Search

ObjectiveWe evaluated the epidemiology, manifestations, serology, comorbidities, and survival among patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) with and without sarcoidosis.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing patients with SSc with and without sarcoidosis. All patients fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology classification criteria for SSc. Sarcoidosis was based on physician diagnosis and/or confirmatory biopsy. The primary outcome was time from diagnosis to all-cause mortality. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves.ResultsWe included 1977 patients (1971 with SSc, 6 with SSc–sarcoidosis) with a SSc–sarcoidosis prevalence of 0.30%. Sarcoidosis frequently preceded SSc (66.66%). The most frequent sarcoidosis manifestations were pulmonary (66.66%), lymphadenopathy (66.66%), arthritis (50%), cutaneous (33.33%), and hepatic (16.66%). Patients with SSc and SSc–sarcoidosis had female to male sex ratios of 4.5:1 vs 5:1 and median ages of SSc onset of 48.3 vs 43.8 years, respectively. Interstitial lung disease (35% vs 66.66%) and pulmonary hypertension (24.91% vs 50%) tended to occur more frequently whereas abnormal nailfold capillaries (34.7% vs 16.66%) and digital ulcers (33.33% vs 16.66%) tended to occur less frequently among patients with SSc–sarcoidosis, but the differences were not significant. There was an increased frequency of stroke among the patients with SSc–sarcoidosis (relative risk 8.59, 95% CI 1.02-72.00). The median survival times were 23.4 years for SSc–sarcoidosis and 18.6 years for SSc, with no differences in survival curves (log-rank test,P =0.55).ConclusionSarcoidosis in SSc is rare but appears to occur more frequently than in the general population. It is associated with pulmonary, lymph node, cutaneous, joint, and hepatic involvement. Stroke occurs more frequently in patients with SSc–sarcoidosis but with no differences in survival.

The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC), American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and the Lupus Foundation of America are developing a revised systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) damage index (the SLICC/ACR Damage Index [SDI]). Shifts in the concept of damage in SLE have occurred with new insights into disease manifestations, diagnostics, and therapy. We evaluated contemporary constructs in SLE damage to inform development of the revised SDI.We conducted a 3-part qualitative study of international SLE experts. Facilitated small groups evaluated the construct underlying the concept of damage in SLE. A consensus meeting using nominal group technique was conducted to achieve agreement on aspects of the conceptual framework and scope of the revised damage index. The framework was finally reviewed and agreed upon by the entire group.Fifty participants from 13 countries were included. The 8 thematic clusters underlying the construct of SLE damage were purpose, items, weighting, reversibility, impact, time frame, attribution, and perspective. The revised SDI will be a discriminative index to measure morbidity in SLE, independent of activity or impact on the patient, and should be related to mortality. The SDI is primarily intended for research purposes and should take a life-course approach. Damage can occur before a diagnosis of SLE but should be attributable to SLE. Damage to an organ is irreversible, but the functional consequences on that organ may improve over time through physiological adaptation or treatment.We identified shifts in the paradigm of SLE damage and developed a unifying conceptual framework. These data form the groundwork for the next phases of SDI development.

Background The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) developed an online self-management program (SPIN-SELF) designed to improve disease-management self-efficacy in people with systemic sclerosis (SSc, or scleroderma). The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility aspects for conducting a full-scale randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the SPIN-SELF Program. Methods This feasibility trial was embedded in the SPIN Cohort and utilized the cohort multiple RCT design. In this design, at the time of cohort enrollment, cohort participants consent to be assessed for trial eligibility and randomized prior to being informed about the trial. Participants in the intervention arm are informed and provide consent, but not the control group. Forty English-speaking SPIN Cohort participants from Canada, the USA, or the UK with low disease-management self-efficacy (Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale [SEMCD] score ≤ 7) who were interested in using an online self-management program were randomized (3:2 ratio) to be offered the SPIN-SELF Program or usual care for 3 months. Program usage was examined via automated usage logs. User satisfaction was assessed with semi-structured interviews. Trial personnel time requirements and implementation challenges were logged. Results Of 40 SPIN Cohort participants randomized, 26 were allocated to SPIN-SELF and 14 to usual care. Automated eligibility and randomization procedures via the SPIN Cohort platform functioned properly, except that two participants with SEMCD scores > 7 (scores of 7.2 and 7.3, respectively) were included, which was caused by a system programming error that rounded SEMCD scores. Of 26 SPIN Cohort participants offered the SPIN-SELF Program, only 9 (35%) consented to use the program. Usage logs showed that use of the SPIN-SELF Program was low: 2 of 9 users (22%) logged into the program only once (median = 3), and 4 of 9 (44%) accessed none or only 1 of the 9 program’s modules (median = 2). Conclusions The results of this study will lead to substantial changes for the planned full-scale RCT of the SPIN-SELF Program that we will incorporate into a planned additional feasibility trial with progression to a full-scale trial. These changes include transitioning to a conventional RCT design with pre-randomization consent and supplementing the online self-help with peer-facilitated videoconference-based groups to enhance engagement. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03914781. Registered 16 April 2019.

