historic dataset (2013-2019) of the ghost crab density and performed biweekly burrow measurements from June/2020 to May/2021. Recovery of ghost crab metapopulation during the lockdown occurred even in more human-modified beaches. Burrow abundance significantly increased in urban sectors, but not in control site along with the time of pandemic. The reduction in the mean burrow opening diameter during this period evidenced that young metapopulation have thrived on urban beaches when recreational activities ceased. Our results show that urban beaches should not be exclusively managed for recreational purposes. Initiatives with a focus on wildlife conservation including spatial-temporal controlled beach closures may increase the biodiversity resilience., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interestsLeonardo Lopes Costa reports financial support was provided by Carlos Chagas Filho Foundation for Research Support of Rio de Janeiro State. Abilio Soares-Gomes reports financial support was provided by National Council for Scientific and Technological Development. Ilana Rosental Zalmon reports financial support was provided by Carlos Chagas Filho Foundation for Research Support of Rio de Janeiro State. Ilana Rosental Zalmon reports financial support was provided by National Council for Scientific and Technological Development., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Statement of Problem: Information regarding the masking ability of ceramic crowns over different implant abutment materials is scarce., Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the masking ability of different monolithic or bilayer ceramic materials with different thicknesses over substrates indicated for implant restorations by using opaque and translucent evaluation pastes., Material and Methods: Disk-shaped specimens, shade A1 (VITA Classic; Ø10×1.5 to 2.5 mm), of different ceramics (a bilayer system [yttria-stabilized zirconia infrastructure+porcelain veneer: Zir+Pc] and monolithic systems [lithium disilicate under low, medium, or high translucency: LtLD, MtLD, or HtLD, respectively, and a high-translucent yttria-stabilized zirconia: HtZir]) were made (n=4). The color difference (ΔE 00 ) was assessed by using the CIEDE2000 formula and considering the different ceramic systems over 5 implant abutment materials (A1 shade Zir [Zir A1]; white Zir [White Zir]; A1 low-translucency lithium disilicate [LD]; polyetheretherketone [PEEK]; and titanium [Ti]) when using 2 different evaluation pastes (translucent or opaque). The control comparison was the restorative material positioned over the Zir A1 substrate with a translucent evaluation paste. Statistical analysis was made by using a 2-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests (α=.05) for ΔE 00 data considering the restorative material and luting agent factors as their association. Additionally, ΔE 00 data were qualitatively analyzed considering the acceptability and perceptibility thresholds. The translucency parameter (TP 00 ) of each restorative material was evaluated, and data were submitted to 1-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests (α=.05)., Results: The most predictable masking ability was seen with Zir+Pc regardless of the evaluation paste used. Nevertheless, under 1.5-mm thickness, Zir+Pc did not adequately mask Ti (ΔE 00 >1.77). Most monolithic ceramics did not mask discolored substrates (PEEK or Ti, ΔE 00 >1.77). The exception was HtZir, which presented acceptable masking ability over PEEK at 2.5-mm thickness with both evaluation pastes (ΔE 00 <1.77). Regardless of the restorative material thickness, Zir+Pc showed the lowest (P<.05) TP 00 values (TP 00 =3.45 at 1.5-mm thickness; TP 00 =2.00 at 2.5-mm thickness), and HtLD presented the highest (P<.05, TP 00 =23.50 at 1.5-mm thickness; TP 00 =13.36 at 2.5-mm thickness). HtZir showed similar TP 00 to MtLD at 1.5-mm thickness and similar TP 00 to Zir+Pc when used at 2.5-mm thickness (P>.05)., Conclusions: Monolithic ceramics should be used with caution over discolored implant abutments. Bilayer systems (Zir+Pc) were the most predictable approach to adequately masking discolored substrates such as PEEK or Ti. An increased restoration thickness provided higher masking ability for all restorative materials tested., (Copyright © 2022 Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Migraine affects 1 billion people worldwide and > 30 million Brazilians; besides, it is an underdiagnosed and undertreated disorder., Objective: The need to disseminate knowledge about the prophylactic treatment of migraine is known, so the Brazilian Headache Society (SBCe, in the Portuguese acronym) appointed a committee of authors with the objective of establishing a consensus with recommendations on the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine based on articles from the world literature as well as from personal experience., Methods: Meetings were held entirely online, with the participation of 12 groups that reviewed and wrote about the pharmacological categories of drugs and, at the end, met to read and finish the document. The drug classes studied in part II of this Consensus were: antihypertensives, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, other drugs, and rational polytherapy., Results: From this list of drugs, only candesartan has been established as effective in controlling episodic migraine. Flunarizine, venlafaxine, duloxetine, and pizotifen were defined as likely to be effective, while lisinopril, enalapril, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, quetiapine, atorvastatin, simvastatin, cyproheptadine, and melatonin were possibly effective in prophylaxis of the disease., Conclusions: Despite an effort by the scientific community to find really effective drugs in the treatment of migraine, given the large number of drugs tested for this purpose, we still have few therapeutic options., Competing Interests: AOK: Speaker for Allergan, Ipsen Pharma, Merz, and Onyxcann Cantera; AT: Lilly, Teva, Ache, Supera, Allergan, and Novartis; CAPR: Teva, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Aché, Apsen, and EJPC: Speaker for Novartis, Allergan, Libbs, and Lilly; EMS: Speaker for Libbs, Allergan, Novartis, Lilly, Lundbeck, and Teva. Advisory board: Allergan, Libbs, Teva, and Lundbeck; EMM: Speaker for Teva, Novartis, Eli Lilly, and Allergan; Advisory board: Libbs and Eli Lilly; GOMT: Speaker for Eli Lilly; HCC: Speaker for Allergan and Eli Lilly; ID, JAMJ, BAJS, MRCFF, MEJ, PFMMF, RPSN, YDF: No conflict of interests to declare; AJS: Speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Teva; JJC: Speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva, and Libbs; Advisory board: Teva, Novartis, and Eli Lilly; JCS: Speaker for Teva, Novartis, and Allergan, Lilly; LCC: Speaker for Allergan, Novartis, and Sanofi; Advisory board: Allergan; LMB: Speaker for Novartis; LPQ: Speaker for Eli Lilly and Allergan; Advisory board: Eli Lilly and Teva; MNPS: Speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva, Allergan, and Libbs; Advisory board: Sanofi, Eli Lilly, and Libbs; MENMC: Speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva, and Allergan; Advisory board: Eli Lilly; MFPP: Grants from Fapesp and CNPq; personal fees from Allergan, Eurofarma, Eli Lilly, Libbs, Novartis, Pfizer, and Teva, during studies; PMP: Speaker for Novartis, Teva, Eli Lilly, and Libbs; Advisory board: Libbs; PSFS: Speaker for Teva, Novartis, Allergan, EMS, and Politec; Advisory board: Libbs and Eli Lilly; PAK: Fees for services from Libbs, Novartis, Allergan, Livanova, and Teva; PASRF: Speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Allergan, and Libbs; Advisory board: Novartis, and Eli Lilly., (Academia Brasileira de Neurologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Objective: We investigated prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration, defined as lasting 28 days or longer, among people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs)., Methods: We analysed data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey (2 April 2021-15 October 2021) to identify people with SARDs reporting test-confirmed COVID-19. Participants reported COVID-19 severity and symptom duration, sociodemographics and clinical characteristics. We reported the proportion experiencing prolonged symptom duration and investigated associations with baseline characteristics using logistic regression., Results: We identified 441 respondents with SARDs and COVID-19 (mean age 48.2 years, 83.7% female, 39.5% rheumatoid arthritis). The median COVID-19 symptom duration was 15 days (IQR 7, 25). Overall, 107 (24.2%) respondents had prolonged symptom duration (≥28 days); 42/429 (9.8%) reported symptoms lasting ≥90 days. Factors associated with higher odds of prolonged symptom duration included: hospitalisation for COVID-19 vs not hospitalised and mild acute symptoms (age-adjusted OR (aOR) 6.49, 95% CI 3.03 to 14.1), comorbidity count (aOR 1.11 per comorbidity, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21) and osteoarthritis (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.27). COVID-19 onset in 2021 vs June 2020 or earlier was associated with lower odds of prolonged symptom duration (aOR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.81)., Conclusion: Most people with SARDs had complete symptom resolution by day 15 after COVID-19 onset. However, about 1 in 4 experienced COVID-19 symptom duration 28 days or longer; 1 in 10 experienced symptoms 90 days or longer. Future studies are needed to investigate the possible relationships between immunomodulating medications, SARD type/flare, vaccine doses and novel viral variants with prolonged COVID-19 symptoms and other postacute sequelae of COVID-19 among people with SARDs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MP reports grants from AbbVie—SELECT-GCA Participating Center and AstraZeneca—MANDARA Participating Center; and consulting fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. ES is a board member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are primarily supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. SES reports research funding related to clinical trials from AstraZeneca (MANDARA) and is supported by the Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium and Vasculitis Foundation, outside the submitted work. CH is a stockholder for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals; an Advisory Board member for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals and UCB Pharmaceuticals; and reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, UCB, Antidote and Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. MJL reports grants from American College of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Actelion, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Mallinckrodt, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Sobi and Union Chimique Belge, outside the submitted work. SB reports non-branded consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Horizon Pharma, Novartis and Pfizer outside the submitted work, and is a Pfizer employee as of September 2021. RG reports speaker honoraria from AbbVie New Zealand, Cornerstones and Janssen New Zealand; speaker honoraria and non-financial support Pfizer Australia; non-financial support from Janssen Australia and personal fees from Novartis (all <$A10 000) outside the submitted work. PMM reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and Union Chimique Belge; and grants and consulting fees from Orphazyme, outside the submitted work. PCR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly and Roche; grants and personal fees from Novartis, Union Chimique Belge, Janssen and Pfizer and non-financial support from Bristol Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. ZSW reports grants from NIH, Bristol Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi; and personal fees from Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. JY reports grants from NIH/NIAMS K24 during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work, reports research grants from Gilead, BMS Foundation and AstraZeneca; consulting fees from Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Aurinia. MG-M reports consulting fees for BMS, BI, JNJ and Aurinia (all <$A10 000), outside the submitted work. RH reports grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingleheim, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and Union Chimique Belge, all paid to Spondylitis Association of America, and consultant fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis, outside the submitted work. RH also owns stocks (<20 shares and representing <4% of personal investments) in AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva and Union Chimique Belge. DA-R is a scientific advisor for and reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKilne Mexico unrelated to this work. RC reports speaker fees from Janssen, Roche, Sanofi and AbbVie, outside the submitted work. AD-G reports grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Rheumatology Research Foundation and Mayo Clinic, outside the submitted work. JAS has received consultant fees from Schipher, Crealta/Horizon, Medisys, Fidia, PK Med, Two Labs, Adept Field Solutions, Clinical Care options, Clearview healthcare partners, Putnam associates, Focus forward, Navigant