Factors associated with COVID-19-related death in people with rheumatic diseases: results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician-reported registry

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors associated with COVID-19-related death in people with rheumatic diseases. METHODS: Physician-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. RESULTS: Of 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. CONCLUSION: Among 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

Clinical spectrum time course in non-Asian patients positive for anti-MDA5 antibodies

Objectives: To define the clinical spectrum time-course and prognosis of non-Asian patients positive for anti-MDA5 antibodies. Methods: We conducted a multicentre, international, retrospective cohort study. Results: 149 anti-MDA5 positive patients (median onset age 53 years, median disease duration 18 months), mainly females (100, 67%), were included. Dermatomyositis (64, 43%) and amyopathic dermatomyositis (47, 31%), were the main diagnosis; 15 patients (10%) were classified as interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF) and 7 (5%) as rheumatoid arthritis. The main clinical findings observed were myositis (84, 56%), interstitial lung disease (ILD) (108, 78%), skin lesions (111, 74%), and arthritis (76, 51%). The onset of these manifestations was not concomitant in 74 cases (50%). Of note, 32 (21.5%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit for rapidly progressive-ILD, which occurred in median 2 months from lung involvement detection, in the majority of cases (28, 19%) despite previous immunosuppressive treatment. One-third of patients (47, 32% each) was ANA and anti-ENA antibodies negative and a similar percentage was anti-Ro52 kDa antibodies positive. Non-specific interstitial pneumonia (65, 60%), organising pneumonia (23, 21%), and usual interstitial pneumonia-like pattern (14, 13%) were the main ILD patterns observed. Twenty-six patients died (17%), 19 (13%) had a rapidly progressive-ILD. Conclusions: The clinical spectrum of the anti-MDA5 antibodies-related disease is heterogeneous. Rapidly-progressive ILD deeply impacts the prognosis also in non-Asian patients, occurring early during the disease course. Anti-MDA5 antibody positivity should be considered even when baseline autoimmune screening is negative, anti-Ro52 kDa antibodies are positive, and radiology findings show a NSIP pattern

Factors associated with COVID-19-related death in people with rheumatic diseases: results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician-reported registry.

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors associated with COVID-19-related death in people with rheumatic diseases. METHODS: Physician-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. RESULTS: Of 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. CONCLUSION: Among 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

REDOSER project: optimising biological therapy dose for rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis patients

Background: Reducing the dose of biological therapy (BT) when patients with immune-mediated arthritis achieve a sustained therapeutic goal may help to decrease costs for national health services and reduce the risk of serious infection. However, there is little information about whether such a decision can be applied universally. Therefore, the objective of this study was to develop appropriateness criteria for reducing the dose of BT in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), and peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA). Methods: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was coordinated by experts in the methodology. Five rheumatologists with clinical research experience in RA and/or SpA selected and precisely defined the variables considered relevant when deciding to reduce the dose of BT in the 3 diseases, in order to define patient profiles. Ten rheumatologists with experience in prescribing BT anonymously rated each profile on a scale of 1 (completely inappropriate) to 9 (completely appropriate) after revising a summary of the evidence obtained from 4 systematic literature reviews carried out specifically for this project. Findings: A total of 2,304 different profiles were obtained for RA, 768 for axSpA, and 3,072 for pSpA. Only 327 (14.2%) patient profiles in RA, 80 (10.4%) in axSpA, and 154 (5%) in pSpA were considered appropriate for reducing the dose of BT. By contrast, 749 (32.5%) patient profiles in RA, 270 (35.3%) in axSpA, and 1,243 (40.5%) in pSpA were considered inappropriate. The remaining profiles were considered uncertain. Interpretation: Appropriateness criteria for reducing the dose of BT were developed in 3 inflammatory conditions. These criteria can help clinicians treating these disorders to optimize the BT dose. However, further research is needed, since more than 50% of the profiles were considered uncertain and the real prevalence of each profile in daily clinical practice remains unknown

Isolated arthritis revealing an underlying anti-synthetase syndrome: Results from a multicentre international study

Background: Articular involvement is reported to occur in up to 85% of patients with antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD) and it may be the only onset feature, although with frequencies and characteristics not still defined Objectives: To determine in a large international cohort of anti Jo-1 positive ASSD the prevalence of isolated arthritis at disease onset. To describe the clinical, serological and radiological characteristics and evolution of these patients Methods: We included all anti Jo-1 positive patients referring to participating centres and with an isolated arthritis at disease onset. The pattern of articular involvement, radiological and serological characteristics of patients were analysed. IgM-Rheumatoid factor (RF) was assessed by immunonephelometry; anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA) by commercial second-generation ELISA kits; anti Jo-1 and anti-Ro positivity by commercially available ELISA kits Results: An isolated arthritis was the first manifestation in 54 (41 females, 13 males) out of the 225 patients included (167 females, 58 males), with a prevalence of 24%. Main characteristics of arthritis and overal results has been completely reported in table 1. Conclusions: We confirmed that an isolated polyarthritis is the first symptom of anti Jo-1 positive ASSD in up to a quarter of cases. Arthritis is mainly polyarticular and symmetrical, and the positivity for IgM RF or ACPA or both is not a rare finding, as well as the occurrence of marginal X-rays joint erosions. Anti-Ro positivity and RP occurrence may help clinician in the early identification of ASSD, even if the high rate of subsequent appearance of ILD and myositis clearly suggest that the screening for an underlying ASSD should be performed also in patients that may be undoubtedly diagnosed with RA. (Table Presented). ]