Objective To investigate the incidence of and factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 testing and infection in immune mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) versus matched non-IMIDs comparators from the general population. Methods We conducted a population-based, matched cohort study among adult residents from Ontario, Canada, from January to December 2020. We created cohorts for the following IMIDs: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases, multiple sclerosis (MS), iritis, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), polymyalgia rheumatica and vasculitis. Each patient was matched with five patients without IMIDs based on socio-demographic factors. We estimated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 testing and infection in IMIDs and non-IMIDs patients. Multivariable logistic regressions assessed odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results We studied 493,499 patients with IMIDs and 2,466,946 patients without IMIDs. Patients with IMIDs were more likely to have at least one SARS-CoV-2 test, versus patients without IMIDs (27.4% vs. 22.7%), but the proportion testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was identical (0.9% in both groups). Overall, IMIDs patients had 20% higher odds of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 (odds ratio (OR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.19, 1.21). The odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection varied across IMIDs groups but was not significantly elevated for most IMID groups compared with non-IMIDs. The odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection was lower in IBD and MS and marginally higher in RA and iritis. Conclusions Patients across all IMIDs were more likely to be tested for SARS-CoV-2 versus those without IMIDs. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection varied across disease sub-groups.

ObjectivesOur aim was to compare patterns of musculoskeletal-related healthcare utilisation between male and female patients before and after the diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis (IA).MethodsWe used Ontario administrative health data to create three inception cohorts of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) diagnosed between April 2010 and March 2017. Healthcare utilisation indicators including visits to physicians, and use of musculoskeletal imaging and laboratory tests were assessed in each year for 3 years before and after diagnosis and compared between male and female patients using regression models adjusting for sociodemographic factors and comorbidities. Results were reported as ORs with 95% CIs for female patients compared with male patients.ResultsA total of 41 277 patients with RA (69% female), 8150 patients with AS (51% female) and 6446 patients with PsA (54% female) were analysed.Similar trends of sex-related differences were observed in all three cohorts. Before diagnosis, female patients were more likely to visit rheumatologists (OR 1.32–2.28) and family physicians (OR 1.03–1.15) for musculoskeletal reasons, whereas male patients were more likely to visit the emergency for musculoskeletal reasons (OR 0.76–0.87). A similar female predominance was observed regarding musculoskeletal imaging and laboratory tests before diagnosis. After diagnosis, female patients were more likely to remain in rheumatology care (OR 1.12–1.24).ConclusionFemale patients with IA have higher healthcare utilisation than male patients which may indicate biological differences in disease course or sociocultural differences in healthcare-seeking behaviour.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an inflammatory musculoskeletal disease with a chronic, progressive course. Various aspects of PsA, including its clinical features, disease course and response to treatment, are influenced by sociodemographic characteristics of the patient. This includes patient sex, the biological attributes associated with being male or female, and gender, a sociocultural construct that comprises attitudes, traits and behaviours associated with being a man or a woman. An understanding of sex- and gender-related differences in PsA, as well as their underlying mechanisms, is therefore important for individualized care. In this narrative review, the influence of sex and gender on PsA manifestation and course, patient function and quality of life, and their association with comorbidities are described. Sex- and gender-related disparities in response to advanced therapies and their potential underlying mechanisms are delineated. Differences in pathophysiological mechanisms between male and female patients including genetics, immune and hormonal mechanisms are discussed. Finally, fertility and pregnancy outcomes in PsA are outlined. By adopting sex and gender lenses, this review is aimed at highlighting key differences between male and female patients with PsA and uncovering mechanisms underlying these differences, ultimately promoting individualized care of men and women with PsA and informing future research in this area.

Calcinosis (hydroxyapatite and calcium phosphate crystal deposition) within the extracellular matrix of the dermis and subcutaneous tissue is a frequent manifestation of adult and pediatric systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases, specifically systemic sclerosis, dermatomyositis, mixed connective tissue disease, and systemic lupus erythematosus. In this article, we review classification of calcinosis, highlight mechanisms that may contribute to the pathogenesis of calcinosis, and summarize the evidence evaluating nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of calcinosis.