consulting, Spherix, MedIQ, Jupiter Life Science, UBM, Trio Health, Medscape, WebMD and Practice Point communications; and the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Rheumatology. JAS has received institutional research support from Zimmer Biomet Holdings. JAS received food and beverage payments from Intuitive Surgical/Philips Electronics North America. JAS owns stock options in TPT Global Tech, Vaxart Pharmaceuticals, Atyu Biopharma, Adaptimmune Therapeutics, GeoVax Labs, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Enzolytics, Seres Therapeutics, Tonix Pharmaceuticals Holding and Charlotte’s Web Holdings. JAS previously owned stock options in Amarin, Viking and Moderna pharmaceuticals. JAS is on the speaker’s bureau of Simply Speaking. JAS is a member of the executive of Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), an organisation that develops outcome measures in rheumatology and receives arms-length funding from eight companies. JAS serves on the FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee. JAS is the chair of the Veterans Affairs Rheumatology Field Advisory Board (FAB). JAS is the editor and the Director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Satellite Center on Network Meta-analysis. JAS previously served as a member of the following committees: member, the American College of Rheumatology's (ACR) Annual Meeting Planning Committee (AMPC) and Quality of Care Committees, the Chair of the ACR Meet-the-Professor, Workshop and Study Group Subcommittee and the co-chair of the ACR Criteria and Response Criteria subcommittee. MFU-G reports research grants from Pfizer and Janssen, unrelated to this work. JSH reports grants from and Rheumatology Research Alliance; consulting fees from Novartis, Pfizer and Biogen; and is a member of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA). JFS received research grant funding from the National Institutes of Health unrelated to this work (NIAMS R01 AR077103 and NIAID R01 AI154533). JSp is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers R01 AR077607, P30 AR070253 and P30 AR072577), the R. Bruce and Joan M. Mickey Research Scholar Fund, the Llura Gund Award for Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Care and Bristol Myers Squibb; and personal fees for AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Janssen, Optum and Pfizer, unrelated to this work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Differences in the distribution of individual-level clinical risk factors across regions do not fully explain the observed global disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. We aimed to investigate the associations between environmental and societal factors and country-level variations in mortality attributed to COVID-19 among people with rheumatic disease globally., Methods: In this observational study, we derived individual-level data on adults (aged 18-99 years) with rheumatic disease and a confirmed status of their highest COVID-19 severity level from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA) registry, collected between March 12, 2020, and Aug 27, 2021. Environmental and societal factors were obtained from publicly available sources. The primary endpoint was mortality attributed to COVID-19. We used a multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent associations between environmental and societal factors and death, after controlling for individual-level risk factors. We used a series of nested mixed-effects models to establish whether environmental and societal factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death., Findings: 14 044 patients from 23 countries were included in the analyses. 10 178 (72·5%) individuals were female and 3866 (27·5%) were male, with a mean age of 54·4 years (SD 15·6). Air pollution (odds ratio 1·10 per 10 μg/m 3 [95% CI 1·01-1·17]; p=0·0105), proportion of the population aged 65 years or older (1·19 per 1% increase [1·10-1·30]; p<0·0001), and population mobility (1·03 per 1% increase in number of visits to grocery and pharmacy stores [1·02-1·05]; p<0·0001 and 1·02 per 1% increase in number of visits to workplaces [1·00-1·03]; p=0·032) were independently associated with higher odds of mortality. Number of hospital beds (0·94 per 1-unit increase per 1000 people [0·88-1·00]; p=0·046), human development index (0·65 per 0·1-unit increase [0·44-0·96]; p=0·032), government response stringency (0·83 per 10-unit increase in containment index [0·74-0·93]; p=0·0018), as well as follow-up time (0·78 per month [0·69-0·88]; p<0·0001) were independently associated with lower odds of mortality. These factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death attributable to COVID-19 (intraclass correlation coefficient 1·2% [0·1-9·5]; p=0·14)., Interpretation: Our findings highlight the importance of environmental and societal factors as potential explanations of the observed regional disparities in COVID-19 outcomes among people with rheumatic disease and lay foundation for a new research agenda to address these disparities., Funding: American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology., Competing Interests: MID reports research support from Pfizer for unrelated work. AS reports grants from a consortium of 13 companies (AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register, and personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, Merck, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. EFM reports that the Portuguese League Against Rheumatic Diseases received support for specific activities: grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal SA, Merck, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, the Global Alliance for Patient Access; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; and non-financial support from Grünenthal GmbH, outside of the submitted work. KLH reports receiving speaker fees from Abbvie and grant income from Bristol Myers Squibb, UCB, and Pfizer, unrelated to this work. KLH is also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LG reports research grants from Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, and Sanofi; and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Biogen, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB, all unrelated to this work. LC has not received fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as Abbvie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, SA Pharma, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi, Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal GmbH, and UCB Pharma. JAS has performed consultancy for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Janssen, and Optum, unrelated to this work. LW has received consulting or speaking fees from Aurinia Pharma, outside of the submitted work. MFU-G reports grant or research support from Jannsen and Pfizer, unrelated to this work. The Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register, with LL as register holder, has agreements with Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sobi, and UCB for register data analyses, unrelated to this work. CR has received consulting or speaker fees from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Glenmark, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Mylan, and Pfizer; and grants from Biogen, Lilly, and Nordic Pharma, all unrelated to this work. MJS has received speaker fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Pfizer. AR has received speaker fees from Janssen, Pfizer, and Novartis. GP-E reports reports personal consulting fees, speaking fees, or both from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Sandoz, and Sanofi, outside of the submitted work. PCR reports personal consulting fees, speaking fees, or both from Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB; and travel assistance from Roche. PMM has received consulting fees, speaker fees, or both from Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, unrelated to this work. PMM is supported by the NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. ES is a Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient-run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. JWL has received research funding from Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. JSH is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation and has salary support from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance. JSH has performed consulting for Novartis, Sobi, and Biogen, unrelated to this work. PS reports honorarium for doing social media for American College of Rheumatology journals. RG reports personal fees, speaking fees, or both from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Cornerstones; and travel assistance from Pfizer. SB reports non-branded consulting fees for AbbVie, Horizon, and Novartis; and is employed by Pfizer. ZSW reports grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb and Principia–Sanofi; and performed consultancy for Viela Bio and MedPace, outside of the submitted work. ZSW's work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. JY has performed consulting for Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Aurinia, and AstraZeneca, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases, such as ankylosing spondylitis (AS), has been variable. Here, we assess disease activity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) through the pandemic in patients with AS., Methods: In the open-label extension (OLE) of the phase 2b BE AGILE study, patients with AS received 160 mg of subcutaneous bimekizumab every 4 weeks. We assessed Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) scores in the OLE immediately before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (September 2019 to April 2021)., Results: A total of 232 patients remained in the BE AGILE OLE and were included in this post hoc study at the start of the analysis period (September 1, 2019); 12 patients had a COVID-19 treatment-emergent adverse event, and no cases resulted in death. The number of missed bimekizumab doses due to COVID-19 (11 doses) was minimal, and missed assessments remained low (≤5%) compared with the prepandemic period. Mean ASDAS-CRP (1.8), BASDAI (2.4), and ASQoL scores (2.8) in the OLE were low at pre-pandemic baseline and remained stable at 1.7 to 1.8, 2.2 to 2.4, and 2.0 to 2.8, respectively, across successive 3-month periods immediately before and during the pandemic. ASDAS-CRP, BASDAI, and ASQoL stability was consistent across major study countries., Conclusion: Disease activity and HRQoL remained stable during the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with AS receiving bimekizumab in the BE AGILE OLE, with no indication of negative effects on these outcomes., (© 2022 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Background and Objectives: Limited data suggest that quantitative MRI (qMRI) measures have potential to be used as trial outcome measures in sporadic inclusion body myositis (sIBM) and as a noninvasive assessment tool to study sIBM muscle pathologic processes. Our aim was to evaluate changes in muscle structure and composition using a comprehensive multiparameter set of qMRI measures and to assess construct validity and responsiveness of qMRI measures in people with sIBM., Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study with assessments at baseline (n = 30) and 1 year (n = 26). qMRI assessments include thigh muscle volume (TMV), inter/intramuscular adipose tissue (IMAT), muscle fat fraction (FF), muscle inflammation (T2 relaxation time), IMAT from T2* relaxation (T2*-IMAT), intermuscular connective tissue from T2* relaxation (T2*-IMCT), and muscle macromolecular structure from the magnetization transfer ratio (MTR). Physical performance assessments include sIBM Physical Functioning Assessment (sIFA), 6-minute walk distance, and quantitative muscle testing of the quadriceps. Correlations were assessed using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Responsiveness was assessed using the standardized response mean (SRM)., Results: After 1 year, we observed a reduction in TMV (6.8%, p < 0.001) and muscle T2 (6.7%, p = 0.035), an increase in IMAT (9.7%, p < 0.001), FF (11.2%, p = 0.030), connective tissue (22%, p = 0.995), and T 2 *-IMAT (24%, p < 0.001), and alteration in muscle macromolecular structure (ΔMTR = -26%, p = 0.002). A decrease in muscle T2 correlated with an increase in T2*-IMAT ( r = -0.47, p = 0.008). Deposition of connective tissue and IMAT correlated with deterioration in sIFA ( r = 0.38, p = 0.032; r = 0.34, p = 0.048; respectively), whereas a decrease in TMV correlated with a decrease in quantitative muscle testing ( r = 0.36, p = 0.035). The most responsive qMRI measures were T2*-IMAT (SRM = 1.50), TMV (SRM = -1.23), IMAT (SRM = 1.20), MTR (SRM = -0.83), and T2 relaxation time (SRM = -0.65)., Discussion: Progressive deterioration in muscle quality measured by qMRI is associated with a decline in physical performance. Inflammation may play a role in triggering fat infiltration into muscle. qMRI provides valid and responsive measures that might prove valuable in sIBM experimental trials and assessment of muscle pathologic processes., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that qMRI outcome measures are associated with physical performance measures in patients with sIBM., (© 2022 American Academy of Neurology.)

