Search

ObjectivesTo provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field.MethodsAn international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item.ResultsThe task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3–6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations.ConclusionsThese updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.

Funding Information: This study was funded by European League Against Rheumatism. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Objectives: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. Methods: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost. publishersversion published

ObjectivesTo correlate immune responses following a two-dose regimen of mRNA anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to the development of a potent neutralising antiviral activity.MethodsThe RECOVER study was a prospective, monocentric study including patients with RA and healthy controls (HCs). Assessments were performed before, and 3, 6, 12 and 24 weeks, after the first vaccine dose, respectively, and included IgG, IgA and IgM responses (against receptor binding domain, S1, S2, N), IFN-γ ELISpots as well as neutralisation assays.ResultsIn patients with RA, IgG responses developed slower with lower peak titres compared with HC. Potent neutralising activity assessed by a SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralisation assay after 12 weeks was observed in all 21 HCs, and in 60.3% of 73 patients with RA. A significant correlation between peak anti-S IgG levels 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose and potent neutralising activity against SARS-CoV-2 was observed at weeks 12 and 24. The analysis of IgG, IgA and IgM isotype responses to different viral proteins demonstrated a delay in IgG but not in IgA and IgM responses. T cell responses were comparable in HC and patients with RA but declined earlier in patients with RA.ConclusionIn patients with RA, vaccine-induced IgG antibody levels were diminished, while IgA and IgM responses persisted, indicating a delayed isotype switch. Anti-S IgG levels 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose correlate with the development of a potent neutralising activity after 12 and 24 weeks and may allow to identify patients who might benefit from additional vaccine doses or prophylactic regimen.

Einleitung: Der Entwicklung einer klinisch manifesten rheumatoiden Arthritis (RA) geht eine präklinische Phase der Autoimmunität voraus. Diese Autoimmunphase ist durch das Vorhandensein von antimodifizierten Proteinantikörpern (AMPA) gekennzeichnet. Ein Teil dieser Individuen at-risk [zum vollständigen Text gelangen Sie über die oben angegebene URL]

Background: COVID-19 and some anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines trigger a humoral autoimmune response against a broad range of endogenous components, which may affect recipients' prognosis in predisposed individuals. Autoantibodies directed against apolipoprotein A-1 (AAA1 IgG) the major protein fraction of High Density Lipoprotein have been shown to be raised in COVID-19 and in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and other populations where they have been associated with poorer outcomes. We wanted to assess the impact of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination on AAA1 autoimmune biomarkers in RA patients.Methods: 20 healthy controls and 77 RA mRNA-based vaccinated patients were collected at baseline, 3 weeks after the first vaccination, 2 and 8 weeks after the second vaccination. AAA1 and SARS-CoV-2 serologies were measured by immunoassays. Systemic and local symptoms occurring during the vaccination protocol were recorded.Results: mRNA-based vaccination induced a significant increase in median AAA1 IgG levels in both healthy controls and RA patients overtime. However, in both populations, these medians trend did not translate into significant increase in AAA1 IgG seropositivity rates despite evolving from 5 to 10% in healthy controls, and from 9 to 12.9% in RA patients. No associations were retrieved between AAA1 IgG and symptoms of any kind during the vaccination protocol.Conclusions: mRNA-based vaccination seems to induce a light AAA1 IgG response in immunocompetent individuals within 2 months after the last injection. Although we did not observe any warning signs, the formal demonstration of the harmlessness of such biological warrants further studies.

Additional file 2: Supplementary Figure 1. Relationship Between Hb Levels and Clinical Efficacy Outcomes: TJC28 and SJC28 Over Time. Supplementary Figure 2. Relationship Between Hb Levels and Clinical Efficacy. Supplementary Figure 3. Scatterplot of CDAI Against Hb (g/L) by Visit and Baseline Hb Status– MONARCH. Supplementary Figure 4. Scatterplots of CDAI Against Hb (g/L) by Visit and Baseline Hb Status – TARGET + MOBILITY Pooled. Supplementary Figure 5. Mean Change in Treatment Outcomes: CDAI, DAS28-CRP, Pain-VAS, PtGA, MDGA – TARGET + MOBILITY Pooled. Supplementary Figure 6. Mean Change in Treatment Outcomes: TJC28, SJC28, FACIT-Fatigue, and Morning Stiffness – TARGET+MOBILITY Pooled Mean Change in Treatment Outcomes: CDAI, DAS28-CRP, Pain-VAS, PtGA, MDGA – TARGET + MOBILITY Pooled. Supplementary Figure 7. Mean Change in Treatment Outcomes: TJC28, SJC28, FACIT-Fatigue, and Morning Stiffness – MONARCH. Supplementary Figure 8. Mean change in JSN from Baseline at Week 24 and Week 52 (95% CI) – MOBILITY. Supplementary Figure 9. Mean change in Erosion score from Baseline at Week 24 and Week 52 (95% CI) – MOBILITY.

Additional file 1: Supplementary Table 1. Concomitant Medications at Baseline. Supplementary Table 2. Proportion of Responders* With Improvement in CDAI and Hb at Respective Visit – MONARCH (Safety Population). Supplementary Table 3. Proportion of responders* With Improvement in CDAI and Hb at Respective Visit – TARGET + MOBILITY Pooled.