Background Elevated levels of interferons (IFNs) are a characteristic feature of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs) and may be useful in predicting impending symptomatic progression in anti-nuclear antibody-positive (ANA+) individuals lacking a SARD diagnosis. Typically, these are measured by their effect on gene expression in the blood, which has limited their utility in clinical settings. Here, we assessed whether the measurement of serum IFN-α or selected IFN-induced cytokines accurately mirrors IFN-induced gene expression in ANA+ individuals and investigated their utility as biomarkers of clinical progression. Methods A total of 280 subjects were studied, including 50 ANA− healthy controls, 160 ANA+ individuals without a SARD diagnosis (96 asymptomatic, 64 with undifferentiated connective tissue disease), and 70 SARD patients. IFN-induced gene expression was measured by nanoString and cytokine levels by ELISA or Simoa. ANA+ individuals lacking a SARD diagnosis who had the new onset of SARD criteria over the subsequent 2 years were defined as progressors. Results Measurement of IFN-α levels by high-sensitivity ELISA or Simoa correlated much better with IFN-induced gene expression than measurement of CXCL-10 or Galectin-9 levels. Despite this, high CXCL-10 and Galectin-9 levels were better predictors of subsequent progression in ANA+ individuals than measures of IFN-α or IFN-induced gene expression with the optimal combination of predictive cytokines (CXCL-10 and IFN-α as measured by ELISA), resulting in a specificity and positive predictive value of 100%. Conclusion Easily performed ELISA assays for CXCL-10 and IFN-α can be used to predict ANA+ individuals at high risk of imminent symptomatic progression.

Explore trial participants’ and research team members’ perceptions of the impact of the videoconference-based, supportive care program (SPIN-CHAT Program) during early COVID-19 for individuals with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Data were collected cross-sectionally. A social constructivist paradigm was adopted, and one-on-one videoconference-based, semi-structured interviews were conducted with SPIN-CHAT Trial participants and research team members. A hybrid inductive-deductive approach and reflexive thematic analysis were used. Of the 40 SPIN-CHAT Trial participants and 28 research team members approached, 30 trial participants (Mean age = 54.9; SD = 13.0 years) and 22 research team members agreed to participate. Those who took part in interviews had similar characteristics to those who declined. Five themes were identified: (1) The SPIN-CHAT Program conferred a range of positive psychological health outcomes, (2) People who don’t have SSc don’t get it: The importance of SSc-specific programming, (3) The group-based format of the SPIN-CHAT Program created a safe space to connect and meet similar others, (4) The structure and schedule of the SPIN-CHAT Program reduced feelings of boredom and contributed to enhanced psychological health, (5) The necessity of knowledge, skills, and tools to self-manage SSc and navigate COVID-19. Participants’ and research team members’ perspectives elucidated SPIN-CHAT Program benefits and how these benefits may have been realized. Results underscore the importance of social support from similar others, structure, and self-management to enhance psychological health during COVID-19. clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04335279)IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe videoconference-based, supportive care SPIN-CHAT Program enhanced psychological health amongst individuals affected by systemic sclerosis.SPIN-CHAT Program participants and research team members shared that being around similar others, program structure, and self-management support were important and may have contributed to enhanced psychological health.Further efforts are required to explore experiences within supportive care programs to better understand if and how psychological health is impacted. The videoconference-based, supportive care SPIN-CHAT Program enhanced psychological health amongst individuals affected by systemic sclerosis. SPIN-CHAT Program participants and research team members shared that being around similar others, program structure, and self-management support were important and may have contributed to enhanced psychological health. Further efforts are required to explore experiences within supportive care programs to better understand if and how psychological health is impacted.

Background Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma; SSc) is a rare autoimmune connective tissue disease. We completed an initial feasibility trial of an online self-administered version of the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Self-Management (SPIN-SELF) Program using the cohort multiple randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. Due to low intervention offer uptake, we will conduct a new feasibility trial with progression to full-scale trial, using a two-arm parallel, partially nested RCT design. The SPIN-SELF Program has also been revised to include facilitator-led videoconference group sessions in addition to online material. We will test the group-based intervention delivery format, then evaluate the effect of the SPIN-SELF Program on disease management self-efficacy (primary) and patient activation, social appearance anxiety, and functional health outcomes (secondary). Methods This study is a feasibility trial with progression to full-scale RCT, pending meeting pre-defined criteria, of the SPIN-SELF Program. Participants will be recruited from the ongoing SPIN Cohort (http://www.spinsclero.com/en/cohort) and via social media and partner patient organizations. Eligible participants must have SSc and low to moderate disease management self-efficacy (Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEMCD) Scale score ≤ 7.0). Participants will be randomized (1:1 allocation) to the group-based SPIN-SELF Program or usual care for 3 months. The primary outcome in the full-scale trial will be disease management self-efficacy based on SEMCD Scale scores at 3 months post-randomization. Secondary outcomes include SEMCD scores 6 months post-randomization plus patient activation, social appearance anxiety, and functional health outcomes at 3 and 6 months post-randomization. We will include 40 participants to assess feasibility. At the end of the feasibility portion, stoppage criteria will be used to determine if the trial procedures or SPIN-SELF Program need important modifications, thereby requiring a re-set for the full-scale trial. Otherwise, the full-scale RCT will proceed, and outcome data from the feasibility portion will be utilized in the full-scale trial. In the full-scale RCT, 524 participants will be recruited. Discussion The SPIN-SELF Program may improve disease management self-efficacy, patient activation, social appearance anxiety, and functional health outcomes in people with SSc. SPIN works with partner patient organizations around the world to disseminate its programs free-of-charge. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT04246528. Registered on 27 January 2020