Objectives: Spinal MRI is used to visualise lesions associated with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The ASAS MRI working group (WG) updated and validated the definitions for inflammatory and structural spinal lesions in the context of axSpA., Methods: After review of the existing literature on all possible types of spinal MRI pathologies in axSpA, the group (12 rheumatologists and two radiologists) consented on the required revisions of lesion definitions compared with the existing nomenclature of 2012. In a second step, using 62 MRI scans from the ASAS classification cohort, the proposed definitions were validated in a multireader campaign by global (absent/present) and detailed (inflammation and structural) lesion assessment at the vertebral corner (VC), vertebral endplate, facet joints, transverse processes, lateral and posterior elements. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used for analysis., Results: Revisions were made for both inflammatory (bone marrow oedema, BMO) and structural (fat, erosion, bone spur and ankylosis) lesions, including localisation (central vs lateral), extension (VC vs vertebral endplate) and extent (minimum number of slices needed), while new definitions were suggested for the type of lesion based on lesion maturity (VC monomorphic vs dimorphic). The most reliably assessed lesions were VC fat lesion and VC monomorphic BMO (ICC (mean of all 36 reader pairs/overall 9 readers): 0.91/0.92; 0.70/0.67, respectively., Conclusions: The lesion definitions for spinal MRI lesions compatible with SpA were updated by consensus and validated by a group of experienced readers. The lesions with the highest frequency and best reliability were fat and monomorphic inflammatory lesions at the VC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: XB: Consulting fees: Abbvie, BMS, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Payment or honoraria for lectures: Abbvie, BMS, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Advisory Board: Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Leadership role: Editorial Board Member of Annals of Rheumatic Diseases, ASAS President. MØ: Consulting fees: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Payment or honoraria for lectures: Abbvie, BMS, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. RGL: Consulting fees: Calyx, CARE Arthritis Ltd., Image Analysis Ltd. IE: Payment or honoraria for lectures: Abbvie, Novartis. PMM: consulting fees: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB. Other financial or non-financial interests: Supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). SJP: Consulting fees: Abbvie, UCB, Novartis (paid to the institution). Payment or honoraria for lectures: MSD, Pfizer, Abbvie, UCB, Novartis (paid to private account and to institution). Support for attending meetings: MSD, Pfizer, Abbvie, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim. Participation to Advisory Committee: Novartis, UCB, Abbvie. MdH: Grants: FWRO/FRSR, Leadership role: EDULAR Advocacy Committee. JS: Consulting fees: AbbVie, Novartis, UCB. Payment or honoraria for lectures: Abbvie, Merck, Novartis. Participate on Advisory Board: Abbvie, DP: Grants: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. Consulting fees: AbbVie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, UCB. Payment or honoraria for lectures: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Medscape, Novartis, Peervoice, Pfizer, and UCB. Participation on Advisory Board: AbbVie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB. MR: Consulting fees: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Payment or honoraria for lectures: Abbvie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. Support for attending meetings: Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Abbvie. DvdH: Consulting fees: AbbVie, Bayer, BMS, Cyxone, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. Leadership role: Associate Editor of Annals of Rheumatic Diseases, Editorial Board Member Journal of Rheumatology, Advisory Committee RMD Open. RL: Grants: Research grants from Galapagos, AbbVie, Novartis, UCB (paid to institution). Consulting fees: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB (paid to own company). Payment or honoraria for lectures: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB (paid to own company). Participation on Advisory Board: UCB, AbbVie, Galapagos, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Jansen, Novartis, Pfizer (paid to own company). Data safety Monitoring Board: UCB (no compensation). Director of Rheumatology Consultancy. Partner of ‘Reumatologie Maatschap Sittard/Heerlen’ (paid to own company). Leadership role: Council Member and EULAR's chair of quality of care. Member of Editorial Board of Annals of Rheumatic Diseases. WPM: Grants: Abbvie, Galapagos, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Consulting fees: Abbvie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Payment or honoraria for lectures: Abbvie, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Leadership role: SPARTAN Board of directors. Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Ltd., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The Brazilian Headache Society (Sociedade Brasileira de Cefaleia, SBCe, in Portuguese) nominated a Committee of Authors with the aim of establishing a consensus with recommendations regarding prophylactic treatment for episodic migraine based on articles published in the worldwide literature, as well as personal experience. Migraine affects 1 billion people around the world and more than 30 million Brazilians. In addition, it is an underdiagnosed and undertreated disorder. It is well known within the medical community of neurologists, and especially among headache specialists, that there is a need to disseminate knowledge about prophylactic treatment for migraine. For this purpose, together with the need for drug updates and to expand knowledge of the disease itself (frequency, intensity, duration, impact and perhaps the progression of migraine), this Consensus was developed, following a full online methodology, by 12 groups who reviewed and wrote about the pharmacological categories of the drugs used and, at the end of the process, met to read and establish conclusions for this document. The drug classes studied were: anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, monoclonal anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) antibodies, beta-blockers, antihypertensives, calcium channel inhibitors, other antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, SSRIs, and dual-action antidepressants), other drugs, and polytherapy. Hormonal treatment and anti-inflammatories and triptans in minimum prophylaxis schemes (miniprophylaxis) will be covered in a specific chapter. The drug classes studied for part I of the Consensus were: anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, monoclonal anti-CGRP antibodies, and beta-blockers., Competing Interests: AOK: speaker for Allergan, Ipsen Pharma, Merz, Onyxcann Cantera; ATNMC: speaker for Lilly, Teva, Ache, Supera, Allergan, Novartis; CAPR: speaker for Teva, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Aché, Apsen, Cellera; EJP: speaker for Novartis, Allergan, Libbs, Lilly; EMS: speaker for Libbs, Allergan, Novartis, Lilly, Lundbeck, Teva; advisory board: Allergan, Libbs, Teva, Lundbeck; EMM: speaker for Teva, Eli Lilly, Allergan; advisory board: Libbs, Eli Lilly; GOMT: speaker for Eli Lilly; HCC: speaker for Allergan, Eli Lilly; JAS: speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva; JJFC: speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, TEVA, Libbs; advisory board: TEVA, Novartis, Eli Lilly; JGS: speaker for Teva, Novartis, Allergan, Lilly; LCC: speaker for Allergan, Novartis, Sanofi; advisory board: Allergan; LMB: speaker for Novartis; LPQ: speaker for Eli Lilly, Allergan; advisory board: Eli Lilly, TEVA; MNPS: speaker for Lilly, Novartis, Teva, Allergan, Libbs; advisory board: Sanofi, Lilly, Libbs; MENMC: speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva, Allergan; advisory board: Eli Lilly; MFPP: Grants from Fapesp and CNPq; personal fees from Allergan, Eurofarma, Eli Lilly, Libbs, Novartis, Pfizer, and Teva, during studies; PMP: speaker for Novartis, Teva, Eli Lilly, Libbs; advisory board: Libbs; PSFS: speaker for Teva, Novartis, Allergan, EMS, Politec; advisory board: Libbs, Lilly; PAK: fees for services to Libbs, Novartis, Allergan, Livanova, Teva; PASRF: speaker for Eli Lilly, Novartis, Allergan, Libbs; advisory board: Novartis, Eli Lilly; IF, JAMJ, JBAS, MRCFF, MEJ, PFMF, RPSN, YDF: no conflict of interests to declare., (Academia Brasileira de Neurologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Objectives: Some adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) are at increased risk of COVID-19-related death. Excluding post-COVID-19 multisystem inflammatory syndrome of children, children and young people (CYP) are overall less prone to severe COVID-19 and most experience a mild or asymptomatic course. However, it is unknown if CYP with RMDs are more likely to have more severe COVID-19. This analysis aims to describe outcomes among CYP with underlying RMDs with COVID-19., Methods: Using the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology COVID-19 Registry, the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry, and the CARRA-sponsored COVID-19 Global Paediatric Rheumatology Database, we obtained data on CYP with RMDs who reported SARS-CoV-2 infection (presumptive or confirmed). Patient characteristics and illness severity were described, and factors associated with COVID-19 hospitalisation were investigated., Results: 607 CYP with RMDs <19 years old from 25 different countries with SARS-CoV-2 infection were included, the majority with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA; n=378; 62%). Forty-three (7%) patients were hospitalised; three of these patients died. Compared with JIA, diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus, mixed connective tissue disease, vasculitis, or other RMD (OR 4.3; 95% CI 1.7 to 11) or autoinflammatory syndrome (OR 3.0; 95% CI 1.1 to 8.6) was associated with hospitalisation, as was obesity (OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.3 to 12)., Conclusions: This is the most significant investigation to date of COVID-19 in CYP with RMDs. It is important to note that the majority of CYP were not hospitalised, although those with severe systemic RMDs and obesity were more likely to be hospitalised., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RC reports personal AstraZeneca shares, unrelated to this manuscript. IK-P reports personal fees by Novartis, SOBI, Chugai, Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, all unrelated to this manuscript. FOR reports consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, Novartis, Pfizer and Sobi, all unrelated to this manuscript. NMW reports personal consultant fees from UCB, BMS, all unrelated to this manuscript. AS reports personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, Celltrion, MSD, Janssen, Lilly, Roche, BMS, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. EFM reports personal consultant fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Portugal, Lda, all unrelated to this manuscript. LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Lilly Portugal, Amgen Biofarmacêutica, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Medac, A. Menarini Portugal - Farmacêutica, S.A., Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Roche Farmacêutica Química, Lda; and non-financial support from Pfizer, and Grünenthal GmbH, all unrelated to this manuscript.PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). MN reports funding from Childhood Arthritis & Rheumatology Research Alliance, Inc (CARRA) to his informatics research and operations group at Boston