Search

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.

Introduction: Adult dermatomyositis (DM) and juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) are rare autoimmune diseases with characteristic skin rashes, weakness, and other systemic features. Upregulated interferon signaling has been consistently described in both adult and juvenile DM which makes janus kinase inhibitors (jakinibs) an attractive therapeutic agent that has a targeted mechanism of action. Areas covered: Herein is a review of the growing literature of jakinib use in adult and juvenile DM, including reports on specific disease features and safety of jakinibs in this population and a comparison between adult and juvenile DM. We performed a literature review using PubMed including all English-language publications before 1 February 2024 and abstracts from key recent rheumatology conferences. Expert opinion: Jakinibs are an exciting and promising treatment in both adult and juvenile DM. Current Phase 2 and 3 randomized placebo-controlled trials of jakinibs in both adult and JDM will provide significant insights into the efficacy of this class of medication as a potentially more mechanistically targeted treatment of both skin and muscle disease. In fact, these results will likely inform the treatment paradigm of dermatomyositis in that it may even be considered as first or second line. The next five years in the therapeutic landscape of both juvenile and adult DM is an exciting time for both patients and medical providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To define the clinical phenotype of SSc patients with antibodies against Sjogren's syndrome (SS)/scleroderma autoantigen 1 (SSSCA1), and to examine the association between these antibodies and cancer in SSc patients. Methods We conducted a case–control study using data from 209 patients with SSc and cancer, and 205 SSc patients without cancer. All were randomly selected from the Johns Hopkins Scleroderma Center Research Registry. Antibodies against SSSCA1 were assayed by immunoprecipitation of 35S-methionine-labelled protein generated by in vitro transcription and translation. We performed logistic regression analysis to examine the relationship between anti-SSSCA1 antibodies and cancer. Results Among the 414 study patients, 31 (7%) were anti-SSSCA1 antibody positive. Antibody-positive patients were more likely to have severe RP, a lower minimum ejection fraction, a trend towards more severe heart involvement and a lower baseline diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide percent predicted than anti-SSSCA1-negative patients. Patients with cancer were significantly more likely to be anti-SSSCA1 positive compared with those without cancer [22/209 (11%) vs 9/205 (4%), respectively; P  = 0.018]. Among patients with cancer, there was a trend towards longer cancer–SSc interval in anti-SSSCA1-positive patients compared with anti-SSSCA1-negative patients. Patients with anti-SSSCA1 antibodies had an increased adjusted risk of cancer (odds ratio 2.46, 95% CI 1.06, 5.70) compared with anti-SSSCA1-negative patients. Conclusions These data suggest anti-SSSCA1 antibody status may be of utility as a cancer biomarker in SSc. Anti-SSSCA1-positive patients with SSc may be more likely to have severe Raynaud's and cardiac involvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To evaluate the association between cigarette smoking and the odds of IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD). Methods We performed a case–control study of patients with IgG4-RD compared in a 1:5 ratio with age-, race- and sex-matched controls. We included cases evaluated at the Massachusetts General Hospital, a hospital within the Mass General Brigham (MGB) System. Controls were identified from the MGB Biobank. Smoking status at the date of IgG4-RD diagnosis or corresponding index date was determined. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the association between cigarette smoking and the odds of having IgG4-RD. Results There were 234 IgG4-RD cases and 1170 controls. The mean age (59 years), sex (62% male) and race (75% white) were well balanced. IgG4-RD cases were more likely to be current smokers compared with controls [25 (11%) vs 70 (6%); odds ratio (OR) 1.79 (95% CI 1.08, 2.95)]. This association was strongest among female cases [13 (14%) vs 19 (4%);, OR 3.79 (95% CI 1.71, 8.39)] and those with retroperitoneal fibrosis [RPF; 13 (28%) vs 13 (6%);, OR 6.93 (95% CI 2.78, 17.26)] or normal IgG4 concentrations [21 (21%) vs 21 (4%); OR 6.22 (95% CI 3.09, 12.49)]. When RPF cases were excluded, there was no longer an association between current smoking and the odds of having IgG4-RD [12 (6%) vs 57 (6%); OR 0.95 (95% CI 0.49, 1.86)]. Conclusion Being a current smoker is associated with greater odds of having IgG4-RD, especially among women and those with RPF or normal IgG4 concentrations. Current smoking is the first recognized modifiable risk factor for IgG4-RD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In earlier studies, patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD) who got infected with COVID-19 had a higher risk of mechanical ventilation than comparators. We sought to determine COVID-19 outcomes among patients with RMD 6 months into the pandemic.Methods: We conducted a cohort study at Mass General Brigham in Boston, Massachusetts, of patients with RMD matched to up to five comparators by age, sex and COVID-19 diagnosis date (between 30 January 2020 and 16 July 2020) and followed until last encounter or 18 August 2020. COVID-19 outcomes were compared using Cox regression. Risk of mechanical ventilation was compared in an early versus a recent cohort of patients with RMD.Results: We identified 143 patients with RMD and with COVID-19 (mean age 60 years; 76% female individuals) and 688 comparators (mean age 59 years; 76% female individuals). There were no significantly higher adjusted risks of hospitalisation (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.68-1.11), intensive care unit admission (HR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.86-1.86), or mortality (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.53-1.95) in patients with RMD versus comparators. There was a trend towards a higher risk of mechanical ventilation in the RMD cohort versus comparators, although not statistically significant (adjusted HR: 1.51, 95% CI: 0.93-2.44). There was a trend towards improvement in mechanical ventilation risk in the recent versus early RMD cohort (10% vs 19%, adjusted HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.17-1.12).Conclusions: Patients with RMD and comparators had similar risks of poor COVID-19 outcomes after adjusting for race, smoking and comorbidities. The higher risk of mechanical ventilation in the early RMD cohort was no longer detected in a recent cohort, suggesting improved management over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate differences in manifestations and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection between those with and without rheumatic disease.Methods: We conducted a comparative cohort study of patients with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 (confirmed by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 PCR), compared in a 1:2 ratio with matched comparators on age, sex and date of COVID-19 diagnosis, between 1 March and 8 April 2020, at Partners HealthCare System in the greater Boston, Massachusetts area. We examined differences in demographics, clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 infection. The main outcomes were hospitalisation, intensive care admission, mechanical ventilation and mortality.Results: We identified 52 rheumatic disease patients with COVID-19 (mean age, 63 years; 69% female) and matched these to 104 non-rheumatic disease comparators. The majority (39, 75%) of patients with rheumatic disease were on immunosuppressive medications. Patients with and without rheumatic disease had similar symptoms and laboratory findings. A similar proportion of patients with and without rheumatic disease were hospitalised (23 (44%) vs 42 (40%)), p=0.50) but those with rheumatic disease required intensive care admission and mechanical ventilation more often (11 (48%) vs 7 (18%), multivariable OR 3.11 (95% CI 1.07 to 9.05)). Mortality was similar between the two groups (3 (6%) vs 4 (4%), p=0.69).Conclusions: Patients with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 infection were more likely to require mechanical ventilation but had similar clinical features and hospitalisation rates as those without rheumatic disease. These findings have important implications for patients with rheumatic disease but require further validation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]