There is an increasing body of literature suggesting a relationship between environmental factors and the development of systemic sclerosis (SSc). These include occupational exposures, chemical materials, medications, alterations in the microbiome, and dysbiosis. Environmental exposures may impact epigenetic regulation thereby triggering an aberrant immune response resulting in the clinical and serologic phenotype that we diagnose as SSc. Screening and studying putative triggers will not only improve our understanding of the pathogenesis of SSc but also inform the institution for protective measures.

ObjectiveTo evaluate whether a change in the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria threshold score affects accurate classification of SLE cases compared to disease-based control subjects. We evaluated a range of threshold scores to determine the score that maximizes the accurate classification of early SLE.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study comparing SLE cases and control patients. A EULAR/ACR criteria score was calculated using baseline information. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratios (+LRs), and negative likelihood ratios (−LRs) with 95% CIs were used to evaluate operating characteristics. Threshold scores of 6 to 12 were evaluated in subjects with early disease (ie, disease duration of ≤ 5 years). +LRs > 10 and −LRs < 0.1 provide evidence to rule in or rule out SLE.ResultsA total of 2764 patients were included: 1980 SLE cases who fulfilled either the ACR or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria and 784 control subjects. The EULAR/ACR SLE criteria had a sensitivity of 98% (95% CI 97-98), a specificity of 99% (95% CI 98-100), a +LR of 95.5 (95% CI 48.0-190), and a −LR 0.03 (95% CI 0.02-0.03). The criteria operated well in those with early disease, in women, in men, and in White, Black, Chinese, and Filipino people. A score of 10 maximized the accurate classification of patients with early disease (+LR 174.4, 95% CI 43.8-694.6; −LR 0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.04). An increase in the threshold score from 10 to 11 resulted in significant worsening in the −LR (threshold score 10: −LR 0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.03 vs threshold score 11: −LR 0.05, 95% CI 0.04-0.06).ConclusionThe EULAR/ACR SLE classification criteria threshold score of 10 performs well, particularly among those with early disease and across sexes and ethnicities.

OBJECTIVE. To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS. This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation. RESULTS. This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence. CONCLUSION. Application of these recommendations should consider patients’ individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

Clinical practice guidelines are important documents developed and endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology to support its membership and other clinicians in the care of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Clinical practice guidelines serve several roles including guiding health care professionals on treatment of a disease, screening, and/or diagnosis. Rigorously developed guidelines are based on the most recent scientific evidence, in consultation with experts, including patients. This article discusses the purpose of clinical practice guidelines, highlighting their strengths and limitations. Policies and procedures of the American College of Rheumatology for the development and endorsement of guidelines are summarized.

Objective To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods A task force was assembled that included 9 rheumatologists/immunologists, 2 infectious disease specialists, and 2 public health physicians. After agreeing on scoping questions, an evidence report was created that summarized the published literature and publicly available data regarding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as literature for other vaccines in RMD patients. Task force members rated their agreement with draft consensus statements on a 9-point numerical scoring system, using a modified Delphi process and the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, with refinement and iteration over 2 sessions. Consensus was determined based on the distribution of ratings. Results Despite a paucity of direct evidence, 74 draft guidance statements were developed by the task force and agreed upon with consensus to provide guidance for use of the COVID-19 vaccines in RMD patients and to offer recommendations regarding the use and timing of immunomodulatory therapies around the time of vaccination. Conclusion These guidance statements, made in the context of limited clinical data, are intended to provide direction to rheumatology health care providers on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate implementation of vaccination strategies for RMD patients.

ObjectiveSystemic sclerosis (SSc) is a multisystem disease with heterogeneity in presentation and prognosis.An international collaboration to develop new SSc subset criteria is underway. Our objectives were to identify systems of SSc subset classification and synthesize novel concepts to inform development of new criteria.MethodsMedline, Cochrane MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched from their inceptions to December 2019 for studies related to SSc subclassification, limited to humans and without language or sample size restrictions.ResultsOf 5686 citations, 102 studies reported original data on SSc subsets. Subset classification systems relied on extent of skin involvement and/or SSc-specific autoantibodies (n = 61), nailfold capillary patterns (n = 29), and molecular, genomic, and cellular patterns (n = 12). While some systems of subset classification confer prognostic value for clinical phenotype, severity, and mortality, only subsetting by gene expression signatures in tissue samples has been associated with response to therapy.ConclusionSubsetting on extent of skin involvement remains important. Novel disease attributes including SSc-specific autoantibodies, nailfold capillary patterns, and tissue gene expression signatures have been proposed as innovative means of SSc subsetting.