Children’s Hospital in its capacity as the CARRA Data Warehouse and associated work for CARRA and the CARRA Registry and has sponsored the COVID-19 Global Pediatric Rheumatology Database study, of which he is the Principal Investigator. MN also serves as Director of Informatics for CARRA, for which he receives no direct compensation but do receive research sponsorship for CARRA-related research, development, and operations (see above). He is also a co-investigator of the CARRA Registry and site Principal Investigator at Massachusetts General Hospital. KLH reports non-personal speaker’s fees from Abbvie and grant income from BMS, UCB, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. All other authors report no disclosures., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aim: To determine characteristics associated with more severe outcomes in a global registry of people with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and COVID-19., Methods: People with SLE and COVID-19 reported in the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry from March 2020 to June 2021 were included. The ordinal outcome was defined as: (1) not hospitalised, (2) hospitalised with no oxygenation, (3) hospitalised with any ventilation or oxygenation and (4) death. A multivariable ordinal logistic regression model was constructed to assess the relationship between COVID-19 severity and demographic characteristics, comorbidities, medications and disease activity., Results: A total of 1606 people with SLE were included. In the multivariable model, older age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.04), male sex (1.50, 1.01 to 2.23), prednisone dose (1-5 mg/day 1.86, 1.20 to 2.66, 6-9 mg/day 2.47, 1.24 to 4.86 and ≥10 mg/day 1.95, 1.27 to 2.99), no current treatment (1.80, 1.17 to 2.75), comorbidities (eg, kidney disease 3.51, 2.42 to 5.09, cardiovascular disease/hypertension 1.69, 1.25 to 2.29) and moderate or high SLE disease activity (vs remission; 1.61, 1.02 to 2.54 and 3.94, 2.11 to 7.34, respectively) were associated with more severe outcomes. In age-adjusted and sex-adjusted models, mycophenolate, rituximab and cyclophosphamide were associated with worse outcomes compared with hydroxychloroquine; outcomes were more favourable with methotrexate and belimumab., Conclusions: More severe COVID-19 outcomes in individuals with SLE are largely driven by demographic factors, comorbidities and untreated or active SLE. Patients using glucocorticoids also experienced more severe outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MFU-G has received research grants from Pfizer and Janssen, not related to this manuscript. AD-G is supported by the Rheumatology Research Foundation (Scientist Development Award) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CR-S has received research grants from Janssen, not related to this manuscript. AEC has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, BMS and GSK, all unrelated to this manuscript. LW has received consulting fees and speaker’s honoraria from Aurinia Pharma unrelated to this manuscript. GJP-E reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work, he reports personal consulting and/or speaking fees from Pfizer, GSK, Janssen and Sanofi (all

Background: There is a lack of data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination safety in children and young people (CYP) with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Current vaccination guidance is based on data from adults with RMDs or CYP without RMDs., Objectives: To describe the safety of SARS-COV-2 vaccination in adolescents with inflammatory RMDs and adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)., Methods: We described patient characteristics, flares and adverse events (AEs) in adolescent cases under 18 with inflammatory RMDs and adult cases aged 18 or above with JIA submitted to the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology COVAX registry., Results: A total of 110 cases were reported to the registry. Thirty-six adolescent cases were reported from four countries, most with JIA (42%). Over half (56%) reported early reactogenic-like AEs. One mild polyarthralgia flare and one serious AE of special interest (malaise) were reported. No CYP reported SARS-CoV-2 infection postvaccination.Seventy-four adult JIA cases were reported from 11 countries. Almost two-thirds (62%) reported early reactogenic-like AEs and two flares were reported (mild polyarthralgia and moderate uveitis). No serious AEs of special interest were reported among adults with JIA. Three female patients aged 20-30 years were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 postvaccination; all fully recovered., Conclusions: This is an important contribution to research on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety in adolescents with RMDs and adults with JIA. It is important to note the low frequency of disease flares, serious AEs and SARS-CoV-2 reinfection seen in both populations, although the dataset is limited by its size., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SL-T and BR have nothing to disclose. PMM reports consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). AS reports personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, and Pfizer. EM reports LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, GAfPA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; non-financial support from Grünenthal, outside the submitted work. LG reports Amgen, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz; consulting fees: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. LC reports fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as Abbvie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, S.A., Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal, and UCB Pharma. IB reports speaker fees from AbbVie, Pfizer, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, all unrelated to this manuscript. DC reports speakers fees from Novartis, GSK, all unrelated to this manuscript. JZ reports speaker fees from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, all unrelated to this manuscript. AR reports research grants and consultant fees from Amgen and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. KLH reports non-personal speaker’s fees from Abbvie and grant income from BMS, UCB, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. XM is an Associate Editor for this journal., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Comparing treatment effectiveness over time in observational settings is hampered by several major threats, among them confounding and attrition bias., Objectives: To develop European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) points to consider (PtC) when analysing and reporting comparative effectiveness research using observational data in rheumatology., Methods: The PtC were developed using a three-step process according to the EULAR Standard Operating Procedures. Based on a systematic review of methods currently used in comparative effectiveness studies, the PtC were formulated through two in-person meetings of a multidisciplinary task force and a two-round online Delphi, using expert opinion and a simulation study. Finally, feedback from a larger audience was used to refine the PtC. Mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated., Results: Three overarching principles and 10 PtC were formulated, addressing, in particular, potential biases relating to attrition or confounding by indication. Building on Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines, these PtC insist on the definition of the baseline for analysis and treatment effectiveness. They also focus on the reasons for stopping treatment as an important consideration when assessing effectiveness. Finally, the PtC recommend providing key information on missingness patterns., Conclusion: To improve the reliability of an increasing number of real-world comparative effectiveness studies in rheumatology, special attention is required to reduce potential biases. Adherence to clear recommendations for the analysis and reporting of observational comparative effectiveness studies will improve the trustworthiness of their results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DSC has received consulting fees from Abbvie, MSD, and Pfizer outside submitted work. KL has received speaker fees from Gilead-Galapagos and grant/research support from AbbVie outside submitted work. ZR has received consulting and speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz outside submitted work. PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, unrelated to the work presented in this manuscript, and is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the (UK) National Health Service (NHS), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), or the (UK) Department of Health, or any other organisation. FI has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, SOBI, Roche and UCB, unrelated to the work presented in this manuscript. TAS has received grant/research support from AbbVie and Roche, has been a consultant for AbbVie and Sanofi Genzyme, and has been a paid speaker for AbbVie, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda. AF has received grant/research support from AbbVie, BMS, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, and Pfizer, has been a paid speaker for AbbVie, BMS, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, on Novartis. MdW operating for Stichting Tools has received fees for lectures or consultancy provided by MdW from Celgene, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and UCB, over the last three years, unrelated to the work presented in this manuscript. AS has received speaker’s fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche, unrelated to the work presented in this manuscript. SRS has received consulting/speaker’s fees from 67 Health, Ampersand Health, Envision Pharma Group, Janssen and On The Pulse Consultancy, and is an employee of Envision Pharma Group, unrelated to the work presented in this manuscript. LMØ has received grant/research support from Novartis, unrelated to the work presented in this manuscript., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To develop evidence-based Points to Consider (PtC) for the use of imaging modalities to guide interventional procedures in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs)., Methods: European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) standardised operating procedures were followed. A systematic literature review was conducted to retrieve data on the role of imaging modalities including ultrasound (US), fluoroscopy, MRI, CT and fusion imaging to guide interventional procedures. Based on evidence and expert opinion, the task force (25 participants consisting of physicians, healthcare professionals and patients from 11 countries) developed PtC, with consensus obtained through voting. The final level of agreement was provided anonymously., Results: A total of three overarching principles and six specific PtC were formulated. The task force recommends preference of imaging over palpation to guide targeted interventional procedures at peripheral joints, periarticular musculoskeletal structures, nerves and the spine. While US is the favoured imaging technique for peripheral joints and nerves, the choice of the imaging method for the spine and sacroiliac joints has to be individualised according to the target, procedure, expertise, availability and radiation exposure. All imaging guided interventions should be performed by a trained specialist using appropriate operational procedures, settings and assistance by technical personnel., Conclusion: These are the first EULAR PtC to provide guidance on the role of imaging to guide interventional procedures in patients with RMDs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CDejaco