Search

ObjectiveAccurate identification of lupus nephritis (LN) cases is essential for patient management, research and public health initiatives. However, LN diagnosis codes in electronic health records (EHRs) are underused, hindering efficient identification. We investigated the current performance of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes, 9th and 10th editions (ICD9/10), for identifying prevalent LN, and developed scoring systems to increase identification of LN that are adaptable to settings with and without LN ICD codes.MethodsTraining and test sets derived from EHR data from a large health system. An external set comprised data from the EHR of a second large health system. Adults with ICD9/10 codes for SLE were included. LN cases were ascertained through manual chart reviews conducted by rheumatologists. Two definitions of LN were used: strict (definite LN) and inclusive (definite, potential or diagnostic uncertainty). Gradient boosting models including structured EHR fields were used for predictor selection. Two logistic regression-based scoring systems were developed ('LN-Code' included LN ICD codes and 'LN-No Code' did not), calibrated and validated using standard performance metrics.ResultsA total of 4152 patients from University of California San Francisco Medical Center and 370 patients from Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center met the eligibility criteria. Mean age was 50 years, 87% were female. LN diagnosis codes demonstrated low sensitivity (43-73%) but high specificity (92-97%). LN-Code achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.93 and a sensitivity of 0.88 for identifying LN using the inclusive definition. LN-No Code reached an AUC of 0.91 and a sensitivity of 0.95 (0.97 for the strict definition). Both scoring systems had good external validity, calibration and performance across racial and ethnic groups.ConclusionsThis study quantified the underutilisation of LN diagnosis codes in EHRs and introduced two adaptable scoring systems to enhance LN identification. Further validation in diverse healthcare settings is essential to ensure their broader applicability.

ObjectiveThe American College of Rheumatology's (ACR) 2020 guidelines for the management of gout recommend using a treat-to-target approach to lower serum urate (SU). Using the ACR's Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness registry, we examined the use of a treat-to-target approach among gout patients receiving long-term urate-lowering therapy (ULT) and followed longitudinally by rheumatologists.MethodsIncluded patients had one or more diagnoses for gout in 2018-2019 and continuous use of ULT for ≥12 months. We assessed the proportions of patients with SU monitoring and, among those tested, who achieved SU

ObjectiveData on the onset of lupus manifestations across multiple organ domains and in diverse populations are limited. The objective was to analyze racial and ethnic differences in the risk of end-organ lupus manifestations following systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) diagnosis in a multiethnic cohort.MethodsThe California Lupus Epidemiology Study (CLUES) is a longitudinal study of SLE. Data on major end-organ lupus manifestations were collected and categorized by organ system: renal, hematologic, neurologic, cardiovascular, and pulmonary. Multiorgan disease was defined as manifestations in ≥2 of these distinct organ systems. Kaplan-Meier curves assessed end-organ disease-free survival, and Cox proportional hazards regression estimated the rate of end-organ disease following SLE diagnosis, adjusting for age at diagnosis, sex, and self-reported race and ethnicity (White, Hispanic, Black, and Asian).ResultsOf 326 participants, 89% were female; the mean age was 45 years. Self-reported race and ethnicity were 30% White, 23% Hispanic, 11% Black, and 36% Asian. Multiorgan disease occurred in 29%. Compared to White participants, Hispanic and Asian participants had higher rates, respectively, of renal (hazard ratio [HR] 2.9 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.8-4.7], HR 2.9 [95% CI 1.9-4.6]); hematologic (HR 2.7 [95% CI 1.3-5.7], HR 2.1 [95% CI 1.0-4.2]); and multiorgan disease (HR 3.3 [95% CI 1.8-5.9], HR 2.5 [95% CI 1.4-4.4]) following SLE diagnosis.ConclusionWe found heightened risks of developing renal, hematologic, and multiorgan disease following SLE diagnosis among Hispanic and Asian patients with SLE, as well as a high burden of multiorgan disease among CLUES participants.

ObjectiveSome 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.MethodsData 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionWe 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.

BackgroundDifferences 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.MethodsIn 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.Findings14 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/m3 [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

AimTo determine characteristics associated with more severe outcomes in a global registry of people with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and COVID-19.MethodsPeople 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionsMore 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.