The EULAR/ACR 2019 classification criteria for SLE constitute a current and optimized clinical approach to SLE classification. Classification is still not based on molecular approaches and the results from large studies using polyomics may be interpreted as demonstrating the relevance of the genetic and environmental background rather than splitting SLE into several entities. In fact, an association study within the EULAR/ACR classification criteria project found associations between manifestations only within organ domains. This independency of various organ manifestations argues for SLE as one disease entity. The current review article will therefore concentrate on the clinical and immunological manifestations of SLE and on what we have already learned in this century. Moreover, the structure and essential rules of the EULAR/ACR 2019 classification criteria will be discussed. While classification and diagnosis are distinct concepts, which have to remain clearly separated, information derived from the process towards the classification criteria is also useful for diagnostic purposes. Therefore this article also tries to delineate what classification can teach us for diagnosis, covering a wide variety of SLE manifestations.

To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the use of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).A task force was assembled that included 9 rheumatologists/immunologists, 2 infectious disease specialists, and 2 public health physicians. After agreeing on scoping questions, an evidence report was created that summarized the published literature and publicly available data regarding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as literature for other vaccines in RMD patients. Task force members rated their agreement with draft consensus statements on a 9-point numerical scoring system, using a modified Delphi process and the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, with refinement and iteration over 2 sessions. Consensus was determined based on the distribution of ratings.Despite a paucity of direct evidence, statements were developed by the task force and agreed upon with consensus to provide guidance for use of the COVID-19 vaccines, including supplemental/booster dosing, in RMD patients and to offer recommendations regarding the use and timing of immunomodulatory therapies around the time of vaccination.These guidance statements are intended to provide direction to rheumatology health care providers on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate implementation of vaccination strategies for RMD patients.

To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the use of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).A task force was assembled that included 9 rheumatologists/immunologists, 2 infectious diseases specialists, and 2 public health physicians. After agreeing on scoping questions, an evidence report was created that summarized the published literature and publicly available data regarding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as literature for other vaccines in RMD patients. Task force members rated their agreement with draft consensus statements on a 9-point numerical scoring system, using a modified Delphi process and the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, with refinement and iteration over 2 sessions. Consensus was determined based on the distribution of ratings.Despite a paucity of direct evidence, statements were developed by the task force and agreed upon with consensus to provide guidance for use of the COVID-19 vaccines, including supplemental/booster dosing, in RMD patients and to offer recommendations regarding the use and timing of immunomodulatory therapies around the time of vaccination.These guidance statements are intended to provide direction to rheumatology health care providers on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate implementation of vaccination strategies for RMD patients.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a disease characterized by fibrosis of the skin and internal organs. In this article, we review some of the current therapeutic approaches used in the treatment of the fibrotic manifestations of SSc. Methotrexate, mycophenolate, and cyclophosphamide are relatively inexpensive and traditional options. Biologic agents, such as rituximab, tocilizumab, and abatacept, have been evaluated with variable results. The role of novel agents such as nintedanib and pirfenidone is currently being considered, In recent years, a more robust evidence base for the use of a variety of immunosuppressive agents has been published offering a wider array of therapeutic options for the fibrotic manifestations of SSc.

Highlights • This scoping review provides an up-to-date overview of published evidence regarding the frequency and severity of acute viral respiratory AEs related to antirheumatic disease therapies. • Glucocorticoid use was associated with a higher frequency of acute upper and lower respiratory viral events. • Mild viral respiratory infections occurred more frequently in several studies in which patients were treated with JAKi, most notably at higher doses. • TNFi and IL-17 inhibitors seemed to be associated with higher frequency of mild viral respiratory infections such as URTI and nasopharyngitis. • Our review identifies a knowledge gap for most antirheumatic medications and their acute respiratory viral complications; in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, increased widespread respiratory viral PCR testing offers immediate research opportunities to clarify the safety of antirheumatic therapies in terms of viral respiratory complications., Introduction COVID-19 is an acute respiratory viral infection that threatens people worldwide, including people with rheumatic disease, although it remains unclear to what extent various antirheumatic disease therapies increase susceptibility to complications of viral respiratory infections. Objective The present study undertakes a scoping review of available evidence regarding the frequency and severity of acute respiratory viral adverse events related to antirheumatic disease therapies. Methods Online databases were used to identify, since database inception, studies reporting primary data on acute respiratory viral infections in patients utilizing antirheumatic disease therapies. Independent reviewer pairs charted data from eligible studies using a standardized data abstraction tool. Results A total of 180 studies were eligible for qualitative analysis. While acknowledging that the extant literature has a lack of specificity in reporting of acute viral infections or complications thereof, the data suggest that use of glucocorticoids, JAK inhibitors (especially high-dose), TNF inhibitors, and anti-IL-17 agents may be associated with an increased frequency of respiratory viral events. Available data suggest no increased frequency or risk of respiratory viral events with NSAIDs, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclophosphamide, or apremilast. One large cohort study demonstrated an association with leflunomide use and increased risk of acute viral respiratory events compared to non-use. Conclusion This scoping review identified that some medication classes may confer increased risk of acute respiratory viral infections. However, definitive data are lacking and future studies should address this knowledge gap.