has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Galapagos and Sanofi, all unrelated to this manuscript. PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). FC has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie and Celgene, all unrelated to this manuscript. LT has received speakers fee from Novartis, UCB, Roche and Pfizer. GT has received research grants from Iqone and received consulting/speaker’s fees from Menarini, all unrelated to this manuscript. LMS has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Pfizer, Abiogen, Samsung Medison, Esaote, all unrelated to this manuscript. FP has received research grants from Novartis and UCB and received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, AMGEN, BMS, Hexal, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. CP has received honoraria and/or research and development grants from: Abbott/AbbVie, Astellas, Astra-Zeneca/MedImmune, BMS, CelGene, Grunenthal, GSK, Janssen/J&J, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche/Genentech/Chugai, UCB. HBH has received fees for speaking and/or consulting from AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, UCB, Roche, MSD and Novartis. WH has received fees for speaking and/or consulting from AbbVie, Alpinion, Canon, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen-Cilag, Pfizer, Roche. CDuftner has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. PVB has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene,Celltrion, Eli Lilly, IBSA, Janssen-Cilag, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Professional Publishing Hungary, Richter, Roche, Sandoz, Springer Nature, UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. XB has received consulting/speaker’s fees or grant support from Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Chugai, Galapagos, Gilead, Hexal, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The aim was to assess rheumatology clinicians' perceptions of telemedicine and their experiences before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey and collected responses from rheumatology clinicians worldwide, between November 2020 and February 2021, regarding use and perceptions of telemedicine in rheumatology. We summarized data with descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis for free-text responses., Results: The survey was completed by 349 rheumatology clinicians from 49 countries; 59% were female and about two-thirds were in the 30-50 years age group. Academic affiliations were held by 55% of participants, and 44% were from North America. Before the pandemic, 24% of participants had experience with telemedicine, whereas about three-quarters used telemedicine for the first time during the pandemic. Overall, 56% thought they provided less adequate care with telemedicine. More than half of clinicians felt that telemedicine was adequate for evaluating crystalline arthritis, inflammatory arthritis and lupus flares. Telemedicine was felt to be inadequate for flares of myositis, vasculitis and scleroderma. Technical problems were reported in 29% of telemedicine encounters and were most commonly related to patient-encountered difficulties., Conclusion: Most rheumatology clinicians used telemedicine for the first time during the pandemic. The quality of care provided was thought to be inferior to that provided in person for specific clinical situations. Additional efforts are needed to address barriers to effective telemedicine, such as patient-related technology issues, challenges with building rapport and performing a physical examination, and to define the appropriate scope of clinical scenarios conducive to telemedicine., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objective: Our primary objective was to study the long-term association between disease activity and disability in axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). Our secondary objective was to define patient profiles according to their level of disability., Methods: We analyzed data collected during the first 5 years of follow-up of a large early axial SpA cohort, the Devenir des Spondylarthropathies Indifferénciées Récentes (DESIR) cohort. Multivariable models were built to study the association between the Health Assessment Questionnaire for Ankylosing Spondylitis (HAQ-AS) and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP), adjusting for potential confounders. Hierarchical multivariable analysis was conducted using the chi-square automatic interaction detector (CHAID) method, to help determine how variables best cluster to explain HAQ-AS., Results: Data from 644 patients and 5,152 visits were analyzed. HAQ-AS was longitudinally, independently, and positively associated with ASDAS-CRP (adjusted B [adjB] 0.205 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.187, 0.222]), the enthesitis score (adjB 0.011 [95% CI 0.008, 0.015]), the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (adjB 0.087 [95% CI 0.069, 0.105]), and female sex (adjB 0.172 [95% CI 0.120, 0.225]). The CHAID decision tree revealed ASDAS-CRP as the first variable with discriminative power on HAQ-AS. The cutoffs that separated different patient disability profiles were obtained., Conclusion: Disease activity contributes longitudinally to disability and is hierarchically superior to any other variable in explaining this health domain. Enthesitis and spinal mobility are also key drivers of disability in early axial SpA. ASDAS-CRP cutoffs that separated different patient disability profiles largely mimicked the cutoffs previously defined for ASDAS-CRP disease activity states., (© 2020 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To describe the safety of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in people with inflammatory/autoimmune rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (I-RMD)., Methods: Physician-reported registry of I-RMD and non-inflammatory RMD (NI-RMDs) patients vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. From 5 February 2021 to 27 July 2021, we collected data on demographics, vaccination, RMD diagnosis, disease activity, immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive treatments, flares, adverse events (AEs) and SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Data were analysed descriptively., Results: The study included 5121 participants from 30 countries, 90% with I-RMDs (n=4604, 68% female, mean age 60.5 years) and 10% with NI-RMDs (n=517, 77% female, mean age 71.4). Inflammatory joint diseases (58%), connective tissue diseases (18%) and vasculitis (12%) were the most frequent diagnostic groups; 54% received conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), 42% biological DMARDs and 35% immunosuppressants. Most patients received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (70%), 17% AstraZeneca/Oxford and 8% Moderna. In fully vaccinated cases, breakthrough infections were reported in 0.7% of I-RMD patients and 1.1% of NI-RMD patients. I-RMD flares were reported in 4.4% of cases (0.6% severe), 1.5% resulting in medication changes. AEs were reported in 37% of cases (37% I-RMD, 40% NI-RMD), serious AEs in 0.5% (0.4% I-RMD, 1.9% NI-RMD)., Conclusion: The safety profiles of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with I-RMD was reassuring and comparable with patients with NI-RMDs. The majority of patients tolerated their vaccination well with rare reports of I-RMD flare and very rare reports of serious AEs. These findings should provide reassurance to rheumatologists and vaccine recipients and promote confidence in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety in I-RMD patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), University College London Hospitals (UCLH), Biomedical Research Centre. SL-T does not report conflicts of interest. AS has received personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, MSD, Lilly, Roche, BMS and Pfizer. EFM has received personal consultant fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Portugal, Lda; LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Lilly Portugal, Amgen Biofarmacêutica, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Medac and from A. Menarini Portugal - Farmacêutica, S.A.; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer, and non-financial support from Grünenthal GmbH, outside the submitted work. KLH has received non-personal speaker’s fees from Abbvie and grant income from BMS, UCB and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LG has received personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis and UCB, and grants from Amgen, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz and Sanofi, all unrelated to this manuscript. LC has not received any fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as Abbvie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, S.A., Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal GmbH and UCB Pharma. AR has received research grants and consultant fees from Amgen and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. BR does not report conflicts of interest. CD does not report conflicts of interest. EH does not report conflicts of interest. EV reports personal consultant fees from Theramex, unrelated to this manuscript. ES does not report conflicts of interest. G-RRB reports personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. GKY does not report conflicts of interest. JAG-P reports speaker fees from Abbvie, Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis and Roche, all unrelated to this manuscript. JZ reports speaker fees from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, all unrelated to this manuscript. LK-F does not report conflicts of interest. LT does not report conflicts of interest. MCu does not report conflicts of interest. MM does not report conflicts of interest. MCo does not report conflicts of interest. MS does not report conflicts of interest. NR does not report conflicts of interest. OB does not report conflicts of interest. PD does not report conflicts of interest. RC reports speaker’s fees from Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, Abbvie, all unrelated to this work. TG does not report conflicts of interest. JWJB does not report conflicts of interest. IM does not report conflicts of interest. XM reports personal consultant fees from BMS, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB and grant from Ose, all unrelated to this manuscript., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To assess the clinical efficacy of flavonoid supplements on allergic diseases., Design: Systematic review. Data Sources . MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched from inception to September 2021. Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies . Eligible study designs were randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of flavonoids applied to allergic diseases., Results: This review included 15 randomized controlled trials, including allergic rhinitis/cedar pollinosis ( n = 10), asthma ( n = 3), and atopic dermatitis ( n = 2). A total of 990 participants aged 6 to 69 years were included in these studies. Globally, 12 studies (80%) revealed some benefits of flavonoids (isolate or combined with other compounds) in allergic patients, while three studies (20%) reported no statistically significant impact on symptom scores and/or lung function. No severe adverse events related to treatment were reported. According to the GRADE system, the outcomes evaluated were of low to moderate quality of evidence., Conclusions: Overall, this review suggests that the administration of flavonoids may provide a viable strategy for mitigating allergic symptoms. Future trials with high methodological quality are needed to establish definitive conclusions. This trial is registered with PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021237403., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Poliana Guiomar de Almeida Brasiel et al.)