ObjectiveUsing the American College of Rheumatology Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry, our objective was to examine performance on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) quality measures and to assess the association between practice characteristics and changes in performance over time among participating practices.MethodsWe analyzed data from practices enrolled in RISE between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017. Eight quality measures in the areas of RA disease management, cardiovascular risk reduction, and patient safety were examined. Variability in performance was evaluated at the practice level. Multivariate linear models were used to predict change in measure performance by year and to determine the effect of practice characteristics on change in performance over time.ResultsData from 59,986 patients from 54 practices were examined. The mean ± SD age was 62 ± 14 years, 77% were female, 69% were Caucasian, and most patients were seen in a single-specialty group practice (46%). The average performance on measures related to RA treatments was consistently high (>90%) across the study period. Measures related to RA functional status and disease activity assessment had the greatest improvements over time (8.4% and 13.0% increase per year, respectively; P

BackgroundPatients 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.MethodsIn 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.FindingsOf 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.InterpretationAmong 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.FundingAmerican College of Rheumatology and the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology.

BackgroundBehçet's disease (BD), a chronic systemic vasculitis, has distinct geographical and ethnic variation. Data regarding the epidemiology of patients with BD in the U.S. are limited; therefore, we sought to describe BD patient characteristics and medication use in the U.S., and compared them with data from patients from endemic regions.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using data from the RISE registry (2014-2018). Patients aged ≥ 18 years with BD were included. Sociodemographic and treatment information was extracted. We compared patients from the RISE registry to data from other published studies of patients with BD from endemic areas.ResultsOne thousand three hundred twenty-three subjects with BD from the RISE registry were included. Mean age was 48.7 ± 16.3 years, female to male ratio was 3.8:1, and 66.7% were White. The most frequently used medications included glucocorticoids (67.6%) and colchicine (55.0%). Infliximab and adalimumab were the most used biologics (14.5% and 14.1%, respectively); 3.2% of patients used apremilast. The RISE registry had more women (79.3%), and patients were older compared to previously published BD studies from endemic areas. Methotrexate and TNFi were more commonly reported in RISE (21.8% and 29.4%) compared to studies from Egypt and Turkey. Colchicine, cyclosporine, and cyclophosphamide were more commonly used in cohorts from Egypt, Turkey, and Iran.ConclusionsFindings from the largest BD dataset in the U.S. suggest that BD patients are predominantly female. Further research is needed to explore the reasons for the higher prevalence of BD among women in the U.S. and its possible impact on disease severity and management.

ObjectiveIndividuals with autoimmune rheumatic disease (RD) are considered to be at increased risk for infection. However, few US population-based studies have assessed whether these patients are at increased risk of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19 compared with those without RD.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study using national Veterans Affairs Health Care System data for individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Outcomes of interest were hospitalization or death due to any cause within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Outcomes were compared among veterans with RD and those without RD by using propensity score matching (PSM) and mixed-effects multivariate logistic regression.ResultsOf 26,116 veterans with COVID-19, 501 (1.9%) had an underlying RD. Prior to matching, patients with RD were more likely to have poor outcomes compared with controls (37.7% vs. 28.5% hospitalized; 6.4% vs. 4.5% died). In the PSM analysis, RD was not a significant predictor for poor outcomes; however, patients with prescriptions for glucocorticoids had increased odds of poor outcomes in a dose-dependent manner (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] for hospitalization or death: 1.33 [1.20-1.48] for doses >0 and ≤10 mg/day; 1.29 [1.09-1.52] for doses >10 mg/day).ConclusionAmong US veterans with COVID-19, we did not find a significant association between RD and hospitalization or death. Poor outcomes appear to be mostly driven by age and other comorbidities, similar to the general veteran population. However, we observed an increased risk for poor outcomes among patients who received glucocorticoids, even at daily doses less than or equal to 10 mg.