Observational studies allow researchers to understand the natural history of rheumatic conditions, risk factors for disease development, and factors affecting important disease-related outcomes, and to estimate treatment effect from real-world data. However, this design carries a risk of confounding bias. A propensity score (PS) is a balancing score that aims to minimize the difference between study groups and consequently potential confounding effects. The score can be applied in 1 of 4 methods in observational research: matching, stratification, adjustment, and inverse probability weighting. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a rare disease characterized by a relatively small sample size and/or low event rates. In this article, we review the PS methods. We demonstrate application of the PS methods to achieve study group balance in a rare disease using an example of risk of infection in SLE patients with hypogammaglobulinemia.

Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases (SARDs) are characterized by the production of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANAs). ANAs are also seen in healthy individuals and can be detected years before disease onset in SARD. Both the immunological changes that promote development of clinical symptoms in SARD and those that prevent autoimmunity in asymptomatic ANA+ individuals (ANA+ NS) remain largely unexplored. To address this question, we used flow cytometry to examine peripheral blood immune populations in ANA+ individuals, with and without SARD, including 20 individuals who subsequently demonstrated symptom progression. Several immune populations were expanded in ANA+ individuals with and without SARD, as compared with ANA- healthy controls, particularly follicular and peripheral T helper, and antibody-producing B cell subsets. In ANA+ NS individuals, there were significant increases in T regulatory subsets and TGF-ß1 that normalized in SARD patients, whereas in SARD patients there were increases in Th2 and Th17 helper cell levels as compared with ANA+ NS individuals, resulting in a shift in the balance between inflammatory and regulatory T cell subsets. Patients with SARD also had increases in the proportion of pro-inflammatory innate immune cell populations, such as CD14+ myeloid dendritic cells, and intermediate and non-classical monocytes, as compared to ANA+ NS individuals. When comparing ANA+ individuals without SARD who progressed clinically over the subsequent 2 years with those who did not, we found that progressors had significantly increased T and B cell activation, as well as increased levels of LAG3+ T regulatory cells and TGF-ß1. Collectively, our findings suggest that active immunoregulation prevents clinical autoimmunity in ANA+ NS and that this becomes impaired in patients who progress to SARD, resulting in an imbalance favoring inflammation.

The European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) established a new criteria system with antinuclear antibodies (ANA) as an entry criterion, domains, and weighted criteria. In the validation cohort, specificity and sensitivity each matched the best performance of the previous criteria sets.Groups worldwide have externally validated the EULAR/ACR SLE classification criteria. Studies on the classification criteria were searched on PubMed and analyzed for their estimates of criteria performance. These were combined with new insights from the EULAR/ACR criteria project to understand any differences in assessments.Overall, external validation supports the concepts and performance of the new SLE criteria. Variation in specificity in part appears to be related to incomplete application of the attribution rule of the criteria, under which items should only be counted for SLE if there were no more likely alternative explanation. Scientific uncertainty, and a lack of worldwide consensus, on the borderline between disease entities, e.g. between SLE and isolated cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE), also affected variation in estimates. For sensitivity, the performance of tests for ANA is critical.

ObjectiveTo investigate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization risk in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) compared with matched non-IMID comparators from the general population.MethodsWe conducted a population-based, matched cohort study using health administrative data from January to July 2020 in Ontario, Canada. Cohorts for each of the following IMIDs were assembled: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis, systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), multiple sclerosis (MS), iritis, inflammatory bowel disease, polymyalgia rheumatica, and vasculitis. Each patient was matched with 5 non-IMID comparators based on sociodemographic factors. We compared the cumulative incidence of hospitalizations for COVID-19 and their outcomes between IMID and non-IMID patients.ResultsA total of 493,499 patients with IMID (417 hospitalizations) and 2,466,946 non-IMID comparators (1519 hospitalizations) were assessed. The odds of being hospitalized for COVID-19 were significantly higher in patients with IMIDs compared with their matched non-IMID comparators (matched unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.37, adjusted OR 1.23). Significantly higher risk of hospitalizations was found in patients with iritis (OR 1.46), MS (OR 1.83), PsA (OR 2.20), RA (OR 1.42), SARDs (OR 1.47), and vasculitis (OR 2.07). COVID-19 hospitalizations were associated with older age, male sex, long-term care residence, multimorbidity, and lower income. The odds of complicated hospitalizations were 21% higher among all IMID vs matched non-IMID patients, but this association was attenuated after adjusting for demographic factors and comorbidities.ConclusionPatients with IMIDs were at higher risk of being hospitalized with COVID-19. This risk was explained in part by their comorbidities.