Background and Objectives: To identify factors associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), defined by hospitalization status, in patients with primary mitochondrial diseases (PMDs), thereby enabling future risk stratification and informed management decisions., Methods: We undertook a cross-sectional, international, registry-based study. Data were extracted from the International Neuromuscular COVID-19 Database and collected between May 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021. The database included subjects with (1) PMD diagnosis (any age), clinically/histopathologically suspected and/or genetically confirmed; and (2) COVID-19 diagnosis classified as "confirmed", "probable", or "suspected" based on World Health Organization definitions. The primary outcome was hospitalization because of COVID-19. We collected demographic information, smoking status, coexisting comorbidities, outcomes after COVID-19 infection, and PMD genotype-phenotype. Baseline status was assessed using the modified Rankin scale (mRS) and the Newcastle Mitochondrial Disease Adult Scale (NMDAS)., Results: Seventy-nine subjects with PMDs from 10 countries were included (mean age 41.5 ± 18 years): 25 (32%) were hospitalized, 48 (61%) recovered fully, 28 (35%) improved with sequelae, and 3 (4%) died. Statistically significant differences in hospitalization status were observed in baseline status, including the NMDAS score ( p = 0.003) and mRS ( p = 0.001), presence of respiratory dysfunction ( p < 0.001), neurologic involvement ( p = 0.003), and more than 4 comorbidities ( p = 0.002). In multivariable analysis, respiratory dysfunction was independently associated with COVID-19 hospitalization (odds ratio, 7.66; 95% CI, 2-28; p = 0.002)., Discussion: Respiratory dysfunction is an independent risk factor for severe COVID-19 in PMDs while high disease burden and coexisting comorbidities contribute toward COVID-19-related hospitalization. These findings will enable risk stratification and informed management decisions for this vulnerable population., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: While COVID-19 vaccination prevents severe infections, poor immunogenicity in immunocompromised people threatens vaccine effectiveness. We analysed the clinical characteristics of patients with rheumatic disease who developed breakthrough COVID-19 after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2., Methods: We included people partially or fully vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 who developed COVID-19 between 5 January and 30 September 2021 and were reported to the Global Rheumatology Alliance registry. Breakthrough infections were defined as occurring ≥14 days after completion of the vaccination series, specifically 14 days after the second dose in a two-dose series or 14 days after a single-dose vaccine. We analysed patients' demographic and clinical characteristics and COVID-19 symptoms and outcomes., Results: SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 197 partially or fully vaccinated people with rheumatic disease (mean age 54 years, 77% female, 56% white). The majority (n=140/197, 71%) received messenger RNA vaccines. Among the fully vaccinated (n=87), infection occurred a mean of 112 (±60) days after the second vaccine dose. Among those fully vaccinated and hospitalised (n=22, age range 36-83 years), nine had used B cell-depleting therapy (BCDT), with six as monotherapy, at the time of vaccination. Three were on mycophenolate. The majority (n=14/22, 64%) were not taking systemic glucocorticoids. Eight patients had pre-existing lung disease and five patients died., Conclusion: More than half of fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections requiring hospitalisation were on BCDT or mycophenolate. Further risk mitigation strategies are likely needed to protect this selected high-risk population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KLH reports she has received non-personal speaker’s fees from AbbVie and grant income from BMS, UCB and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript; KLH is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LG reports personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis and UCB, and grants from Amgen, Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi and Galapagos, all unrelated to this manuscript. AS reports research grants from a consortium of 14 companies (among them AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead/Galapagos, Lilly, Mylan/Viatris, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register and personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, Lilly and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. LC has not received fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as AbbVie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi-Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal and UCB Pharma. EF-M reports personal consultant fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Portugal and that LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal, MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern and GAfPA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; and non-financial support from Grünenthal, outside the submitted work. IB reports personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer and Janssen, all unrelated to this manuscript. JZ reports speaker fees from AbbVie, Novartis and Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, all unrelated to this manuscript. GR-C reports personal consultant fees from Eli Lilly and Novartis, all unrelated to this manuscript. JS is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers: R01 AR077607, P30 AR070253 and P30 AR072577), and the R Bruce and Joan M Mickey Research Scholar Fund. JS has received research support from Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb and performed consultancy for Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen and Optum, unrelated to this work. LW receives speaker’s bureau fees from Aurinia Pharma, unrelated to this manuscript. SB reports no competing interests related to this work. He reports non-branded consulting fees for AbbVie, Horizon and Novartis (all <$10 000). MGM has no competing interests related to this work. She serves as a patient consultant for BMS, BI JNJ and Aurinia (all <$10 000). RG reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work she reports personal and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and Cornerstones and travel assistance from Pfizer (all <$10 000). JH reports no competing interests related to this work. He is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation and has salary support from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance. He has performed consulting for Novartis, Sobi and Biogen, all unrelated to this work (<$10 000). ESi reports non-financial support from Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, outside the submitted work. PS reports personal fees from the American College of Rheumatology/Wiley Publishing, outside the submitted work. ZW reports grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi and performed consultancy for Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. His work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study. PMM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). PCR reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work PCR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Atom Bioscience, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kukdong, Novartis, UCB, Roche and Pfizer; meeting attendance support from BMS, Pfizer and UCB; and grant funding from Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma (all <$10 000). JY reports no competing interests related to this work. Her work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (K24 AR074534 and P30 AR070155). Outside of this work, she has received research grants or performed consulting for Gilead, BMS Foundation, Pfizer, Aurinia and AstraZeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are one of the main regulators of gene expression. Recent studies have demonstrated that primary transcripts of miRNAs (pri-miRNAs) encode regulatory peptides, called miRNA-encoded peptides (miPEPs), capable of enhancing the expression of their associated miRNAs in plants. In this work, we aimed to computationally identify miPEPs produced by small open reading frames (ORFs) in pri-miRNAs from four species of Fabaceae. Five families of miRNAs were investigated, based on their role in plant-microorganism interaction. We used the miR171 family as a training dataset centered on the information about mtr-miPEP171b and vvi-miPEP171d already described. From the sequences of the pri-miRNAs and the genomic regions where they were located, ORFs encoding putative miPEPs were predicted. The 5'-most ORFs encoding peptides on pri-miRNAs were aligned and the amino acids conservation was observed. In total, 81 sequences of potential miPEPs were identified. We found conserved miPEPs inside pri-miRNAs from soybean and between soybean, common bean, and cowpea. Besides, our results showed few conserved miPEPs among isoforms of the same miRNA and no conservation among different miRNA families, which indicate the possible specificity of miPEPs in relation to their corresponding miRNAs. Our findings contribute to the understanding of miPEPs features in plants and provide the basis for studies aiming the biotechnological use of miPEPs in leguminous species., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RBML received honoraria for lecturing and consultation from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB and is the owner and director of Rheumatology Consultancy BV. PMM received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, and is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the (UK) National Health Service, the NIHR or the (UK) Department of Health. VN-C received research grants/honoraria from AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Inclusion body myositis (IBM) is an acquired idiopathic inflammatory myopathy more commonly seen in individuals aged above 50. Unlike other idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, there is no response to immunosuppression/immunomodulation. The lack of response to such therapies led the focus away from considering IBM as a purely immune-mediated condition. However, the discovery of antibodies against cytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A (cN1A) in patients with IBM has reinvig-orated interest in autoimmunity as a key role in its pathogenesis. Over the last decade different methods have been developed to detect anti-cN1A antibodies. There has been an interest in whether these assays can be utilised in the diagnosis of IBM. Furthermore, there has been focus on whether anti-cN1A antibodies can be used to prognosticate and predict the clinical phenotype in IBM. Anti-cN1A antibodies appear to have a high specificity and moderate sensitivity for IBM. There have been some exploratory clinicopathological associations described in seropositive IBM patients, but sample sizes in most studies have been small so far. Antibody testing is yet to be standardised; which somewhat limits our ability to draw robust conclusions from current investi-gations. In this article we review the literature on anti-cN1A antibodies and discuss whether they have a role in clinical practice.

Sporadic inclusion body myositis (sIBM) is a heterogeneous progressive inflammatory muscle disease impacting skeletal muscles in the head, neck, and limbs. Use of valid, reliable, sensitive, and standardised clinical and paraclinical outcome assessments (COA) are critical to inform both proactive clinical care and clinical trial design. Here we review clinical and imaging methods used to quantify muscle strength, size, or function in sIBM, and discuss their application to clinical practice and use in clinical trials. Considerations for future work to validate measures in this population are also discussed.