ObjectiveTo investigate baseline use of biologic or targeted synthetic (b/ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and COVID-19 outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsWe analysed the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry (from 24 March 2020 to 12 April 2021). We investigated b/tsDMARD use for RA at the clinical onset of COVID-19 (baseline): abatacept (ABA), rituximab (RTX), Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), interleukin 6 inhibitors (IL-6i) or tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi, reference group). The ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome was (1) no hospitalisation, (2) hospitalisation without oxygen, (3) hospitalisation with oxygen/ventilation or (4) death. We used ordinal logistic regression to estimate the OR (odds of being one level higher on the ordinal outcome) for each drug class compared with TNFi, adjusting for potential baseline confounders.ResultsOf 2869 people with RA (mean age 56.7 years, 80.8% female) on b/tsDMARD at the onset of COVID-19, there were 237 on ABA, 364 on RTX, 317 on IL-6i, 563 on JAKi and 1388 on TNFi. Overall, 613 (21%) were hospitalised and 157 (5.5%) died. RTX (OR 4.15, 95% CI 3.16 to 5.44) and JAKi (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.65) were each associated with worse COVID-19 severity compared with TNFi. There were no associations between ABA or IL6i and COVID-19 severity.ConclusionsPeople with RA treated with RTX or JAKi had worse COVID-19 severity than those on TNFi. The strong association of RTX and JAKi use with poor COVID-19 outcomes highlights prioritisation of risk mitigation strategies for these people.

ObjectivesTo determine factors associated with COVID-19-related death in people with rheumatic diseases.MethodsPhysician-reported registry of adults with rheumatic disease and confirmed or presumptive COVID-19 (from 24 March to 1 July 2020). The primary outcome was COVID-19-related death. Age, sex, smoking status, comorbidities, rheumatic disease diagnosis, disease activity and medications were included as covariates in multivariable logistic regression models. Analyses were further stratified according to rheumatic disease category.ResultsOf 3729 patients (mean age 57 years, 68% female), 390 (10.5%) died. Independent factors associated with COVID-19-related death were age (66-75 years: OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.13 to 4.22; >75 years: 6.18, 4.47 to 8.53; both vs ≤65 years), male sex (1.46, 1.11 to 1.91), hypertension combined with cardiovascular disease (1.89, 1.31 to 2.73), chronic lung disease (1.68, 1.26 to 2.25) and prednisolone-equivalent dosage >10 mg/day (1.69, 1.18 to 2.41; vs no glucocorticoid intake). Moderate/high disease activity (vs remission/low disease activity) was associated with higher odds of death (1.87, 1.27 to 2.77). Rituximab (4.04, 2.32 to 7.03), sulfasalazine (3.60, 1.66 to 7.78), immunosuppressants (azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, ciclosporin, mycophenolate or tacrolimus: 2.22, 1.43 to 3.46) and not receiving any disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) (2.11, 1.48 to 3.01) were associated with higher odds of death, compared with methotrexate monotherapy. Other synthetic/biological DMARDs were not associated with COVID-19-related death.ConclusionAmong people with rheumatic disease, COVID-19-related death was associated with known general factors (older age, male sex and specific comorbidities) and disease-specific factors (disease activity and specific medications). The association with moderate/high disease activity highlights the importance of adequate disease control with DMARDs, preferably without increasing glucocorticoid dosages. Caution may be required with rituximab, sulfasalazine and some immunosuppressants.

ObjectiveRacial/ethnic minorities experience more severe outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the general US population. This study was undertaken to examine the association between race/ethnicity and COVID-19 hospitalization, ventilation status, and mortality in people with rheumatic disease.MethodsUS patients with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 were entered into the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry between March 24, 2020 and August 26, 2020 were included. Race/ethnicity was defined as White, African American, Latinx, Asian, or other/mixed race. Outcome measures included hospitalization, requirement for ventilatory support, and death. Multivariable regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, rheumatic disease diagnosis, comorbidities, medication use prior to infection, and rheumatic disease activity.ResultsA total of 1,324 patients were included, of whom 36% were hospitalized and 6% died; 26% of hospitalized patients required mechanical ventilation. In multivariable models, African American patients (OR 2.74 [95% CI 1.90-3.95]), Latinx patients (OR 1.71 [95% CI 1.18-2.49]), and Asian patients (OR 2.69 [95% CI 1.16-6.24]) had higher odds of hospitalization compared to White patients. Latinx patients also had 3-fold increased odds of requiring ventilatory support (OR 3.25 [95% CI 1.75-6.05]). No differences in mortality based on race/ethnicity were found, though power to detect associations may have been limited.ConclusionSimilar to findings in the general US population, racial/ethnic minorities with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 had increased odds of hospitalization and ventilatory support. These results illustrate significant health disparities related to COVID-19 in people with rheumatic diseases. The rheumatology community should proactively address the needs of patients currently experiencing inequitable health outcomes during the pandemic.