Objectives The cytokine oncostatin M (OSM) is implicated in the pathology of SSc. Inhibiting OSM signalling using GSK2330811 (an anti-OSM monoclonal antibody) in patients with SSc has the potential to slow or stop the disease process. Methods This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled participants ≥18 years of age with active dcSSc. Participants were randomized 3:1 (GSK2330811:placebo) in one of two sequential cohorts to receive GSK2330811 (cohort 1: 100 mg; cohort 2: 300 mg) or placebo s.c. every other week for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety; blood and skin biopsy samples were collected to explore mechanistic effects on inflammation and fibrosis. Clinical efficacy was an exploratory endpoint. Results Thirty-five participants were randomized to placebo (n = 8), GSK2330811 100 mg (n = 3) or GSK2330811 300 mg (n = 24). Proof of mechanism, measured by coordinate effects on biomarkers of inflammation or fibrosis, was not demonstrated following GSK2330811 treatment. There were no meaningful differences between GSK2330811 and placebo for any efficacy endpoints. The safety and tolerability of GSK2330811 were not favourable in the 300 mg group, with on-target, dose-dependent adverse events related to decreases in haemoglobin and platelet count that were not observed in the 100 mg or placebo groups. Conclusion Despite a robust and novel experimental medicine approach and evidence of target engagement, anticipated SSc-related biologic effects of GSK2330811 were not different from placebo and safety was unfavourable, suggesting OSM inhibition may not be a useful therapeutic strategy in SSc. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03041025; EudraCT, 2016-003417-95.

Systemic sclerosis is a systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease characterized by immune abnormalities, leading to vasculopathy and fibrosis. Autoantibody testing has become an increasingly important part of diagnosis and prognostication. Clinicians have been limited to antinuclear antibody (ANA), antitopoisomerase I (also known as anti-Scl-70) antibody, and anticentromere antibody testing. Many clinicians now have improved access to an expanded profile of autoantibody testing. In this narrative review article, we review the epidemiology, clinical associations, and prognostic value of advanced autoantibody testing in people with systemic sclerosis.

Quality improvement is an emerging field, that applies principles of improvement science and utilizes measurement methods with the aim of improving patient care. Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease associated with increased healthcare burden, cost, morbidity, and mortality. Gaps in delivering care to patients with SSc have been consistently observed. In this article, we introduce the discipline of quality improvement and its use of quality measures. We summarize and comparatively evaluate three sets of quality measures that have been proposed to evaluate the quality of care of patients with SSc. Finally, we highlight the areas of unmet needs and indicate future directions for quality improvement and quality measures in SSc.

Summary Background Abatacept was well tolerated by patients with early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis in a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial, with potential efficacy at 12 months. We report here the results of an open-label extension for 6 months. Methods Patients (aged ≥18 years) with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis of less than 3 years' duration from their first non-Raynaud's symptom were enrolled into the ASSET trial (A Study of Subcutaneous Abatacept to Treat Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis), which is a double-blind trial at 22 sites in Canada, the UK, and the USA. After completion of 12 months of treatment with either abatacept or placebo, patients received a further 6 months of abatacept (125 mg subcutaneous every week) in an open-label extension. The primary endpoint of the double-blind trial was modified Rodnan Skin Score (mRSS) at 12 months, which was reassessed at 18 months in the open-label extension. The primary analysis included all participants who completed the double-blind trial and received at least one dose of open-label treatment (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02161406 . Findings Between Sept 22, 2014, and March 15, 2017, 88 participants were randomly allocated in the double-blind trial either abatacept (n=44) or placebo (44); 32 patients from each treatment group completed the 6-month open-label extension. Among patients assigned abatacept, a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS was noted at 12 months (−6·6 [SD 6·4]), with further improvement seen during the open-label extension period (−9·8 [8·1] at month 18). Participants assigned placebo had a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS at 12 months (−3·7 [SD 7·6]), with a further improvement at month 18 (−6·3 [9·3]). Infections during the open-label extension phase occurred in nine patients in the placebo–abatacept group (12 adverse events, one serious adverse event) and in 11 patients in the abatacept–abatacept group (14 adverse events, one serious adverse event). Two deaths occurred during the 12-month double-blind period in the abatacept group, which were related to scleroderma renal crisis; no deaths were recorded during the open-label extension. Interpretation During the 6-month open-label extension, no new safety signals for abatacept were identified in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Clinically meaningful improvements in mRSS and other outcome measures were observed in both the abatacept and placebo groups when patients transitioned to open-label treatment. These data support further studies of abatacept in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb and National Institutes of Health.