Objectives: To estimate the relationship between EQ5D (three levels, UK version) and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) for use in the economic evaluation of health technologies for people with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). To compare against the relationship with the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)., Methods: An electronic, prospective, Portuguese, nationwide, rheumatic disease register (Reuma.pt) provided data on 1140 patients (5483 observations) with a confirmed diagnosis of axSpA. We estimated models of EQ5D as a function of ASDAS, alone or in combination with measures of functional impairment, using bespoke mixture models which reflect the complex distributional features of EQ5D. The SPondyloArthritis Caught Early cohort provided data from 344 patients (1405 observations) in four European countries and was used for validation. A previously published model of BASDAI/Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) was also used to generate predicted EQ5D scores and model performance compared., Results: A non-linear relationship exists between EQ5D from ASDAS. The final model included ASDAS, ASDAS squared, age and age squared and demonstrated close fit in both datasets except where data were sparse for patients with very high levels of disease activity (ASDAS >4). This finding held in the validation dataset. Models that included BASFI improved model fit. The ASDAS based models fit the data marginally less well than models using BASDAI., Conclusions: Mapping models linking ASDAS to EQ5D allow results from clinical studies to be used in economic evaluation of health technologies with confidence. There is some loss of information compared with BASDAI but this has only a marginal impact., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MvdS has received consulting fees/speaker’s fees/research grants from Novartis, UCB, Abbvie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and MSD. FAvG has received grants from Stichting vrienden van Sole Mio, Stichting ASAS, Jacobus Stichting, Novartis and UCB, and consulting fees from Novartis, Eli Lilly, MSD, AbbVie and Bristol Myers Squibb. MB has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen and Novartis. RR has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. SE has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Janssen and Novartis. DvdH has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma and serves as director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB Pharma., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Vaccination is a major strategy to prevent the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, information about factors associated with men and women intention to be vaccinated are scarce. To determine COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and identify factors associated vaccine hesitancy according to sex, we performed a cross-sectional population-based random survey in Salvador, Brazil between Nov/2020-Jan/2021. Participants were interviewed to obtain data on intention to receive and pay for a COVID-19 vaccine, as well as on demographics, comorbidities, influenza vaccination history, previous diagnosis of COVID-19, and exposures and perception of COVID-19 risk. Among 2,521 participants, 2,053 (81.4%) reported willingness to use a COVID-19 vaccine and 468 (18.6%) hesitated to take it. Among those intending to get vaccinated, 1,400 (68.2%) would pay for the vaccine if necessary. Sex-stratified multivariable analysis found that men who were working and who had comorbidities were less likely to hesitate about using the vaccine. Among women, higher educational level and high perception of COVID-19 risk were associated with less vaccine hesitancy. In both groups, reporting influenza vaccination in 2020 reduced the chance of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. COVID-19 vaccine campaigns targeting to reduce vaccine hesitancy are urgently needed. These campaigns should consider gender differences in order to be successful., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Importance: Pharmacists are among the healthcare professionals involved in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, maintaining essential services. In the context of restrictions and reorganization of human resources, as a result of policies recently applied to the health sector, following international guidelines, and given the scarcity of data on burnout in pharmaceutical activity, it was considered highly relevant to promote a nationwide survey aiming to collect more complete evidence on the burnout syndrome and to understand how pharmacists have viewed their work and the people they worked closely with., Objectives: The study aimed to assess the occurrence of pharmacist burnout and determine outcomes for each of its dimensions; identify potentially associated characteristics; and determine profiles and critical limits., Design: A cross-sectional observational study conducted by a multidisciplinary panel from the Portuguese Pharmaceutical Society (PPS). Professionals from community and hospital pharmacies who were at the forefront of the COVID-19 response were involved in (i) confirming the need and pertinence for conducting this research, (ii) identifying the main factors leading to pharmaceutical emotional distress ("burnout"), and (iii) disseminating the survey. The questionnaire was designed for digital voluntary, confidential, and anonymous participation and divided into four segments of data collection: (i) demographics, (ii) employment and workplace characterization, (iii) pandemic impact on labor activity, and (iv) burnout assessment (as described ahead)., Setting: An electronic survey was addressed to all PPS members, and an account was created solely to manage the questionnaire data for the research team. The web-based and user-friendly platform Google Forms supported the data capture and provided an intuitive interface for validated data entry., Participants: In a population of 15,565 pharmacists (members of the PPS), the minimum recommended sample size (Epi Info software), with a 5% margin of error and a 99.9% confidence interval, should be 1,012 individuals. A total of 1,362 pharmacists participated in the study. Of these, 91.4% ( n = 1,246) were involved in direct patient care activity and 7.7% ( n = 106) in non-direct patient care activity., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Santos, Silva, Costa and Torre.)

Objective: To describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy outcomes in patients with rheumatic disease who were pregnant at the time of infection., Methods: Since March 2020, the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance has collected cases of patients with rheumatic disease with COVID-19. We report details of pregnant women at the time of COVID-19 infection, including obstetric details separately ascertained from providers., Results: We report on 39 patients, including 22 with obstetric detail available. The mean and median age was 33 years, range 24-45 years. Rheumatic disease diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis (n = 9), systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 9), psoriatic arthritis/other inflammatory arthritides (n = 8), and antiphospholipid syndrome (n = 6). Most had a term birth (16/22), with 3 preterm births, 1 termination, and 1 miscarriage; 1 woman had yet to deliver at the time of report. One-quarter (n = 10/39) of pregnant women were hospitalized following COVID-19 diagnosis. Two of 39 (5%) required supplemental oxygen (both hospitalized); no patients died. The majority did not receive specific medication treatment for their COVID-19 (n = 32/39, 82%), and 7 patients received some combination of antimalarials, colchicine, anti-interleukin 1β, azithromycin, glucocorticoids, and lopinavir/ritonavir., Conclusion: Women with rheumatic diseases who were pregnant at the time of COVID-19 had favorable outcomes. These data have limitations due to the small size and methodology; however, they provide cautious optimism for pregnancy outcomes for women with rheumatic disease particularly in comparison to the increased risk of poor outcomes that have been reported in other series of pregnant women with COVID-19., (© 2022 The Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To update the EULAR points to consider (PtCs) on the use of immunomodulatory therapies in COVID-19., Methods: According to the EULAR standardised operating procedures, a systematic literature review up to 14 July 2021 was conducted and followed by a consensus meeting of an international multidisciplinary task force. The new statements were consolidated by formal voting., Results: We updated 2 overarching principles and 12 PtC. Evidence was only available in moderate to severe and critical patients. Glucocorticoids alone or in combination with tocilizumab are beneficial in COVID-19 cases requiring oxygen therapy and in critical COVID-19. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors (baricitinib and tofacitinib) is promising in the same populations of severe and critical COVID-19. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies and convalescent plasma may find application in early phases of the disease and in selected subgroups of immunosuppressed patients. There was insufficient robust evidence for the efficacy of other immunomodulators with further work being needed in relation to biomarker-based stratification for IL-1 therapy CONCLUSIONS: Growing evidence supports incremental efficacy of glucocorticoids alone or combined with tocilizumab/Janus kinase inhibitors in moderate to severe and critical COVID-19. Ongoing studies may unmask the potential application of other therapeutic approaches. Involvement of rheumatologists, as systemic inflammatory diseases experts, should be encouraged in clinical trials of immunomodulatory therapy in COVID-19., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AA, AN, HB, FC, GDM, RG, CM-C and JRC have nothing to declare. PMM has received consulting and/or speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. G-RRB has received consulting and/or speaker’s fees from Abbvie, Gilead, Lilly, Roche, Sanofi, Pfizer all unrelated to this manuscript. IK-P has received consulting and/or speaker’s fees from Novartis, SOBI, Amgen, CHUGAI, Pfizer, LFB, Novimmune, Abbvie and PAtent for AIDAI score AVR has received speaker fees/Honoraria from Abbvie, Lilly, Roche, UCB, SOBI and Novartis all unrelated to this manuscript. DGM has received consulting and/or speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. XM has received consulting and/or speaker’s fees from BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Servier and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction/aims: Sporadic inclusion body myositis (IBM) is a degenerative and inflammatory acquired myopathy characterized by muscle deposition of various proteins typically associated with Alzheimer disease and other neurodegenerative diseases. Although cognitive impairment is not noted as a clinical feature of IBM, evidence is lacking. In this study we investigated whether cognitive performance of patients with IBM differs from population norms, focusing on cognitive domains affected in early Alzheimer disease (memory, executive function), and to test whether disease duration and the level of disability of IBM are associated with cognitive function., Methods: Twenty-four patients with IBM (mean [standard deviation]: age, 62.0 [7.2] years; disease duration, 9.6 [4.8] years) were assessed cross-sectionally on neuropsychological tests covering multiple cognitive domains, including the Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite (PACC). Performance was compared with published normative data adjusted for age, sex, and education (National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center; N = 3268). Associations were examined between PACC score, disease duration, and level of disability (assessed using the IBM Functional Rating Scale [IBMFRS])., Results: Across all cognitive tests, group performance was within ±1 standard deviation of the normative mean. There was no evidence of associations between PACC score and either disease duration (ρ = -0.04, P = .87) or IBMFRS total score (ρ = 0.14, P = .52)., Discussion: Memory and executive function in patients with IBM did not differ from normative data, and we observed no evidence of associations between the cognitive composite and disease duration or level of disability. This addresses a question frequently asked by patients and will be of value for clinicians and patients alike., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Patients with primary systemic vasculitis or polymyalgia rheumatica might be at a high risk for poor COVID-19 outcomes due to the treatments used, the potential organ damage cause by primary systemic vasculitis, and the demographic factors associated with these conditions. We therefore aimed to investigate factors associated with COVID-19 outcomes in patients with primary systemic vasculitis or polymyalgia rheumatica., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 12, 2020, and April 12, 2021, who had a history of primary systemic vasculitis (antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody [ANCA]-associated vasculitis, giant cell arteritis, Behçet's syndrome, or other vasculitis) or polymyalgia rheumatica, and were reported to the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry were included. To assess COVID-19 outcomes in patients, we used an ordinal COVID-19 severity scale, defined as: (1) no hospitalisation; (2) hospitalisation without supplemental oxygen; (3) hospitalisation with any supplemental oxygen or ventilation; or (4) death. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression analyses were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs), adjusting for age, sex, time period, number of comorbidities, smoking status, obesity, glucocorticoid use, disease activity, region, and medication category. Analyses were also stratified by type of rheumatic disease., Findings: Of 1202 eligible patients identified in the registry, 733 (61·0%) were women and 469 (39·0%) were men, and their mean age was 63·8 years (SD 17·1). A total of 374 (31·1%) patients had polymyalgia rheumatica, 353 (29·4%) had ANCA-associated vasculitis, 183 (15·2%) had giant cell arteritis, 112 (9·3%) had Behçet's syndrome, and 180 (15·0%) had other vasculitis. Of 1020 (84·9%) patients with outcome data, 512 (50·2%) were not hospitalised, 114 (11·2%) were hospitalised and did not receive supplemental oxygen, 239 (23·4%) were hospitalised and received ventilation or supplemental oxygen, and 155 (15·2%) died. A higher odds of poor COVID-19 outcomes were observed in patients who were older (per each additional decade of life OR 1·44 [95% CI 1·31-1·57]), were male compared with female (1·38 [1·05-1·80]), had more comorbidities (per each additional comorbidity 1·39 [1·23-1·58]), were taking 10 mg/day or more of prednisolone compared with none (2·14 [1·50-3·04]), or had moderate, or high or severe disease activity compared with those who had disease remission or low disease activity (2·12 [1·49-3·02]). Risk factors varied among different disease subtypes., Interpretation: Among patients with primary systemic vasculitis and polymyalgia rheumatica, severe COVID-19 outcomes were associated with variable and largely unmodifiable risk factors, such as age, sex, and number of comorbidities, as well as treatments, including high-dose glucocorticoids. Our results could be used to inform mitigation strategies for patients with these diseases., Funding: American College of Rheumatology and the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology., Competing Interests: SES reports funding from a Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium (VCRC)–Vasculitis Foundation Fellowship (the VCRC is part of the Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network, an initiative of the Office of Rare Diseases Research, National Center for Advancing Translational Science [NCATS], and is funded by a collaboration between NCATS and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases [NIAMS; U54 AR057319]). RC reports speaker's fees from Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, and Abbvie outside the submitted work. CH received funding under a sponsored research agreement from Vifor Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. SLM has received consulting fees from AbbVie; consulting fees from AstraZeneca; other from Roche-Chugai; consulting fees from Sanofi; and non-financial support from Roche, all outside the submitted work; and is a patron of the patient charity PMRGCAuk. PM is a Medical Research Council-GlaxoSmithKline (MRC-GSK) EMINENT clinical training fellow, who has received project funding from this organisation, outside the submitted work; has received funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre (UCLH BRC); reports grants from MRC-GSK; reports personal fees from Swedish Orphan Biovitrum and Lilly; and reports consultancy fees from Abbvie and Pfizer, all outside the submitted work. LN reports being a trustee of the charity PMR-GRA Scotland. JSA reports grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH) and NIAMS, the Rheumatology Research Foundation, the Brigham Research Institute, the R Bruce and Joan M Mickey Research Scholar Fund, and Amgen; grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb; and personal fees from Gilead, Inova, Janssen, Optum, and Pfizer, all outside the submitted work. AD-G is supported by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Award, the Robert D and Patricia E Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, and the Women's Health Career Enhancement Award outside the submitted work. KLH reports receiving speaker's fees from Abbvie; grant income from Bristol-Myers Squibb, UCB Pharma, and Pfizer, all outside the submitted work; and is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre outside the submitted work. RG reports non-financial support from Pfizer Australia and Janssen Australia; and personal fees from Pfizer Australia, Cornerstones, Janssen New Zealand, and Novartis, all outside the submitted work. UM-L is supported by grants from the German Ministry of Research and Education and the German Research Foundation outside the submitted work. MAG reports funding from the NIH and the NIAMS. PCR reports personal fees from Abbvie and Gilead; grants and personal fees from Janssen, Novartis, UCB Pharma, and Pfizer; non-financial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; and personal fees from Lilly and Roche, all outside the submitted work. JY reports no competing interests related to this work; is supported by grants from NIH (K24 AR074534 and P30 AR070155); and reports consulting fees from Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Aurinia, and AstraZeneca, all outside the submitted work. PMM has received consulting or speaker's fees from Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma, all outside the submitted work (all <$10 000); and is supported by the NIHR UCLH BRC outside the submitted work. ES is a board member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, which is a patient-run, volunteer-based organisation, whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. JWL reports grants from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. JSH reports no competing interests related to this work; is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation; receives salary support from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance; and reports consulting fees for Novartis, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum, and Biogen, all outside the submitted work (<$10 000). PS reports no competing interests related to this work, but reports receiving honorarium for editing social media for the American College of Rheumatology journals (<$10 000). SBh reports receiving non-branded consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Horizon, Novartis, and Pfizer (<$10 000 from each)outside the submitted work. ZSW reports receiving grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Principia-Sanofi; has consulted for Viela Bio and MedPace; and is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, all outside the submitted work. AS reports personal fees for lectures from AbbVie, Celltrion, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. EFM has received grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Lilly Portugal, Amgen Biofarmacêutica, Grünenthal SA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Medac, and A Menarini Portugal-Farmacêutica SA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; and non-financial support from Grünenthal, all outside the submitted work. LG reports research grants from Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, and Sanofi; consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Biogen, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB Pharma, all outside the submitted work. LC declares no competing interests related to this study, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as Abbvie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España SA, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal, and UCB Pharma. NJP reports grants from NIH during the conduct of the study. MU-G reports grants from Pfizer and Janssen, outside the submitted work. SBa reports grants and personal fees from Alexion Pharma, outside the submitted work. RV reports grants from Novartis, Pfizer, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The current core outcome set for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has had only minor adaptations since its development 20 years ago. Considering the significant advances in this field during the preceding decades, an update of this core set is necessary., Objective: To update the ASAS-OMERACT core outcome set for AS into the ASAS-OMERACT core outcome set for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA)., Methods: Following OMERACT and COMET guidelines, an international working group representing key stakeholders (patients, rheumatologists, health professionals, pharmaceutical industry and drug regulatory agency representatives) defined the core domain set for axSpA. The development process consisted of: i) Identifying candidate domains using a systematic literature review and qualitative studies; ii) Selection of the most relevant domains for different stakeholders through a 3-round Delphi survey involving axSpA patients and axSpA experts; iii) Consensus and voting by ASAS; iv) Endorsement by OMERACT. Two scenarios are considered based on the type of therapy investigated in the trial: symptom modifying therapies and disease modifying therapies., Results: The updated core outcome set for axSpA includes 7 mandatory domains for all trials (disease activity, pain, morning stiffness, fatigue, physical function, overall functioning and health, and adverse events including death). There are 3 additional domains (extra-musculoskeletal manifestations, peripheral manifestations and structural damage) that are mandatory for disease modifying therapies and important but optional for symptom modifying therapies. Finally, 3 other domains (spinal mobility, sleep, and work and employment) are defined as important but optional domains for all trials., Conclusion: The ASAS-OMERACT core domain set for AS has been updated into the ASAS-OMERACT core domain set for axSpA. The next step is the selection of instruments for each domain., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest V. Navarro-Compán: Research grants/honoraria from AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB. A. Boel has no competing interests to declare. A. Boonen: Research grants from AbbVie and Novartis and honoraria for boards or lectures form AbbVie, Galapagos and Lilly. R. Landewé: Honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma. Director of Rheumatology Consultancy BV. U. Kiltz: Grant and research support and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Fresenius, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB. M. Dougados: Consulting fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, UCB Pharma. W. Bautista-Molano: Research speaker´s fees from Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Biopas. X. Baraliakos: Consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. P. Chiowchanwisawakit: Research grants/honoraria from Novartis, Pfizer, Zuellig Pharma, Janssen. N. de Peyrecave: Employee of UCB Pharma. B. Elzorkany: Consultancy, research grants, and speaker's fees from: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Eva, Hekma, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, New Bridge, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi‐Aventis, and Servier. L. Fallon: Employee and shareholder of Pfizer Inc. K. Gaffney: Research grants from AbbVie, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Consulting fees: AbbVie, Celltrion, Celgene, Gilead, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB: Director Spondyloarthritis Academy (SPATE UK). LS. Gensler: Research grants/honoraria from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB. N. Haroon: Consultant for Amgen, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. PM. Machado: Consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. WP. Maksymowych: Consulting fees from Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB; Research and/or Educational Grants Abbvie, Novartis, Pfizer; Chief Medical Officer CARE Arthritis Limited. S. Ramiro: Research grants from Galapagos, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, UCB and Sanofi. D. Poddubnyy: Research support from AbbVie, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer. Consulting fees from: AbbVie, Biocad, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB. Speaker fees from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB. I-H. Song: Employee of AbbVie, Immunology Clinical Development, USA. D. van der Heijde: Consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma. Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To investigate opinion and routine practice of specialists from different disciplines on imaging techniques for interventional procedures related to rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods: An English-language questionnaire was developed by an international working group and distributed to health care providers of various disciplines involved in the care of people with RMDs via an online survey tool (SoSci Survey®) from December 2019 to May 2020. Results: A total of 1,105 respondents from 56 countries completed the survey, over 60% of participants were rheumatologists. The majority of respondents (88%) performed interventional procedures in RMDs patients and 90% of them used imaging guidance. Ultrasonography was the most frequently used technique, particularly among rheumatologists. X-ray and computed tomography were mainly used by radiologists. A discrepancy emerged between the importance assigned to certain items such as the availability of a second operator and their actual implementation in clinical practice. Local barriers, lack of resources and facilities were mentioned as the most relevant obstacles in this regard. Lack of training on imaging and/or imaging guided procedures did not emerge as a barrier to perform such interventions; in fact, 19% of respondents performing the procedures indicated not to have received adequate training in this field. Conclusions: This is the first multinational multidisciplinary survey exploring in detail the opinions and practice on imaging guidance for interventional procedures in RMDs. A harmonization of protocols based on international guidelines, along with adequate training programmes and interventions on barriers at national/local levels are the main unmet needs requiring attention., Competing Interests: FC has received consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie and Celgene, all unrelated to this manuscript. PMM has received consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. FP has received research grants from Novartis, Lilly and UCB and received consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie, AMGEN, BMS, Hexal, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. XB has received consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript. CD has received consulting/speaker's fees from Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi, all unrelated to this manuscript. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Carubbi, Bosch, Machado, Scirè, Alunno, Proft, Baraliakos and Dejaco.)