ObjectiveImmunosuppressant drugs can increase the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) and tuberculosis (TB) reactivation. Using the American College of Rheumatology's Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry, we examined pre-treatment screening among new users of biologic or targeted synthetic disease modifying drugs (DMARDs).MethodsData, derived from RISE, included patients ≥ 18 years old who were new users of biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs. We developed quality measures related to pre-treatment screening for HBV, HCV, and TB in addition to a "composite" measure for all applicable tests. We assessed patient-level screening rates, practice-level variation among practices reporting on ≥ 20 patients, and the frequency of positive results.ResultsWe included 26,802 patients across 213 rheumatology practices nationwide. Patients were 58 (14) years old, 75.9% female; 59.6% had rheumatoid arthritis, and TNFi were the most common index DMARDs (64.9%). Overall, 44.8% and 40.5% patients had any documented HBV or HCV screening, respectively, prior to the index date; 29.7% had TB screening in the year prior to drug start. Only 15.5% had documentation of screening for all appropriate infections prior to drug start. Practice-level performance on the composite measure was low (range 0 to 48.3%). 2.4% of screening tests were positive.ConclusionWe found gaps in documentation of key safety measures among practices participating in RISE. Given the small but significant number of patients with active or latent infections that pose safety risks, developing standardized and reliable strategies to capture safety screening measures is paramount.

ObjectivesCOVID-19 outcomes in people with rheumatic diseases remain poorly understood. The aim was to examine demographic and clinical factors associated with COVID-19 hospitalisation status in people with rheumatic disease.MethodsCase series of individuals with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry: 24 March 2020 to 20 April 2020. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs of hospitalisation. Age, sex, smoking status, rheumatic disease diagnosis, comorbidities and rheumatic disease medications taken immediately prior to infection were analysed.ResultsA total of 600 cases from 40 countries were included. Nearly half of the cases were hospitalised (277, 46%) and 55 (9%) died. In multivariable-adjusted models, prednisone dose ≥10 mg/day was associated with higher odds of hospitalisation (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.96). Use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) alone or in combination with biologics/Janus Kinase inhibitors was not associated with hospitalisation (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.17 and OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.46, respectively). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use was not associated with hospitalisation status (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.06). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (anti-TNF) use was associated with a reduced odds of hospitalisation (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.81), while no association with antimalarial use (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.57) was observed.ConclusionsWe found that glucocorticoid exposure of ≥10 mg/day is associated with a higher odds of hospitalisation and anti-TNF with a decreased odds of hospitalisation in patients with rheumatic disease. Neither exposure to DMARDs nor NSAIDs were associated with increased odds of hospitalisation.

ObjectiveApplying treat-to-target strategies in the care of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is critical for improving outcomes, yet electronic health records (EHRs) have few features to facilitate this goal. We undertook this study to evaluate the effect of 3 health information technology (health-IT) initiatives on the performance of RA disease activity measures and outcomes in an academic rheumatology clinic.MethodsWe implemented the 3 following initiatives designed to facilitate performance of the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI): an EHR flowsheet to input scores, peer performance reports, and an EHR SmartForm including a CDAI calculator. We performed an interrupted time-series trial to assess effects on the proportion of RA visits with a documented CDAI. Mean CDAI scores before and after the last initiative were compared using t-tests. Additionally, we measured physician satisfaction with the initiatives.ResultsWe included data from 995 patients with 8,040 encounters between 2012 and 2017. Over this period, electronic capture of CDAI scores increased from 0% to 64%. Performance remained stable after peer reporting and the SmartForm were introduced. We observed no meaningful changes in disease activity levels. However, physician satisfaction increased after SmartForm implementation.ConclusionModifications to the EHR, provider culture, and clinical workflows effectively improved capture of RA disease activity scores and physician satisfaction, but parallel gains in disease activity levels were missing. This study illustrates how a series of health-IT initiatives can evolve to enable sustained changes in practice. However, capture of RA outcomes alone may not be sufficient to improve levels of disease activity without a comprehensive treat-to-target program.