Objective: To compare organ involvement and disease severity between male and female patients with juvenile onset systemic sclerosis. Methods: Demographics, organ involvement, laboratory evaluation, patient-reported outcomes and physician assessment variables were compared between male and female juvenile onset systemic sclerosis patients enrolled in the prospective international juvenile systemic sclerosis cohort at their baseline visit and after 12 months. Results: One hundred and seventy-five juvenile onset systemic sclerosis patients were evaluated, 142 females and 33 males. Race, age of onset, disease duration, and disease subtypes (70% diffuse cutaneous) were similar between males and females. Active digital ulceration, very low body mass index, and tendon friction rubs were significantly more frequent in males. Physician global assessment of disease severity and digital ulcer activity was significantly higher in males. Composite pulmonary involvement was also more frequent in males, though not statistically significantly. After 12 months, they are the pattern of differences changed female patients had significantly more frequent pulmonary involvement. Conclusion: In this cohort, juvenile onset systemic sclerosis had a more severe course in males at baseline and but the pattern changed after 12 months. Some differences from adult findings persisted, there is no increased signal of pulmonary arterial hypertension or heart failure in male pediatric patients. While monitoring protocols of organ involvement in juvenile onset systemic sclerosis need to be identical for males and females.

To determine the ability of a EULAR/ACR SLE criteria score ≥20 to predict damage accrual and mortality.Inception SLE patients from the Toronto Lupus Clinic recruited in the first 12 months after diagnosis were included. A EULAR/ACR criteria score was calculated based on the baseline clinical and laboratory information. A EULAR/ACR score of 20 was used as a threshold to compare outcomes between groups (EULAR/ACR score20 vs ≥20), based on receiver operating characteristic analysis.867 SLE patients were included. The group of patients with the higher score accrued more damage compared to the group with the lower score in the first 10 years after diagnosis (210 [46%] vs 167 [40%] for patients with a score ≥20 vs 20 respectively p = 0.02). This was corroborated by multivariable regression analysis (HR 1.34, p = 0.007). Patients with a score of ≥20 had a higher risk of death (HR 2.34, p = 0.001). When excluding patients who had kidney involvement at baseline, the group with the higher score continued to be at a higher risk of damage accrued (HR 1.46, p = 0.006), although there was no difference in mortality between groups (p = 0.54).A EULAR/ACR criteria score ≥20 at baseline is an indicator of long-term outcomes, especially damage accrual.

This year, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1982 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) celebrate their 40th anniversary. From this start, the quest for optimal SLE criteria has led to the 1997 ACR update, the 2012 publication of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria, and, in 2019, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR classification criteria. The latter have since been externally validated in more than two dozen studies and have become the gold standard inclusion criterion of SLE clinical trials. This comprehensive review attempts to follow the evolving success story of SLE classification, highlighting relevant decisions and their rationale, and discussing consequences for the way SLE is defined and managed.

We thank Dr Pons-Estel and colleagues1 for their interest in our2 paper proposing that a score of 20 or more in the 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria3 4 predicts more severe disease activity in the following 5 years after the systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification.2 Pons-Estel et al 1 demonstrated that 98 (15.31%) patients who were classified by 1982/1997 ACR criteria, but not classified as SLE with the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria, having a score of less than 10 points, accrued less damage compared with those who had a score of ≥10.5 In our cohort of patients with SLE, only …

Since the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were published, they were externally validated by groups worldwide. In particular, the new criteria worked well also in East Asian and pediatric cohorts. Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) as an entry criterion were critically discussed, but the group of ANA-negative patients is small (

Objective We investigated the autoantibody (autoAb) profiles in ANA+ individuals lacking systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) and early SARD patients to determine the key differences between these groups and identify factors that are associated with an increased risk of symptomatic progression within the next 2 years in ANA+ individuals. Methods Using custom antigen (Ag) microarrays, 144 IgM and IgG autoAbs were surveyed in 84 asymptomatic and 123 symptomatic (48 UCTD and 75 SARD patients) ANA+ individuals. AutoAbs were compared in ANA+ individuals lacking a SARD diagnosis with ≥2 years follow-up (n = 52), including all those who demonstrated progression (n = 14) during this period, with changes over time assessed in a representative subset. Results We show that ANA+ individuals have autoAb to many self-Ags that are not being captured by current screening techniques and very high levels of these autoAbs are predominantly restricted to early SARD patients, with SLE patients displaying reactivity to many more autoAgs than the other groups. In general, the symptoms that developed in progressors mirrored those seen in SARD patients with similar patterns of autoAbs. Only anti-Ro52 Abs were found to predict progression (positive predictive value 46%, negative predictive value 89%). Surprisingly, over 2 years of follow-up the levels of autoAbs remained remarkably stable regardless of whether individuals progressed or not. Conclusion Our findings strongly argue that development of assays with an expanded set of auto-Ags and enhanced dynamic range would improve the diagnostic and prognostic ability of autoAb testing.