ObjectiveMost studies that have evaluated patient-reported outcomes, such as those utilizing the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF10a) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have been performed in white and English-speaking populations. The aim of our study was to assess the measurement properties of the PF10a in a racially/ethnically diverse population with RA and to determine the effect of non-English language proficiency, insurance status, and race/ethnicity on the validity and responsiveness of the PF10a.MethodsData were abstracted from electronic health records for all RA patients seen in a university-based rheumatology clinic between 2013 and 2017. We evaluated the use of the PF10a, floor and ceiling effects, and construct validity across categories of language preference, insurance, and race/ethnicity. We used standardized response means and linear mixed-effects models to evaluate the responsiveness of the PF10a to longitudinal changes in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) across population subgroups.ResultsWe included 595 patients in a cross-sectional analysis of validity and 341 patients in longitudinal responsiveness analyses of the PF10a. The PF10a had acceptable floor and ceiling effects and was successfully implemented. We observed good construct validity and responsiveness to changes in CDAI among white subjects, English speakers, and privately insured patients. However, constructs evaluated by the PF10a were less correlated with clinical measures among Chinese speakers and Hispanic subjects, and less sensitive to clinical improvements among Medicaid patients and Spanish speakers.ConclusionWhile the PF10a has good measurement properties and is both practical and acceptable for implementation in routine clinical practice, we also found important differences across racial/ethnic groups and those with limited English proficiency that warrant further investigation.

Introduction/objectivesPneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) is a rare but potentially fatal opportunistic infection; however, consensus varies around which conditions or medications confer a level of risk sufficient to justify antibiotic prophylaxis for PJP. We used electronic health record (EHR) data to assess the current patterns of PJP prophylaxis, PJP outcomes, and prophylaxis-related adverse events among patients with rheumatic diseases who were receiving high-risk immunosuppressant drugs.MethodsData derive from the EHR of a large health system. We included new immunosuppressant users with diagnoses of vasculitis, myositis, or systemic lupus erythematosus. We calculated the proportion of patients who received PJP prophylaxis for each diagnosis and drug combination. We also calculated the number of PJP infections and the number of antibiotic adverse drug events (ADEs) per patient-year of exposure.ResultsWe followed 316 patients for 23.2 + /- 14.2 months. Overall, 124 (39%) of patients received prophylactic antibiotics for PJP. At least 25% of patients with the highest risk conditions (e.g. vasculitis) or highest risk immunosuppressants (e.g. cyclophosphamide) did not receive PJP prophylaxis. We found no cases of PJP infection over 640 patient-years of follow up, including among those not receiving prophylaxis, and an overall incidence rate of ADEs of 2.2% per patient-year.ConclusionsPJP prophylaxis for patients with rheumatic conditions is inconsistent, with one quarter of patients who have high risk conditions or high risk immunosuppressants not receiving prophylaxis. However, given extremely low rates of PJP infection, but detectable ADEs to prophylactic antibiotics, our findings suggest that evidence to guide more personalized risk assessments are needed to inform PJP prophylaxis.

ObjectivesNew specialty drugs such as biologics are now available in record numbers, presenting increased safety risks for people with immune-mediated diseases. However, comprehensive assessments of patient safety for these drugs are lacking. We examined performance on key patient safety measures, such as screening for latent tuberculosis (LTBI), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV), for new users of a broad group of specialty medications.MethodsData were extracted via electronic health record data warehouses of a large university health system using structured queries, and extensive chart review was performed to confirm measure elements. We included all new users of immunosuppressive specialty drugs between 2013 and 2017. We assessed screening for LTBI, HBV, and HCV from 12 months before through 60 days after medication initiation, and calculated performance on a composite measure that required screening for all three infections. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess differences in screening across specialties, adjusting for patient race, sex, age, and comorbidities.ResultsAmong 2027 patients, the most common drugs prescribed were adalimumab (32%), etanercept (24%), infliximab (19%), and ustekinumab (9%). Overall, 62% of patients were screened for LTBI, 42% for HBV, and 33% for HCV. Only 26% of patients were screened appropriately for all three infections. Screening patterns differed significantly according to treating specialty.ConclusionsWe found gaps in ambulatory safety for patients treated with immunosuppressive specialty drugs for diverse inflammatory conditions across all relevant treating specialties. More robust safety protocols are urgently needed to prevent serious patient safety events in this high-risk population.

BackgroundDiabetes devices provide data for health care providers (HCPs) and people with type 1 diabetes to make management decisions. Extracting and viewing the data require separate, proprietary software applications for each device. In this pilot study, we examined the feasibility of using a single software platform (Tidepool) that integrates data from multiple devices.Materials and methodsParticipating HCPs (n = 15) used the software with compatible devices in all patient visits for 6 months. Samples of registration desk activity and office visits were observed before and after introducing the software, and HCPs provided feedback by survey and focus groups.ResultsThe time required to upload data and the length of the office visit did not change. However, the number of times the HCP referred to the device data with patients increased from a mean of 2.8 (±1.2) to 6.1 (±3.1) times per visit (P = 0.0002). A significantly larger proportion of children looked at the device data with the new application (baseline: 61% vs. study end: 94%, P = 0.015). HCPs liked the web-based user interface, integration of the data from multiple devices, the ability to remotely access data, and use of the application to initiate patient education. Challenges included the need for automated data upload and integration with electronic medical records.ConclusionsThe software did not add to the time needed to upload data or the length of clinic visits and promoted discussions with patients about data. Future studies of HCP use of the application will evaluate clinical outcomes and effects on patient engagement and self-management.

Inclusion of patient-reported outcomes is important in SLE clinical trials as they allow capture of the benefits of a proposed intervention in areas deemed pertinent by patients. We aimed to compare the measurement properties of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures used in adults with SLE and to evaluate their responsiveness to interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A systematic review was undertaken using full original papers in English identified from three databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed. Studies describing the validation of HRQoL measures in English-speaking adult patients with SLE and SLE drug RCTs that used an HRQoL measure were retrieved. Twenty-five validation papers and 26 RCTs were included in the indepth review evaluating the measurement properties of 4 generic (Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF36), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item-bank, EuroQol-5D, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue) and 3 disease-specific (Lupus Quality of Life (LupusQoL), Lupus Patient Reported Outcomes, Lupus Impact Tracker (LIT)) instruments. All measures had good convergent and discriminant validity. PROMIS provided the strongest evidence for known-group validity and reliability among generic instruments; however, data on its responsiveness have not been published. Across measures, standardised response means were generally indicative of poor-moderate sensitivity to longitudinal change. In RCTs, clinically important improvements were reported in SF36 scores from baseline; however, between-arm differences were frequently non-significant and non-important. SF36, PROMIS, LupusQoL and LIT had the strongest evidence for acceptable measurement properties, but few measures aside from the SF36 have been incorporated into clinical trials. This review highlights the importance of incorporating a broader range of SLE-specific HRQoL measures in RCTs and warrants further research that focuses on longitudinal responsiveness of newer instruments.

Despite the increasing use of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cardiovascular (CV) risk score in clinical practice, few studies have compared this score to the Framingham risk score among rheumatologic patients. We calculated Framingham and 2013 ACC/AHA risk scores in subjects with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and assessed demographic, CV, and rheumatologic characteristics associated with discordant scores (high-risk ACC/AHA scores but low-risk Framingham scores). SLE and RA subjects drawn from two population-based cohort studies were assessed during in-person study visits. We used chi-squared tests and t tests to examine the association of discordant CV risk scores with baseline characteristics. Eleven (7.0%) of 157 SLE subjects and 11 (11.5%) of 96 RA subjects had discordant CV risk scores with high ACC/AHA scores and low Framingham scores. These findings did not significantly change when a 1.5 multiplier was applied to the Framingham score. Rheumatologic disease duration, high-sensitivity CRP levels, African-American race, diabetes, current use of anti-hypertensive medication, higher age, and higher systolic blood pressure were each significantly associated with discordant risk scores. Approximately 10% of SLE and RA subjects had discordant 10-year CV risk scores. Our findings suggest that the use of the 2013 ACC/AHA risk score could result in changes to lipid-lowering therapy recommendations in a significant number of rheumatologic patients. Prospective studies are needed to compare which score better predicts CV events in rheumatologic patients, especially those with risk factors associated with discordant risk scores.

Evidence suggests that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) retinal toxicity is more common than previously thought. Adhering to careful weight-based dosing can significantly reduce the risk of this adverse event and is recommended in recent guidelines. We used electronic health record data from a large health system to examine HCQ dosing over a 5-year period and identify risk factors associated with higher dosage of HCQ. We constructed a longitudinal, retrospective cohort of patients with HCQ prescriptions (1681 patients with 3490 prescribing events) between 2012 and 2016. We measured HCQ dosing patterns relative to guidelines (